Four Stars

Hamlet (1996) Review

April 10, 2015 by JD Hansel

Is there a way for a mere college kid,
Who hardly can recall the time of day,
To have the slightest clue of how to do
A film review about a Shakespeare play?
I once again must face that question now
Of whether I should judge only the film,
Or judge the work the film is based on too?
And why the heck did Shakespeare write this way?

So now that I’m done with the iambic pentameter (and I’ll admit I didn’t even rhyme it right for Shakespeare), let’s talk about Hamlet the play. I like Hamlet, as a character, and I find him to be rather fascinating. I can understand an intellectual who struggles to accept the concept of death, is obsessive and goes kind of insane, and slowly, methodically plans out how he can make clever plans once he has good evidence suggesting it is wise to do so. Perhaps it may frighten some people to hear me say this, but I can relate to the guy. That being said, it takes him months, and we have to watch five whole acts. We shouldn’t have to wait that long, so as to keep waiting in suspense from becoming waiting in boredom. That’s my main problem with Hamlet – it’s tedious.

Aside from that, Hamlet is a very well-written story with an interesting premise, clever dialogue, and strong characters, so this seems like a natural fit for cinema. This has been adapted for film and television many times, and while I have not completely finished watching the version with Patrick Stewart and David Tennant, I may like their performances of the characters just a wee bit better. Still, this movie has a really fantastic cast – all of them brilliant and/or super famous – and the characters are all done well. The acting may be a little over the top, but I don’t think that hurts the film.

Actually, one of the major criticisms I’ve seen of this movie is that it’s too theatrical. I’m not sure I believe in such a thing. The very theatrical acting works very well for the nature of this production. The shots are all huge, and I suppose they are theatrical, but I see them as cinematic. One might say that my heart belongs to film, but I still have the hots for theater. One would be right. I felt like I was watching a humongous theater production the whole time, and I loved that.

I must say that my big problem with it is still the length. I watched the full-length version on DVD, and I was frightened when I got to the end of disc one, which I thought would be the end of the movie, but I found out that it was only the end of the first half! The rest one on disk two, and it was a bit of a chore to get through. The impressive thing about this movie, however, is that it’s really the first time anyone had tried to do the whole play as a movie before, keeping in every word. This movie did Hamlet without editing it down, and that’s rather impressive. So, if you’re okay with a ridiculously long movie that looks good, has great writing, and has strong characters, I highly recommend it.

Ed Wood Review

March 29, 2015 by JD Hansel

(MINOR SPOILERS)

There are a couple of downsides to doing movies about real people and events. The first is that it can often limit one visually; the filmmaker almost always must portray a world that is believable to the audience, which typically means no animation, no theatrical lighting/color, no surreal sets or props, etc. Secondly, some liberties have to be taken with the characters since they are based on real people, meaning that names must be changed to avoid lawsuits, or the people must be fictionalized to seem likable and interesting. There’s also the simple, obvious problem that the series of events that take place in real life are seldom as interesting as what is commonly found in fiction. Did Tim Burton’s Ed Wood successfully avoid, or at least properly handle, all of these potential dangers?

On the whole, yes, the movie manages to have very interesting visuals, characters, and story flow. Mostly. To be fair, there were a lot of times when I was a little bored by the movie because it can be kind of tedious. With a slightly faster pace, I would have enjoyed it a lot more, but I did still enjoy it. It was really the characters that got me through it, because I did enjoy the majority of the cast.

This may not be my favorite Tim Burton film that I’ve seen thus far, but it is my favorite Johnny Depp performance. Yes, he’s playing the type of character that he tends to play too often, but heck, I’ll take this over his Willy Wonka any day. Ed Wood is a very likable character and relatable character, in spite of the fact that he’s kind of an idiot. I just can’t help but admire his passion and enthusiasm for making movies the way he believes they should be made. Also, Martin Landau is fantastic as Bela Lugosi, and Bill Murray is Bill Murray at being Bill Murray all throughout the Bill Murray. Bill Murray.

There are a lot of great scenes in the film that work for a variety of different reasons. The scene in which Bela is about to commit suicide is the most Burton-ly shot scene in the film, and is thus my favorite visually. My favorite in terms of character and story, which is probably more important, is the exchange between Ed Wood and Orson Welles. That’s the scene that makes the whole movie worth watching. The scene in which Bela appears on television (with no idea how to improvise) is really a painful scene to watch, but not because it’s a bad scene. Rather, it’s because it hurts to see him struggle in such a difficult, awkward situation.

The big problem with this film is not historical inaccuracy, a cinema sin that is also present, but is actually the simple fact that this guy’s life was difficult to focus into one cohesive story that clearly moves in a particular direction. It’s always a little difficult for me to watch a movie if I get no sense that each scene is a part of getting the story to its climax, and Ed Wooddoes kind of drag for that reason. Still, I would recommend that everyone go into the movie prepared to be a little patient, and then enjoy getting to meet this delightful character called Ed Wood. Plus Bill Murray.

Sleepless in Seattle Review

February 26, 2015 by JD Hansel

I find this movie to be simply pleasant. There isn’t much about it that is spectacular, but nothing about it is necessarily bad. It has a very nice soundtrack, and not a bad plot, but both of these are shamelessly borrowed from other movies. Still, it makes it sentimental in a way that I think is okay.

The characters are likable enough, and they’re written pretty well. Their motives and desires are pretty understandable and relatable. The one thing that bugs me is that the movie talks enough about destiny, magic, and fate to make the audience accept that these are all working in favor of the protagonist, and we are supposed to like that. This gives the writers “permission” to fill the sucker with Dius ex machina, while also showing faith in destiny to be a very positive thing, with which I personally disagree. This kind of comes across as lazy writing, especially since it’s the writer’s job to make it seem like nothing can possibly work out for the protagonist, and this movie seems to proclaim from the beginning that destiny’s going to ensure that everything works out.

For that reason, and the fact that the plot doesn’t strike me as anything absolutely outstanding, I think the movie is a little weak. However, in its simplicity it manages to be remarkably pleasant, and I see why it’s a classic.

Back to the Future Part III Review

February 9, 2015 by JD Hansel

I love the Back to the Future series, and I recognize that this is the finale that brings everything to completion, but I think it is probably the weakest of the three. Still, it’s a chance to see Doc and Marty on the screen again, and they are still as enjoyable as ever, so I love it. It’s fun, funny, and, as usual with the BttF franchise, keeps the audience in suspense and wonder. (Honestly, the only reason it doesn’t get an extra half a star is that I wish it were as good as the first movie in the series, which may be a little too much to ask of a sequel that a studio demanded.) It unfortunately does not have as many beautiful shots as the first two, but it still has a neat look and feel. I like getting to see the ancestors of the characters, and the things and people that shaped the town. The writing is absolutely brilliant, as one would expect, but it does leave me with one question: how could the future not be influenced at all by the passengers on the train not making it to their destination?

The Road to El Dorado Review

January 22, 2015 by JD Hansel

(MINOR SPOILERS)

Does anyone remember the DreamWorks 2-Ds and hand-drawns? Anyone? You may remember Prince of Egypt, but for the most part, people seem to only remember the CG movies, such as Shrek, Antz, and Madagascar. However, I think my favorite DreamWorks film is probably the one that I just saw for my first time a few days ago: The Road to El Dorado. I remembered seeing little bits and pieces as a kid, but I never actually watched it all the way through. Honestly though, I don’t think I would have appreciated it as much in my youth as I do now.

From a writing perspective, it is clearly a carefully built and structured film, that perfectly exemplifies the “correct” way to write a Hollywood narrative movie. This is exactly what I would expect from the people behind the screenwriting website Wordplayer.com, which I highly recommend to everyone who has an interest in film. The characters in the movie are strong, and the story is one that frequently connects to itself, if that makes sense. (I mean to say that elements that appear early in the film connect to events later in the film, and every scene is there for a purpose.) One of the writers did acknowledge that the middle of the film suffers from a bad studio decision to keep the protagonists “laying low” for a while, or in other words, actively doing absolutely nothing while waiting for their boat to be built. Still, the situation is handled in a way that makes it bearable. The screenplay seems to get a bit to edgy or dark for young children at times, so I do not recommend that the li’l ones are shown this film, but for an adult, it surprisingly adds to the fun.

That being said, even if the writing had been terrible, the music and animation are so wonderful that the film would arguably be good anyway. Once the protagonists enter the mysterious city of El Dorado, you can expect every scene to look gorgeous from that point on. The music is by Elton John and Tim Rice, so I don’t need to say anything else about that. While I personally did not relate with the characters very much (which is a pretty typical problem for me when I watch movies) I can still say that this is a very enjoyable film that made me gape with wonder multiple times, and it is sure to be a joy for anyone who loves a good animated flick.

Into the Woods Review

January 15, 2015 by JD Hansel

What do you call a movie that feels much longer than it really is, and yet stays very interesting throughout? You call it Disney’s Into the Woods. (About two thirds of the way through the film, my friend joked that they must still be making it and sending footage to the theater as they go along, creating a literally never-ending story.)

You should see this movie.

Let’s talk flaws first. Between the lighting, set designs, and color grading, the woods look like a slightly fantasized version of… well, the woods. Like the woods by the park where you used to play, or at least the way they might have seemed to a reasonably imaginative child. That’s nice and all, but this was a missed opportunity to create unique woods in a unique fantasy world, like they did in Jim Henson’s Labyrinth. And, while on the subject of visuals, the way the film opens is essentially a modified jump scare, which I found incredibly annoying.

Because of the nature of the stage musical upon which this film is based, the story structure is a bit odd. Without giving too much away, the film gives few warnings that its structure is going to throw off some viewers. I… don’t know how I feel about this. It is certainly one of the many thing about this film that had me saying, “Woah, are we really doing this, movie? Are we really doing what it looks like we’re doing? Wow. Okay then.” Honestly, that reaction wasn’t really a bad one – it meant I was intrigued and surprised, mostly in a positive way.

Now that we are talking about things I liked, I think the casting was pretty good, and the film featured one of my very favorite Johnny Depp performances. I also really liked the way that Little Red Riding Hood was written and performed; her voice is the one that was stuck in my head afterwards because it stands out in much the same way that her bright red hood does. Which, again, is mostly a plus. Since the story and music are, for the most part, right out of an impressive Sondheim musical, it’s pretty much a given that they are impressive in the film. Even the look of the film, in spite of my rant above, has a lot to offer (and you can click here for Exhibit A).

The story, characters, music, theme, and other elements are strong in this film. This is amazingly dark, with moments that are hard to believe Disney would keep in, and I think that makes it all the more memorable. It has a couple of little problems, but it sticks with you.