The Incredible Hulk
*1/2 out of ****
Five years ago, director Ang Lee released his film version of “Hulk”, the adaptation of the Marvel comic with a big pissed off green giant as its main protagonist. It starred Eric Bana as Dr. Bruce Banner, the mild-mannered scientist whose exposure to gamma radiation caused a funky accident with his molecules and allowed him to transform into The Hulk whenever he got extremely angry. “Don’t make me angry…you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry,” is the trademark line everyone who knows the history of the Hulk associates the film, comic and T.V. show with. Now, Hulk fans weren’t particularly pleased with Ang Lee’s more ponderous take on the green guy, so Marvel and Universal Studios decided to retrace their steps and give the fans the movie they wanted in the first place. “The Incredible Hulk” is a reboot, not a remake, much like “Batman Begins”. It replaces Eric Bana with Edward Norton, Jennifer Connelly with Liv Tyler (which is like an insult to Connelly), and Sam Elliot with William Hurt. Clearly the people involved with this picture put forth a great deal of effort to ensure that Hulk fans get more bang for their buck, but that’s exactly the problem with “The Incredible Hulk”: it spends too much time on the bang.
I think a more appropriate title would have been “The Uninteresting Hulk”, because there is absolutely nothing incredible or even interesting about this film. I think Ang Lee’s “Hulk” is easily the most morose and dry adaptation of a well-known comic book character to date and while “The Incredible Hulk” is more action-packed and fast-paced, I think I actually prefer the 2003 version to this mess. Yes, a Hulk movie does need to showcase some extreme action, but there is a fine line between using those sequences where need be and overusing them. It’s like both “Hulk” movies are opposites; the 2003 film spent too much time on exposition and boring subplots, and this 2008 reboot becomes bogged down in so many overdone action sequences it all becomes repetitive by the third major setpiece. But not only is the action drawn out, it’s also pretty cartoonish, even for “Hulk” standards. One scene in particular, which involves the military launching an all-out attack on the Hulk in a grassy area located near a college never has a sense of credibilty going for it. The reason for that is because everything that explodes during this scene doesn’t look any different than the kinds of explosions which occur in video games.
“The Incredible Hulk” opens in Brazil, where Dr. Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) is living incognito after secluding himself from his life in the States and everyone he cares about. By the time we catch up on him, we discover that Bruce has spent five years hiding from the U.S. Military after his first transformation into the Hulk ended with considerable damage done. Bruce is now working in a soda factory and taking special breathing lessons that he hopes will come in handy if he ever gets too excited, because this movie says that Bruce will turn into the Hulk not just because of anger, but because of too much excitement in general; if Bruce’s heartbeats become too quick, then in all likelihood he’ll turn into the mean green fighting machine. While Bruce is not doing either of those things, he spends the rest of his time attempting to create an antidote to counteract the damage done to his molecules. He goes back and forth with another scientist by way of e-mail in order to determine the proper way to go about making an antidote.
One day, however, Bruce pricks his finger and some of his blood accidentally falls into a soda bottle which is then shipped out to the United States. Back in the U.S., the evil General Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Ross (William Hurt) gains wind of this and sends in one of his Special Forces teams to capture Bruce. Turns out that Ross wants to use Bruce’s blood to perfect a sort of “Super Soldier” serum, which he will then use to create an army of Hulks. There’s a problem I have with that plan that I’ll get to a little later. Back in Brazil, Ross and his team arrive to take Bruce into custody, inspiring the film’s first and only enjoyable action sequence, which is a footchase through the streets and across the rooftops in Brazil that seems to have been inspired by “The Bourne Ultimatum” Here, the handheld camera technique is employed, which further solidifies the comparison to “Bourne”. After this chase ends in Bruce turning into the Hulk as a result of his quickened heartbeats from the chase, a violence-crazed soldier of Ross’s named Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth) wants a rematch with the green-skinned beast. So, Ross decides to give Blonsky a bit of the experimental portion of the Super Serum made from Bruce’s droplets of blood, but Blonsky gradually becomes hooked on the Serum.
Meanwhile, Bruce is forced to return to the U.S. and eventually meets up with Betty Ross (Liv Tyler), daughter of the General and longtime crush of Bruce himself. The location of their reunion? Why, in a huge rainstorm of course. Flimsy, see-through blouse for Betty during this scene? Check. But as you can guess, their reunion is eventually interrupted by heavy firepower, explosions, and the overconfident Blonsky returning for Round Two. And after this confrontation ends yet again in Blonsky’s bone-breaking defeat, he demands a higher dose of the Serum and becomes a Hulk-esque monster referred to as, well, The Abomination.
“Iron Man” set the new standard for Marvel’s films last month. That movie contained really good acting, interesting characters and action that wasn’t overdone. “The Incredible Hulk” has none of these. Edward Norton is the only interesting thing about this picture, with everyone else giving some pretty mediocre if not bad performances. Let me tell you something, when a good actress like Jennifer Connelly is replaced by Liv Tyler, you better switch casting directors. That’s not to say Tyler can’t be good, but there is no denying her profoundly one-dimensional performance in this movie. It’s my theory that her audition for the part mainly consisted of the filmmakers seeing how many different ways she could scream “Bruce!”, or how unemotional she could be when delivering most of her lines. William Hurt has his moments where he goes into full teeth-gnashing mode, but for the most part he seems to be bored and phoning it in. Tim Roth is also very one-dimensional, as we never find out anything about his character other than that he likes to win his fights. How many times have we seen that caricature in a villain?
Another thing that really hurt this film for me is the fact that compared to superheroes such as Batman and Spider-Man, the Hulk isn’t that interesting of a character. The Hulk’s biggest dilemma seems to be smash or destroy? Hmmmm.
Anyway, about that problem I had with General Ross’s plan for the serum, here it is: how can Ross be sure that he’ll be able to control his army of Hulks? If Bruce is any indication, they’ll more likely be violent rampaging beasts with absolutely no concern for civilian safety. You’d think an Army General would have thought about that.
And did I mention the film’s action overload? Well, it has that especially in the climatic final battle between Hulk and Abomination, with that sequence stretching on forever. Now, I don’t mind testosterone-fueled action like that, as long as the film doesn’t switch over to autopilot while doing it; something “The Incredible Hulk” does with every one of its action scenes. And these scenes aren’t helped by the poor CGI either; these images come as close to video game animation as a live-action film can. And the movie never slows down enough so that we can come to care about these characters; something Ang Lee’s version took the time to do.
I actually wanted to like this film, and I was fairly entertained for the first half hour or so. But after the footchase in Brazil, my problems with the film kept piling up so high that I finally gave in and accepted the fact that this was a bad movie. “The Incredible Hulk” looks good enough, but it’s just good-looking crap. Do we really need another movie about the Not-So-Jolly Green Giant? No. Two is more than plenty.
Fool’s Gold
*1/2 out of ****
After films such as “Sahara” and the two “National Treasure” films, the genre of the treasure hunt adventure seems to slowly be coming back to Hollywood. This May, the long-awaited fourth installment in the “Indiana Jones” franchise will hit theatres and beyond that, there may be more quest-themed adventures to come. I mean, who doesn’t love a good treasure hunt? You’ve got ancient maps with mysterious symbols, clues just waiting to be unearthed that will help point you in the right direction, and secret caves and/or catacombs that have been lost to civilization for countless years. So, with all of those interesting elements, it’s hard to go wrong when making a treasure hunt film; just keep everything else surrounding the long-lost treasure fun and exciting, and most of the time you’ll come out reasonably successful. But the main problem with “Fool’s Gold” is that it makes absolutely no real effort to keep the basic story interesting or inventive for that matter.
But that’s not to say that there’s nothing going on in the movie at all. There certainly is, but none of it ever holds our attention for more than a minute or so. I suppose hectic is a word that best describes this traffic collision of adventure cliches because there’s always a moment that features either Matthew McConaughey getting hit in the head with something or gun-wielding rappers shooting at the good guys. Then there’s all of the treasure mumbo jumbo that bridges together scenes between stars McConaughey and Kate Hudson that make it clear to the people watching this film that they seriously lack any real chemistry, but I could have told you that after having seen the idiotic romantic comedy from 2003, “How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days”. McConaughey and Hudson had zero chemistry in that movie, and I guess that ”Fool’s Gold” elevates their chemistry level somewhat to around .5. In describing “Fool’s Gold”, I feel compelled to use the word ‘perfunctory’, because for a movie showcasing underwater fights and high-speed sequences with motor scooters, Jet Skis and a prop plane, it all becomes rather boring all too quickly.
And the film’s cast of supporting characters is an oddly mixed bag. First, there’s the rich Nigel Honeycutt (Donald Sutherland) who owns the yacht that ends up serving as the transportation for the good guys, the rough and crusty Moe Fitch (Ray Winstone), and a group of homicidal rappers who are the villains of this particular escapade. But there’s also the ditzy daughter of Mr. Honetcutt, Gemma (Alexis Dziena), who at one point wonders if the oceans of the world are all connected. I guess we’re supposed to laugh at her absent-mindedness and the jokes that fall flat on their faces, but we don’t. Instead, we shake our heads in disappointment while using the bright and vibrant colors of the film’s Caribbean setting to check our watches.
“Fool’s Gold”, which at first makes the promise of being a romantic farce, is really just about the quest for treasure more so than the rekindling of the love between the recently divorced Finn and Tess Finnigan (McConaughey and Hudson). And the name Finn Finnigan easily tops McConaughey’s name of Dirk Pitt in “Sahara”. Anyway, Finn and Tess have spent the last eight years searching for a Spanish Galleon belonging to King Phillip that sank somewhere in the Bahamas in 1715. But the lack of discoveries pertaining to said ship have slowly driven them to divorce. Tess then decides to continue her work as a stewardess aboard Honeycutt’s yacht as Finn keeps up his search for the treasure buried on the bottom of the ocean floor. The finding of this particular treasure is of the utmost importance to Finn because he needs to pay off a debt to a murderous rapper (Kevin Hart), otherwise he will die. Exactly why the writers decided to make a rap star the villain of a treasure hunt movie is way beyond my skills of deductive reasoning, and not only that, they make him a complete stereotype as well.
Meanwhile, Nigel Honeycutt has invited his diva-like daughter to come spend two weeks with him in an attempt to connect with her after many years apart. Through a series of events that involve Finn rescuing Gemma Honeycutt’s hat from drowning, Finn winds up on the yacht as well and a run-in with his ex-wife is more than inevitable. And after offering a rather long-winded explanation of his life’s work, Finn convinces Mr. Honeycutt to join in on the hunt as well, along with his clueless daughter. And to further complicate matters, there’s the tiny problem of Finn’s former mentor Moe Fitch also looking for the treasure at the behest of the same rapper. Will Finn and Tess find the treasue and rekindle their love along the way? Will they escape the rapper and his henchmen? Will Nigel Honeycutt be able to establish a relationship with his daughter? Let me save you the trouble: yes, to all of the above.
Don’t let the advertising for “Fool’s Gold” fool you. This is not a romantic comedy with a subplot involving treasure hunting. This is a treasure hunt movie masquerading as a romantic comedy to draw in the couples for the fast-approaching Valentine’s Day. There’s more emphasis put on the history of the Spanish treasure than the relationship between Finn and Tess. In fact, it’s as if they suddenly forget about their divorce just so they can team up to find a treasure. I’m surprised that these two lines of dialogue weren’t in the film:
“Oh, man, we just got divorced. But hey, you up for some treasure salving?”
“Absolutely!”
Yeah, we’re just supposed to buy that because the two have spent so many years in search of this cache of gold, jewels and other such things; they are so obsessed with this treasure, in fact, that they have sex in a library not once…but twice. The film would have done better to show at least some sort of reluctance on Tess’s part.
And why, why make the bad guys stereotypical rappers? These guys wind up coming across as obnoxious and stupid rather than menacing. When making this type of film, it makes more sense to have the villains be fellow history buffs looking to cash in on the treasure, much like Sean Bean and Ed Harris in the “National Treasure” films. In “Fool’s Gold”, the bad guys seem to be there only to fire their flashy silver guns and talk junk. Yeah, that’s really convincing.
The acting is pretty bad here. Kate Hudson can add this film to her list of failures and McConaughey, who was actually pretty good in “Sahara” but even better in “We Are Marshall”, needs to start picking better scripts. He needs to prove that he’s worth more than these pretty-boy roles that are almost always one-dimensional. Donald Sutherland seems to be phoning it in and he adds an awkward British accent to his character. But I guess the shallow characters are a result of the writing, which isn’t real impressive either. It feels like the screenwriters weren’t really trying that hard to make the movie as enjoyable as the “National Treasure” films or “Sahara”, for that matter. Where I would have normally been intrigued with the clues and the discovery of the treasure cave, I instead remained impassive. I can’t recall one moment in “Fool’s Gold” where I really cared about what was happening.
Such a shame, too. “Fool’s Gold” is a movie that really serves no purpose except to fill the screen with colorful tropical locations and the stars who showcase both small bikinis and intense tans. I think the most interesting thing about this movie is how perfectly tanned its two main stars are.
Next
*1/2 out of ****
I’m often asked how it is that I am able to enjoy the majority of the movies I see on a regular basis, and my answer is I try to go into each of them with an open mind with my “Willing Suspension of Disbelief” turned fully on. But near the halfway mark of “Next”, I realized that this movie is so convoluted and sloppy, that even with the weapon of enjoyment inside my head switched on, I could not believe a single moment of the ludicrous action sequences. And since “Next” is meant to be a sci-fi action thriller, that is definitely not a good thing.
Nicolas Cage is one of my favorite actors and can normally be good in almost any role he inhabits, but here he is reduced to just being a mildly interesting character with a few infinitesimal moments of amusement. Julianne Moore is nothing more than a cookie-cutter character in the movie just to offer minor complications for our so-called “hero” of the story. Jessica Biel, who proved that she can most certainly act in last year’s mesmerising mystery “The Illusionist”, plays the worrisome love-interest who constantly runs from the bad guys, trying not to get shot.
“Next” is based on a short story from famous sci-fi writer Phillip K. Dick entitled “The Golden Man”. It is reported that “Next” has an entirely different storyline, but the same interesting detail for its main character. Cris Johnson (Nicolas Cage) is a man who has the ability to see precisely two minutes into the future and alter it without much of a consequence. Cris’s day job is a stage magician in Las Vegas, and he spends his spare time gambling at poker tables. But this unique ability has attracted the attention of Federal Agent Callie Ferris (Julianne Moore); she wishes to use Cris’s power to see as far ahead as possible into the future so that they can locate and disarm a nuclear bomb that has been smuggled into Los Angeles by ruthless terrorists. Now at this point, if you are reminded of the hit TV show “24″, then you are not alone.
Cris tries to evade Ferris and her agents and spend some time with his new girlfriend Liz (Jessica Biel), because he knows that the FBI will never let him go if he complies with their wishes. Recently, Liz has been appearing in some of Cris’s visions, however he cannot figure out why. But, unfortuneately, that specific plot point is never fully explained and that is just one of my many, many problems with this movie.
The whole movie seems to be made up of mindless, over-the-top action sequences that are just there for the sake of the movie. And all of this leads up to a “twist” that is what I consider the worst pay-off in the history of film every time it is used.
Nicolas Cage appears bored in this movie as Cris Johnson. He is able to convince you up to a point, but mainly he lulls through each scene as if he is waiting to be offered a better movie. But I admit, Cage does deliver some trademark moments of quirkiness that only Nicolas Cage can pull off. Julianne Moore’s Callie Ferris is just like Jack Bauer, only with longer hair and a more petite body. Her character never really serves any purpose, other than act as an emcumbrance to the main character. Jessica Biel is a beautiful actress, but having looks is simply not enough in Hollywood; you have to have both looks and talent, something Biel has seemed to have forgotten since “The Illusionist”. In “Next”, she is nothing more than the damsel in distress.
Director Lee Tamahori’s CGI abilities once again seem to be taken directly out of a video game, as they do not look realistic in any way. One scene in particular where Cris tries to escape the FBI on a rocky hill had me rolling my eyes at the ceiling, wishing Denzel Washington’s character from “Deja Vu” could come over from that particular movie, and give Cris Johnson a lesson in how to survive action movies where the prospect of changing the future is an important thing. Not only was I expecting Denzel Washington to show up in “Next”, I also half-expected Kiefer Sutherland to turn up and tell Nicolas Cage off for trying to rip off his TV show due to all the talk of a nuclear bomb threat.
“Deja Vu”, another future-altering thriller, is a much better and watchable movie than “Next”. This movie turned out to be a waste of potential, and I mean a waste. All I have to say is, next movie, please.
And if you are reading this review and can actually see ahead two minutes into the future, I apologize for taking so long. After all, you could have just looked ahead two minutes and seen me say that this movie is bad.
