Komedi, mana engkau pergi?

Istanbul Aku Datang
My rating:




Pembikin dan cendekiawan filem Amir Muhammad menggelar filem ini, bersama dengan Gol & Gincu dan Pisau Cukur, sebagai "Gedik Trilogy" terbitan Red Films. Ketiga-tiganya diarah oleh Bernard Chauly, ditulis oleh Rafidah Abdullah, dan memaparkan watak utama perempuan yang muda, periang dan (ofkos) gedik. Saya tidak menonton Gol & Gincu tapi saya menyukai Pisau Cukur, dan saya ada memuji saudara Chauly sebagai salah satu pengarah filem yang paling cekap dan berwibawa. Namun Chauly dan Rafidah nampaknya jarang mengeluarkan filem; sudah tiga tahun sejak Pisau Cukur baru muncul Istanbul Aku Datang, babak ketiga dalam Gedik Trilogy ini. Saya sebenarnya tidak merancang untuk menonton filem ini, tapi mujurlah ada pembaca blog memberi komen yang merekomenkan filem ini. Saya gembira kerana sempat menontonnya - tapi bukan kerana ia best sangat.

Kerana saya berpeluang menulis tentang apa yang membuat sebuah filem komedi romantik bagus, dengan memberi contoh apa yang kurang dalam filem ini.

Dian (Lisa Surihani) membuat keputusan yang terburu-buru untuk mengembara ke Istanbul, Turki agar dapat bersama kekasihnya Azad (Tomok) yang sedang belajar di universiti di sana - tetapi dia kecewa dengan sambutan dingin dari Azad. Ketika mencari tempat tinggal, Dian tertipu oleh seorang lelaki Turki (Mert Yavuzcan) dan terpaksa tinggal serumah dengan Harris (Beto Kusyairy), seorang lelaki dari Malaysia yang langsung tidak senang berkongsi tempat tinggal dengan Dian. Tetapi sambil hubungan Dian dengan Azad bertambah renggang, hubungan Dian dengan Harris pula bertambah mesra - sehingga Dian harus memilih siapa diantara mereka berdua yang memiliki hatinya.

Kekuatan tulisan Rafidah adalah dialog yang lucu dan bersahaja, yang berjaya menggelikan hati penonton-penonton dalam panggung saya. Arahan Chauly juga menampakkan sentuhan ringan yang efektif, mewujudkan suasana kelakar bagi filem ini. Tapi saya rasa keistimewaan filem-filem terbitan Red Films yang utama ialah watak-watak heroin yang menarik dan mendalam, yang juga memberi peluang bagi pelakon-pelakon wanita memberi persembahan yang mantap dan mencabar. Watak perempuan sebegini jarang dilihat dalam filem tempatan (dan bukan sahaja dalam filem tempatan), jadi sayanglah kalau Red Films tidak lebih kerap mengeluarkan filem. Humor dalam Istanbul Aku Datang adalah bernada mesra dan murah hati; jenakanya tidak memperli sesiapa, dan tiada watak yang benar-benar jahat atau patut dibenci. Ini semua benda yang saya suka.

Apa yang saya tak suka ialah jalan cerita yang tidak teliti dan tidak tekun. Kita tahu ini sebuah komedi romantik, jadi kita tahu Dian dan Harris akan jatuh cinta. Tapi kita tidak melihat mahupun merasainya. Mula-mula mereka saling membenci, tiba-tiba timbul perasaan cinta. Watak Harris pun tidak terbina; siapa sebenarnya mamat ni? Apa personalitinya, apa bezanya dari Azad sehingga Dian memilihnya sebagai kekasih? Mengapa sampai hampir babak klimaks baru kita tahu apa pekerjaannya? Dan mengapa Rafidah dan Chauly hanya menggunakan adegan-adegan montaj berlagu bagi menceritakan kisah cinta mereka? Bagilah mamat dan minah ni betul-betul berkenalan, bersama dialog yang mencuit serta menyentuh hati. Kalau harapkan montaj saja, ini penceritaan yang sungguh malas. Cerita ini malas!

Sifat malas inilah yang amat mengecewakan saya. Genre filem ini ialah komedi romantik, tetapi komedinya setakat separuh pertama sahaja. Lepas pertengahan jalan, langsung tiada lawak jenaka lagi. Mengapa, saudara Chauly dan saudari Rafidah? Ini bukan cara nak buat cerita romantic comedy; walaupun dilema percintaan heroin anda makin serius, unsur komedi tetap perlu ada. Separuh keduanya bertukar menjadi melodrama yang sappy dan telalu sentimental - dan masalahnya, jika separuh pertama adalah komedi, begitulah jangkaan penonton terhadap cerita seterusnya. Penonton sudah bersedia untuk ketawa. Penonton dalam panggung saya ketawakan adegan Harris mencuci rambut Dian, dan pasti ini bukan niat anda bukan, saudara Chauly dan saudari Rafidah? Anda ingatkan adegan ini sedih dan pilu, bukan?

Pemilihan pelakon juga agak ragu-ragu. Lisa Surihani adalah antara pelakon wanita yang paling popular dan berkarisma; tiada masalah bagi beliau membawa watak heroin Red Films. Tetapi kedua-dua pelakon gandingannya pula kurang sesuai. Tomok Indrawan sering kelihatan kayu, terutama bila berlakon disamping Lisa yang ceria. Beto Kusyairy pula, mungkin beliau dihampakan oleh skrip yang tidak membina wataknya, seperti yang dikatakan. Tetapi saya tetap rasa Beto salah dipilih sebagai watak utama lelaki dalam filem komedi romantik. Raut mukanya sentiasa serius dan garang. Lakonannya dalam babak-babak komedi adakala tidak natural, dan beliau tiada banyak chemistry dengan Lisa.

Tetapi saya tidak patut terlalu keras mengkritik filem ini. Dahlah saya memberinya 3 bintang, kerana ia tetap sebuah filem yang menghiburkan - malah saya ingin melihat banyak lagi filem tempatan sebegini. Selain komedi yang bersahaja dan dialog yang kelakar, ia juga memaparkan keindahan kota Istanbul dimana ia difilemkan; filem ini boleh dilihat sebagai travel porn yang berjaya. Chauly juga boleh berbangga atas kejayaan ko-produksi ini bersama kru dan pelakon Turki. Dan sudah tentu saya tidak mahu menunggu tiga tahun lagi sebelum keluar filem seterusnya dari Chauly, Rafidah dan Red Films. Kekuatan mereka amat dialu-alukan - dan kelemahan mereka pula sesuatu yang perlu diperbaiki dengan lebih banyak latihan. Kita tunggu babak seterusnya dalam Gedik Quadrilogy nanti.

NEXT REVIEW: War of the Worlds: Goliath
Expectations: man, I have nooooo idea 

All brawn, still not much fun

The Expendables 2
My rating:




I wasn't too keen on The Expendables two years ago. There were four ensemble action movies that year, and I felt that one was clearly the weakest of them all; the least clever, the least fun, and the least funny (also the most in need of a sense of humour). And for a movie predicated on putting together a supergroup of '80s action movie icons, it cheated big time with never-beens like (MMA champion) Randy Couture and (NFL player and deodorant spokesman) Terry Crews. Yet it's the only one that gets a sequel, so shows how much I know. I guess the nostalgia value of seeing old-school action heroes from the '80s really does sell tickets worldwide, though its charms were somewhat lost on me.

And they're still not working.

The mercenary team led by Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) and comprising Lee Christmas (Jason Statham), Yin Yang (Jet Li), Hale Caesar (Terry Crews), Toll Road (Randy Couture), Gunnar Jensen (Dolph Lundgren) and new member Billy the Kid (Liam Hemsworth) are forced into a new mission by CIA operative Church (Bruce Willis). The job involves retrieving an item from a safe in a crashed plane in Eastern Europe - and also comes with another new member Maggie Chan (Yu Nan) as the safecracker. But after obtaining the Macguffin, they are ambushed by Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme) who leads his own private army called the Sangs. Vilain takes the item - which turns out to be blueprints of an abandoned mine in which is hidden five tons of weapons-grade plutonium - and kills one of the team. Swearing revenge, Ross and the Expendables must now track down Vilain and stop him - and along the way, they'll get a little help from fellow veteran mercenaries Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and Booker (Chuck Norris).

In certain ways, this sequel is an improvement on it predecessor. Instead of having Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis in a mere cameo, this time they're in a proper action scene - and throws in Chuck Norris and Jean-Claude Van Damme to boot. It's more aware of its cheesy appeal; there are references to "I'll be back" and "Yippee-ki-yay", and Norris recites a Chuck Norris Fact. (Also, "Vilain".) Crews and Couture have more presence this time, making it feel like a proper ensemble instead of a Sylvester Stallone-Jason Statham buddy movie like the first one was. Simon West is a more competent director of action movies than Stallone (or most likely his 2nd-unit director), and the action scenes are better composed and edited. There are even a couple of funny lines of dialogue. But none of this made much of an impression on me, nor persuaded me to give it a higher rating.

See, maybe I just don't get the whole '80s action thing. I actually missed out on a lot of those movies, particularly those with Norris and Van Damme, who were always more low-rent than Schwarzenegger and Stallone. (And I don't think I've even watched Rambo III all the way. Have it on DVD, tried it once, fell asleep.) So pulling them out of retirement and putting them all together doesn't really do anything for me; in fact, all it does is highlight how little appeal they have besides kicking ass on camera. They're dull. The titular team, supposedly a tightly-knit band of fighting men, have little chemistry with each other. Every time they're not in an action scene, they all just seem really awkward. And in the case of the 72-year-old Norris, we're meant to believe he's an awesome badass when he barely even throws a punch.

Perhaps it's not that they don't have any real screen presence - because they certainly don't in this movie - but that they would if the movie found ways to play up their natural personalities. Or maybe if the screenplay gave them some. Dolph Lundgren gets to be the comic relief - a role for which, unfortunately, he is eminently unsuited - and that's the kind of thing that suffices to distinguish one macho lunkhead from another in this movie. These guys just aren't much fun to be around, even when they're kicking ass and mowing down hundreds of faceless bad guys. I mentioned Red, another movie with a similar senior-citizen-action-heroes premise, and that one was so much more fun - because John Malkovich, Helen Mirren, Brian Cox and Richard Dreyfuss are much better actors who can liven up even a cheesy action movie that should be beneath their talents.

And so the problems with the original remain - namely, not knowing how to be as much fun as it should be. It doesn't know whether to be a straight-faced throwback to ultraviolent '80s action flicks (no it shouldn't) or a more winking, deliberately cheesy homage-cum-parody of same (yes, that's more like it). Stallone - 'cos it's clearly him driving this franchise, even if he isn't directing this time - seems like he's leaning more towards the former, whereas the humourous self-referential elements seem more like afterthoughts. At times, this film asks to be taken seriously, such as the aforementioned death of a member of the team and the funeral scene that follows. Which is clearly meant to be all sad and tragic, but is more likely to evoke boredom at best, derisive laughter at worst. We didn't come to this movie for pathos, Stallone - we came to cheer and whoop and laugh, and if you can't make us laugh with you then we'll laugh at you.

Still, it's as well-made as an action film can be. The action sequences have a bit more creativity to them than in the last one, and there is a thrill in watching Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis side by side going all God Mode on a bunch of goons. But watching Chuck Norris walk out of smoke in slo-mo to a steel guitar soundtrack does nothing for me. A climactic Stallone-Van Damme fight scene... meh. (The Statham-Scott Adkins fight was more fun.) Lundgren making cracks about his real-life academic credentials... could've been fun, but it's Lundgren making them, and he's just no comedian. And though I doubt more of his presence would've made much difference, Jet Li is summarily and inexplicably written out of the movie after the opening action scene. Maybe he realised, like I did, that all this series has going for it is its premise, but it never really does anything with it.

NEXT REVIEW: Premium Rush
Expectations: yay Joseph Gordon-Levitt... and yay David Koepp?

Namewee needs to work on his impulse control

Hantu Gangster
My rating:




My respect for Namewee took a plunge after his anti-Lynas music video. I have no wish for a potentially hazardous industrial plant with dodgy safety standards on our shores, but I thought that video was hateful. It was full of nothing but virulently racist invective against Australians, for no other reason than that Lynas is an Australian corporation. It clearly did not occur to Namewee that many Malaysians may have Australian friends, and his video would have utterly embarrassed both of them. Which is why I was eager to watch his latest movie. I liked his last, and I wanted to see what he does next. I've gone to bat for him before and defended him against those who think he's a vulgar and shameless opportunist. I would like to think he's more than that.

I think he is. But he is also, in many ways, his own worst enemy.

Te Sai (Namewee) is a petty criminal, ne'er-do-well and single father to his perpetually disappointed 12-year-old son Chee Meng (Tee Jing Chen). But he's the one whom the ghosts of three recently-murdered gangland bosses, Pak Nasir (Dato' Jalaluddin Hassan), Uncle Arulmugam (Dato' David Arumugam) and Uncle Ah Hua (Charlie Loke), seek out to avenge their murders. Their sons and new leaders of the gangs - weak-willed Parut (Taiyuddin Bakar), thuggish loan shark Seelan (Abu Bakar Siddiq) and debauched drug dealer Ah Bao (Fa Chai Bao) - have forgotten the bonds of brotherhood that their fathers forged decades ago, and are on the verge of a race war. Unbeknownst to all three is the fact that the devious Ewan (Farid Kamil), who ordered the hit on their fathers, is deliberately stoking racial tensions in his bid to take control of all three gangs. To stop Ewan and restore harmony, there could not be an unlikelier hero than Te Sai - although if he succeeds, he might win the heart of the lovely Jameela (Diana Danielle), his son's schoolteacher and also the daughter of Pak Nasir.

Dear Namewee. Here is a list of things in your movie that are not funny:

- Te Sai's expletive of choice, "Kuihkochi".
- Attempting Japanese dialogue when the extent of your knowledge of Japanese comes from JAV.
- The fact that Arulmugam is never without a bottle in his hand. Dude. Beh hao ar.
- The musical number that the three gangs suddenly launch into to hoodwink the police.
- "Guaaaaang Zhou." (Unless this is a reference to something I'm unfamiliar with.)
- Te Sai getting hamsap with Jameela.
- "Christopher".
- Anything to do with Ah Bao's four perpetually-shirtless henchmen.
- Especially the one with the killer penis. Yes.
- And the one who seems to really really enjoy anal stimulation.
- Seriously, any time you think of doing a dirty joke... don't. Just don't.

The majority of these are unfunny because they are, quite frankly, distasteful. Those that aren't are silly and lazy - which isn't to say that the distasteful jokes aren't also lazy attempts at getting laughs just by putting something stupid up on screen. Broad humour - which seems to be the only kind of humour that local films know how to employ - doesn't have to insult the audience's intelligence. One only has to look at the films of the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker heyday (Airplane!, Top Secret!, The Naked Gun) for examples of jokes that are silly on the surface, but in fact rely a great deal on the audience being smart enough to get them. I mention this because I am greatly hoping that Namewee does a little homework and learns from his betters before making his next movie.

Because the fact is, he's got a lot going for him. Despite Certain Quarters trying to paint him as a Chinese chauvinist, he managed to rope several popular Malay actors into his film, aside from many of the same non-Malay celebrities who previously appeared in Nasi Lemak 2.0. He discovered a bona fide child prodigy in Tee Jing Chen; he even managed to score a cameo from Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir no less. He's done a canny job of getting investors for his films, which he repaid with quite shameless product placement shots. He's daring enough to poke fun at the Polis DiRaja Malaysia, in a joke that I couldn't believe he got past the censors. And of course, he has his fanbase in the Chinese-speaking segment of the population, who supported him through his last movie and will certainly make up the bulk of the box-office for this one. But there is also his deep, abiding - and thoroughly sincere - love of the multi-cultural mix that is unique to Malaysia and only Malaysia.

Oh, it's in this movie alright, and in spades. There are few tributes to 1Malaysia as effective as the flashback sequence chronicling how the three gang bosses (played in their youths by Noh Hujan, Reshmonu and Dennis Lau) met, became fast friends, and went on to become the most honourable, most fashionably-dressed, and overall awesomest gang leaders in Klang. (Well, except for how the Indian is always drinking.) We even see how they weather the events of May 1969, in a scene that has a lot to teach a certain other local production about how to depict that particular historical event. Beyond the annoyingly tasteless comedy, Namewee is a true patriot; the one message he wants to convey, above all else, is that Malaysia is only Malaysia if it's made up of Malays, Chinese and Indians. Love him or hate him, you can't deny him this - and you'd be ignorant and judgemental if you did.

So it's a shame that his most noble instincts are always brought low by his basest. I once called him less than circumspect, but I think I was far too kind; he's bloody reckless. Dude just doesn't think before he executes his ideas, whether it's in a viral video or a feature film. Hantu Gangster's screenplay bears the mark of having been hashed out in about a day, then never once being rewritten or revised or looked over to see if maybe this scene or that joke could be better played another way. (He's banking a lot on the audience's suspension of disbelief with his ridiculously romanticised portrayal of gangsters. And by movie's end, when everyone is one big happy family again, he seems to have forgotten that Seelan is still a violent criminal and Ah Bao is still a drug dealer.) Everything in here feels like a first thought, just as everything Namewee does seems like pure unguarded impulse without the benefit of a voice of discretion.

Which, again, is a shame, because his talents are also undeniable. As dumb as the jokes can be, there is at least one bit where I laughed out loud: a perfectly-timed rendition of "Negaraku." Contrast the hilarity of that moment to a later one, when our same national anthem is used as ironic counterpoint to a tense, ominous scene. Hantu Gangster is not a bad movie; there's some pretty good filmmaking in here, and it loses out to Nasi Lemak 2.0 only for being less of a purely feel-good experience. But if Namewee is gonna keep making films, he really really needs to work harder at it. Study other comedy filmmakers. (Hence, Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker.) Learn how to build something more than a paper-thin plot. Spend more time on effective storytelling rather than comic setpieces. And most of all, start asking yourself, "Does this work? Is this good? Or is there a better way?" In fact, as I mentioned earlier - when it comes to anything that could be gross or risqué, ignore your instincts. When it comes to your sense of social satire, or your vision of what Malaysia is and should be... those instincts, you can trust.

NEXT REVIEW: The Bourne Legacy
Expectations: no Paul Greengrass or Matt Damon - but hey, Tony Gilroy?...

We remember it just fine on our own

Total Recall (2012)
My rating:




TMBF has of course seen the original 1990 Total Recall, directed by Paul Verhoeven and starring Arnold Schwarzenegger. It stands out from Schwarzenegger's '80s-and-early-'90s run of action movies for two things: Verhoeven's unique - and at times, uniquely grotesque - visions of a science-fictional future, and its mind- and reality-bending plot based on Philip K. Dick's short story "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale." It was a popular enough, and recent enough, film that one could not but wonder just why anyone would want to remake it - but then again, remember what TMBF said about criticising a movie for being unnecessary. And indeed, there were early reports of how Len Wiseman's remake would not repeat the Mars storyline, and that it would take more inspiration from Dick's story than the 1990 film. The trailer also looked good, showcasing a fresh an eye-catching look that's certainly different from Verhoeven's.

But the surface is all that's different. In the fundamental ways, this is as much a rehash as it is a remake.

In a future where most of the world has been rendered inhabitable due to global chemical wars, the Earth's population is confined to the United Federation of Britain and the Colony (what was once Australia) - and the haves clearly live in the former while the have-nots are confined to the latter. Travel between the two areas is only possible via the Fall, a massive elevator shaft that runs through the Earth's core. Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) is an ordinary factory worker who has been having disturbing recurring dreams, and - despite the admonishments of his wife Lori (Kate Beckinsale) and his friend Harry (Bokeem Woodbine) - visits Rekall, a shady establishment that implants artificial memories, to satisfy what seems like his fantasy of being a secret agent. Suddenly he is hunted by the police, his own wife tries to kill him, and the mystery woman from his dreams (Jessica Biel) shows up to help him. Quaid realises that he may indeed be a double agent, working for the Colony's resistance and its leader Matthias (Bill Nighy) against the UFB's dictator Chancellor Cohaagen (Bryan Cranston), and that his very identity may be false.

There's no doubt that Wiseman, along with his screenwriters Mark Bomback, James Vanderbilt and Kurt Wimmer, are fans of the original film. And it's quite clear that they enjoyed putting in as many little references and callbacks to that film as they could. There's a triple-breasted prostitute; there's a bug that Quaid painfully extracts out of his body; there's a security checkpoint that Quaid tries to get past with the aid of futuristic disguising technology; there's an attempt by the bad guys to convince Quaid none of it is real, that's given away by a timely secretion of a bodily fluid. (It's, um, not as dirty as it sounds.) All this plus the basic plot that is essentially identical, substituting only the deprivation of air to the colourfully mutated citizens of Mars with the Fall as symbol of oppression of the Colony's downtrodden slum-dwellers. There's even a bit where an arm gets ripped off by an elevator, only - this being PG-13 - it's a robot's and not Michael Ironside's.

But in effect, none of these are as fun as Wiseman seem to think they are. All they do is remind us that it's all been done before. Again and again, the movie keeps telling us "hey, remember this thing from the original movie? Betcha do! And hey, remember this thing? And this?" Yes, we remember, but if we wanted to watch 'em again we could just pick up the first film on DVD. We would much rather see something new, which is what I believe - correct me if I'm wrong - most people want when they purchase a current cinema ticket.

To be fair, the best parts are those that are new and different from its 1990 predecessor. For one, the Blade Runner-inspired visual design of the Colony, looking very much like a Hong Kong or Tokyo tenement city of the future with its hodge-podge of apartments stacked chaotically atop each other. It looks cool enough that it doesn't even seem like such a bad place to live. We see less of how the other half lives in the UFB, but they use magnetically-levitated cars on a kilometres-high multi-level highway system there, and it looks pretty cool too - especially when we get a good ol' car chase sequence in them. The entire first half of the movie is one long chase sequence, and if Wiseman's good at one thing it's crafting action scenes. Especially when they employ the best of circa 2012 special effects; design-wise and technical-wise, it all looks great.

And then the second half slows way the hell down, getting interminably mired in its not-particularly-interesting plot details. I've previously decried the cliché of the dystopian sci-fi action film in which the hero fights the tyrannical villain but first meets the rag-tag resistance and ends up getting them all killed. Well, it turns out the original Total Recall was one of the first to employ that trope. And it turns out the new Total Recall simply regurgitates it. Bryan Cranston as aforementioned tyrannical villain gets just one scene to do some villainous scenery-chewing, and it isn't nearly enough. Bill Nighy as the aforementioned resistance's leader gets just one scene period and doesn't even hide the fact that he's just phoning it in. (And Kuato was so much more cool.) Wasting the talents of two such charismatic character actors is just one more example of how lacking in real imagination and creativity this movie is.

But the kids'll probably enjoy it. If you've never seen the original movie and don't know a thing about it, if your age falls below the 22-year interval between the two films, you'll most likely like this just fine. It's a competent and largely unobjectionable big-budget Hollywood timewaster, and I can't imagine anyone being sorely disappointed by it. Except that aside from time, it also wastes a fascinating science fiction premise that had already been turned into a big loud action movie once before. Is it too much to expect that a remake - especially one that claims to have went back to the original Dick source material - take it somewhere different? Is it too much to expect, say, a deeply mind-f**king psychological thriller instead, which is what instantly came to mind when I thought "hmm, how should a Total Recall remake justify its existence?" I guess it is.

NEXT REVIEW: Hantu Gangster
Expectations: gee, Namewee sure ain't an easy guy to defend

The Spider-Man that was

Yeah, let's do this! It's been ages since I last posted a Retro Review, even though I enjoy doing them. And a retrospective look at the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy is in order, since a reboot of the entire franchise has just come our way. The initial news of which was greeted with, in our uniquely Malaysian vernacular, "aiyoo, whaffor?" Indeed, it seems like a very short five years between Spider-Man 3 and this new The Amazing Spider-Man; it took seven years after the much-(and justly-)maligned Batman & Robin before the much better-received (and just plain better) Batman Begins came out. Thing is, despite the fan backlash towards the last installment, no one really thought the Spider-Man series went off the rails the way the Batman franchise did under Joel Schumacher. All its elements - from director to every cast member - seemed solid enough to deliver a much better Spider-Man 4, which was what we were all hoping for. Yet here we are, with a total reboot and a completely new creative vision, with all the uncertainty that brings. So before we check out what Marc Webb and Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone hath wrought, let's see what baggage they have to contend with.


Spider-Man (2002)
My rating:




This is the only one I watched in cinemas, and I wasn't that hot about it at the time. I went with a friend who's a Spider-Man fanboy and he was pretty ecstatic about it (then again, he doesn't have the greatest taste in movies - sorry Ray), but I just thought it was alright. My opinion hasn't changed much watching it 10 years later. In fact, the opening scenes seemed terribly contrived in making Peter Parker the world's most put-upon high school student, beleaguered by everything from evil jock bullies to a school bus driver who drives past him for no good reason. But thing is, Raimi is going for a deliberate tonality here: a broad, purposefully corny approach that faithfully adapts the original Silver Age Spider-Man comics of the early 1960s, in all their wide-eyed earnestness and trademark Stan Lee bombast. It takes a bit of getting used to, which I eventually did - but those early high school scenes are still annoyingly on-the-nose.

It got better after Peter gets bitten by that famous radioactive genetically-engineered spider, and starts being a superhero movie. Watching him explore his newfound powers is fun, as are his initial exploits at superheroing; the circa 2002 CGI effects look a little cartoony when it comes to animating human figures, but there's a palpable sense of joy in the web-slinging and crime-busting. In between, there's the death of Uncle Ben, the tragic event that defines Peter's destiny - which didn't really affect me much. Much more effective are the Daily Bugle scenes with a pitch-perfect J. Jonah Jameson in J.K. Simmons, perhaps the entire series' greatest asset. Raimi's cornball tone works better at broad comedy than broad drama, and that includes the somewhat soppy romance between Peter and Mary Jane Watson. The romance factor is a big part of the film (as well as the other two), with MJ portrayed as the one great love of Peter's life. Yeah, and she goes through no less than three guys in one movie.

Kirsten Dunst gets flack for being the weakest member of the recurring cast; although she's not great, the fault lies more in how the character was written - needy, shallow, and ever the shrieking damsel in distress. Tobey Maguire fares better, and he earned quite a bit of acclaim for his performance - although I found him a little inconsistent. He, along with James Franco as Harry Osborn, seem like they don't quite get Raimi's precise tone, though both would improve in the next two movies. But the one actor who got it off the bat is Willem Dafoe, as a sneering, cackling, deliciously scenery-chewing Norman Osborne/Green Goblin. Now that's how you do a broad comicbook movie villain; I enjoyed him more than any other member of the cast (aside from Simmons). And I enjoyed this movie just fine, up to and including the fun superpowered action/fight scenes. But ten years ago, it didn't make me keen to watch its inevitable sequels - and which I didn't, not in cinemas. I only like it just a little bit more now.


Spider-Man 2 (2004)
My rating:




Widely regarded as the best of the trilogy, as agreed upon by fans, RottenTomatoes (93% approval, although the first film also garnered a respectable 89%) and even Roger Ebert (who gave it a perfect 4 stars over the first one's 2-½). I agree it's an improvement over its predecessor, but in subtle ways. The cornball dialogue remains, as does the cartoonishly heightened world it's set in; we have here a genius scientist working on a fantastic, world-changing piece of technology, and oh by the way, he also has this other fantastic, world-changing piece of technology lying around that he just uses to work on the first fantastic, world-changing piece of technology. The scene in which both are introduced would induce eye-rolls in most discerning viewers, if it weren't for the fact that what preceded it carefully laid the foundation for suspending your disbelief for it. Raimi is asking - nicely - that you just go with it, and most people did.

Because there are plenty of rewards in store once you do. The action scenes for one, including one of the best superpowered fight scenes ever filmed in live-action. Dr. Octopus is a marvellous work of character design and special effects, and never once do his mechanical arms not look real. And Alfred Molina's performance doesn't imitate Dafoe's, but matches him in essaying another pitch-perfect comicbook villain - one that engenders real sympathy and pathos. But it is in its portrayal of Peter Parker that this movie succeeds best as the definitive cinematic Spider-Man, capturing his angst, his dire financial straits, and his difficulties in balancing an ordinary life with his superheroing exploits. Spider-Man has always been hailed as the first costumed superhero to deal with ordinary true-to-life concerns in addition to fighting supervillains, and Spider-Man 2 captures it superbly.

Of course, the corniness and on-the-noseness is still there, as seen in a scene where Peter debates his life choices with a fantasy figure of Uncle Ben in what looks like a vision of heaven - and it isn't even a dream sequence. But the tone succeeds at endearing us to our hero rather than making us roll our eyes. Somewhat less successful is MJ who ends up the damsel in distress for Spidey to rescue again. Still, even when she spends the entire movie pining after Peter whilst engaged to another man, she comes off better than in the last one. (Can't blame a girl for moving on after the guy she gave her heart to turned her down.) The grand romance between Peter and MJ is another thing this sequel does well, and ends the film on an anticipatory note of big changes in both their lives. And yes, since this is the one that left me wanting more of Spidey, I'd definitely agree to putting it among the best superhero movies of all time.


Spider-Man 3 (2007)
My rating:




And this is the one that spoiled it all. Although, as you can probably tell from my rating, I don't think it's the trainwreck that everyone says it is - but before we get to the good parts, the bad parts are pretty bad. It starts off with Peter being popular and well-liked, in a relationship with MJ, and on top of the world for once - a nice development from the status quo of the first two movies. But this quickly turns into both of them becoming remarkably unlikable. Even before Peter starts strutting down the street like an idiot, he's already insensitive and inconsiderate of his girlfriend - who doesn't earn our sympathies either, being all whiny and petulant. (And who then sucks face with her ex. Seriously, can this woman ever stay faithful?) And here's the thing: this is all Raimi. It's all in the same vein with his broad, cornball tone. He can blame the studio for forcing Venom into the movie, but emo hair Peter, jazz-dancing Peter, and a Peter who flaunts a new girl in front of his recently-broken-up girlfriend - all the most hated parts of Spider-Man 3 - are definitely Raimi's ideas.

Of course, the inclusion of Venom is another huge problem - namely, there's too much going on. Bad enough that Flint Marko a.k.a. Sandman turns out to be Uncle Ben's real killer - an unwise retread of Peter's origin story, methinks - there's also the alien symbiote that at first infects our hero, then finds a more welcoming host in Peter's photographer rival, Eddie Brock, Jr. And while Raimi and his writers valiantly attempt to tie it all together, both Marko/Sandman and Brock/Venom are reduced to sadly underdeveloped characters and poorly-resolved subplots. (Despite Thomas Haden Church's and Topher Grace's performances; the series has never lacked for great casting.) The seams are stretched to breaking point when Brock just happens to be where Peter is while the latter is getting rid of his black costume, thus allowing it to jump from hero to villain; you know the plot is in trouble when it has to resort to such a wild coincidence. And that's not even mentioning the movie's third villain: Harry Osborne, Peter's best friend-turned New Goblin.

Which is actually one of the things it does well, largely because it's the third act of a storyline that had been building since the first movie. Their teamup in the climactic battle is fun, and the well-choreographed action scenes benefit from the series' biggest budget to date. (Unfortunately, MJ gets kidnapped by the villain yet again; seriously, can you guys ever find something else for her to do?) Which ends the movie on a not-entirely-unsatisfying note - hence 3 stars - but it's a movie that gets worse the more you think about it. The damage it does to the character of one of comics' most beloved superheroes is galling, as is the waste of one of his most popular villains from the '90s. Which Raimi, being a fan of the Silver Age Spider-Man, has no love for, and it shows; even Venom's design is a simple recolouring of Spidey's usual digs, and doesn't even look like the strikingly matte black costume from the comics. No, I didn't hate it, but I can understand all too well why the fans did.

-----

Despite fan disapproval, Spider-Man 3 is actually the most financially successful of the trilogy and Sony/Columbia's highest-grossing film to date. Which clearly indicates that the split between the studio and Raimi had to have been acrimonious; why would they fire him after he delivered such a huge hit? But fire him they did, and with him went Maguire and Dunst and therefore the entire franchise - or at least, this iteration of it. How successful Webb's reboot remains to be seen (and by the time you read this, I will already have seen it and be writing my review), but having seen the entire Raimi Spider-Man trilogy, it's definitely a shame that he wasn't allowed to keep helming the series. No matter how bad the last one was, I don't think any Spider-fan was angry enough to not give him another chance, or who wasn't eager to see his Spider-Man 4. But that's one for the Movies That Could've Been Awesome (But Never Got Made) list now.

Sorakan yang ringan

Hoore! Hoore!
My rating:




TMBF dah nak givap dengan mengulas setiap filem tempatan yang keluar di panggung. Dulu boleh, tapi sekarang makin susah - tambahan pula kini bukan hanya satu tapi dua filem tempatan keluar setiap minggu. (Tak hairan kalau kebanyakannya dari kilang filem Metrowealth, yang pernah cakap nak tingkatkan produktiviti tapi senyap tentang kualiti.) Jangan salah faham, saya tetap akan cuba sebaik mungkin untuk menonton dan merebiu filem Melayu, tetapi mungkin hanya pilih yang menarik perhatian saya sahaja. Filem Hoore! Hoore! berjaya menarik perhatian saya, kerana filem muzikal yang menggunakan lagu-lagu klasik nyanyian Allahyarham Sudirman Haji Arshad nyata sesuatu yang berbeza dari filem-filem Melayu biasa.

Beza memang ada, dan ini antara kekuatannya. Tetapi kelemahan dan kekurangan juga ada.

Nurul Aiman (Nurfarah Nazirah), atau lebih dikenali sebagai Iman, adalah seorang gadis remaja yang sering dipersendakan kerana tubuhnya yang gempal - terutamanya oleh alpha bitch di sekolahnya iaitu Rita (Kilafairy), malah juga dari kawan-kawan Iman iaitu Lana (Shana Razman) dan Azadan (Afi Yamin). Iman amat disayangi oleh ibubapanya (Harun Salim Bachik dan Adibah Noor) dan juga neneknya (Fauziah Nawi) yang pernah menjadi ratu cantik zaman '60an. Neneknya mendorong Iman supaya menyertai pertanding Ratu Idola yang juga ditanding oleh Rita bagi membina keyakinan dirinya - walaupun ibu Iman kurang senang dengan pertandingan ratu cantik sebegitu. Iman juga dibantu oleh Johari (Akim), ketua pengawas sekolahnya yang menjadi jejaka idaman semua gadis, tapi sebenarnya menyimpan perasaan terhadap Iman; namun Johari juga menghadapi tentangan dari bapanya Cikgu Mursyid (Shahronizam Noor).

Banyak yang saya suka tentang filem ini. Saya suka dialog tulisan Shariman Wahab bersama pengarah Saw Teong Hin yang kerap bijak dan kelakar. ("Moto tu mak kau ke aku mak kau?") Saya suka lakonan yang hampir flawless, terutamanya dari pelakon veteran seperti Fauziah Nawi, Harun Salim Bachik dan Adibah Noor manakala bakat baru seperti Nurfarah Nazirah dan Akim juga berkesan. Saya suka paparan hubungan antara watak-watak yang berkonflik, namun penuh kasih sayang. Saya suka ia sebuah cerita orang muda lawan orang tua yang memihak kepada orang muda. Dan saya suka tema ceritanya, iaitu kebaikan tidak mengenal rupa dan hati yang murni lebih penting dari pandangan orang, semuanya berlandaskan pandangan dari seri agama Islam yang lebih terbuka dan bukan hanya melarang-larang. Semua ini amat baru dan segar bagi filem Melayu, dan ianya ubat penawar yang mujarab kepada filem-filem lain yang kononnya Islam sangat.

Tapi sebagai sebuah muzikal, ia kurang memuaskan. Berbanding filem Mamma Mia! (yang mengadaptasikan pementasan Broadway) dimana ceritanya dibina berdasarkan lirik lagu-lagu ABBA, plot Hoore! Hoore! tidak berkaitan dengan lagu-lagu Allahyarham Sudirman yang dipilih. Adegan muzikal dalam filem muzikal perlu diintegrasikan dengan cerita, supaya muzik dan liriknyalah yang menjadi penggerak cerita - tapi disini, walaupun lagunya sedap, tapi kesannya ibarat garam yang ditambah, bukan ramuan utama. Bagi saya - yang jujur kata, bukan minat sangat genre muzikal - kelemahan yang paling besar adalah dari segi penceritaan. Watak-watak tidak dibina dengan teliti dan konflik antara mereka kabur; akibatnya, yang mengecam dan melarang penyertaan Iman dalam Ratu Idola pada mula-mula, tiba-tiba ubah pendirian tanpa sebab yang jelas.

Disini saya terpaksa membandingkan filem ini dengan filem Hairspray (yang pernah difilemkan dua kali - satu tahun 1988, satu lagi remake tahun 2007). Dalam filem itu, bakat yang ditonjolkan oleh heroinnya Tracy Turnblad ialah tarian, bukan ratu cantik; Tracy juga seorang yang penuh keyakinan diri dari mula, bukan pemalu. Perubahan ini melemahkan Hoore! Hoore! kerana kita boleh lihat sendiri kebolehan Tracy menari, jadi kita faham bagaimana dia boleh menjadi popular walaupun gemuk. Iman pula segan dan kekok, jadi popularitinya sebagai petanding ratu cantik sukar dipercayai. Masalah utamanya ialah ini menjejaskan mesejnya tentang gadis gemuk yang ingin membuktikan diri - kerana apa sebenarnya yang Iman nak buktikan? Apa sebenarnya kejayaan yang dicapainya? Saw dan Shariman seolah-olah takut hendak menjadikan Iman terlalu berani atau kasar, dan akibatnya mesej ini kurang bergigi.

Yang saya ingin lihat dari filem ini ialah gigi. Contohnya babak awal dimana Iman bergaduh dengan Rita selepas Rita memperlinya; lagi sedap kalau Iman memberi satu penumbuk ke hidung Rita dengan bunyi dusshhh! yang kuat. Watak nenek Iman lakonan Fauziah Nawi memang hebat, tapi lagi hebat jika dia ada semasa Rita dengan entourage-nya menyindir Iman lagi; bolehlah dia balas balik dengan sindiran yang lagi power. Dan kan lagi syok kalau persembahan Iman di pusingan akhir pertandingan itu ialah babak tarian dan nyanyian yang rancak dan bertenaga? Ini kan filem muzikal. Ini kan filem girl power, ke tidak? Kalau ada babak-babak macam ni, baru lagi seronok.

Tapi saya agak suka jugaklah filem ini. Nyata ia sesuatu yang baru dan segar, serta menunjukkan pendirian yang amat ingin saya lihat dalam filem tempatan. Filem seperti inilah yang perlu diperbanyakkan lagi di panggung wayang kita - bukan hanya kerana ia memberi ajaran yang sihat dan berharga kepada penonton, khususnya penonton muda dan remaja yang disasarkan. Juga kerana lagi banyak filem seperti ini yang dibikin, lagi mahirlah pembikin-pembikin filem tempatan mengolah dan menggarap cerita sebegini supaya kelemahan yang ada disini dapat diperbaiki.

NEXT REVIEW: Snow White and the Huntsman
Expectations: hoping K-Stew isn't as bad as they say

Street of broken dreams

Chow Kit
My rating:




Oh em gee, I am seriously behind on my local film reviews; so much for my vow to consistently watch and review Made in Malaysia productions. But this one looked like one to catch. Full disclosure, I was actually contacted by one of the directors who invited me to a preview, which I had to turn down. So I paid a full price ticket to watch this, and I was happy to. It's pretty clear this movie isn't going to make much money at the local box-office, simply because it's neither a rempit movie nor horror movie (nor a rempit horror movie) and doesn't star Shaheizy Sam or Zizan Razak. But it's partly for this same reason that I thought it worthy of a watch, and why I chose to support it with my ringgit.

And it is... I guess. But more for its intentions than its actual merits as a film.

Two loosely-connected stories feature the denizens of Chow Kit, perhaps the roughest and grittiest slum area of Kuala Lumpur. The first concerns a group of street kids and close friends, Ajik (Muhammad Izzam Syafiq), Achat (Muhammad Izzam Izzudin), Reda (Muzhaffar Shah Shahrul Asran) and Tika (Nur Nadzirah Rosi). Tika and Ajik are children of prostitutes (Lana Noordin and Airis Yasmin), whereas brothers Achat and Reda live in a cardboard shack with their father (Namron). For them, life is either running about the streets, begging for change, or doing odd jobs for a kindly shopkeeper (Yasmin Hani) - but tragedy strikes when one of Tika's mother's "friends" (Saiful Ghaz) takes an unhealthy interest in the little girl. The second story is about Ah Kuan (Mers Sia), a petty criminal who has just returned to KL and his partner-in-crime Mojo (Beto Qusyairy), who get caught in between a war between gang bosses David (Brandon Yuen) and Che Wan (Mohd Razib Salimin). Meanwhile, the innocent Ai Leen's (Janelle Chin) mother has been forced to sell her virginity to a pimp named Chong (Chen Puie Heng), whom Ai Leen's friend and neighbour Salina (Dira Abu Zahar) also once worked for.

Both this film's directors, Rosihan Zain @ Dhojee and Brando Lee who each helmed one of its two segments, have stated their intentions to shine a light on the real-life stories of Chow Kit residents - the homeless, the destitute, the victimised and the desperate. As the "Berdasarkan kisah benar" title at the movie's beginning implies, these stories were culled from the experiences of charities who work in Chow Kit (in particular, the Rumah Nur Salam children's shelter), which lends a poignant verisimilitude to what we see. But to fully bring out that verisimilitude, to tell a heartbreaking story that's also true and to make us believe in its truth, requires a great deal of filmmaking skill. Sadly, neither Dhojee nor Lee are fully successful at it.

The first segment is the more affecting, simply because street kids are more compelling than adult protagonists. But the plot suffers from an aimless quality; it spends more time on how miserable and impoverished these kids' lives are rather than telling a story with a proper beginning, middle and end. Yasmin Hani's character is entirely superfluous, as are scenes with Hairie Othman as - I think - a director of a children's welfare organisation (and who doesn't seem to provide any help at all). The portrayal of these children is also far too precious, which feels emotionally manipulative and not very honest. These are the sweetest and most angelic bunch of crime-ridden-slum-area kids you've ever seen - and they're supposed to be the kind of kids who extract their own brand of rough mob justice on those who have wronged them.

That being a pedophile who raped one of their own. Yes, there is child rape in this film, and in its depiction, it faces the same problem that marred Zhang Yimou's The Flowers of War. How do you depict a stomach-churningly ugly act with the best of intentions and not end up making something (even unintentionally) exploitative? What you need is an exceedingly skillful touch - and in this particular case, spectacularly talented child actors, which Chow Kit does not have. Don't get me wrong; they all give quite impressive, naturalistic performances, and with greater experience and guidance they - especially Muhammad Izzam Syafiq and Nur Nadzirah Rosi - could be very good some day. But in this film, that delves into such disturbingly adult territory, far too much is asked of them. You'd need an Elle Fanning or a Chloë Grace Moretz to play these roles right.

The second segment suffers from the same problems to a somewhat smaller degree; smaller, because its subject matter isn't as sensitive. Unfortunately, it also recycles a lot of old Hong Kong gangster movie clichés that does no favours to its attempts at depicting the "real" Chow Kit. Kuan is your typical tarnished-but-noble hero, sporting a facial scar (and a flashback that explains how he got it) for extra cool points. His relationship with Ai Leen - and yes, they do have a connection - plays out like something ripped off of A Moment of Romance, that semi-seminal 1990 Andy Lau gangland weepie melodrama. Dira Abu Zahar gets prominent placing on the poster, but her character is minor, not to mention disconnected from the main plot. And there's a fair bit of gory bloodshed - plus a Reservoir Dogs-style Mexican standoff - that indicate that Lee would've much rather made his own Hong Kong-style crime thriller movie. (Albeit a compromised one, since it ends with that good ol' FINAS-approved PDRM-shows-up-and-arrests-everyone ending.)

Acting problems abound as well; Merz Sia has the look of a male runway model and the acting talents to match. Janelle Chin looks to be in her early 20s but plays Ai Leen as an airheaded 16-year-old. But Chen Puie Heng as Chong the pimp is the one that's emblematic of Lee's approach here. At first, we are told that Chong is one of the "good" ones, who takes good care of the prostitutes who work for him; Salina sure seems pretty friendly with him. Later he turns out to not be a very nice person at all, and this isn't a spoiler because Chen's performance blatantly telegraphs it from his first scene. Just like Dhojee making the street kids as innocent and blameless as possible, Lee makes his villains as one-dimensionally villainous as possible. The pedophile rapist from the first segment also shows up here as a psychotically vicious gangster, because of course he is.

But for this film at least, I chalk it down to an earnest-to-a-fault attempt at depicting the tragedies and miseries of Chow Kit. Its earnestness comes across in little ways, from Dira Abu Zahar's performance - the one truly affecting one in the movie - to the song that plays over the end credits, Butterfingers' "Mati Hidup Kembali". That is one beautifully, heartbreakingly lovely song, and even if it wasn't composed for the movie (it was released in 2009), I can't help but become more kindly disposed toward Chow Kit after hearing it. I believe in this film's intentions; I believe Dhojee's and Lee's hearts were in the right place in making it; I believe they were genuinely stirred by the real-life stories they heard, because that emotion does manage to shine through. That it managed to shine through some poor filmmaking choices is no mean feat.

NEXT REVIEW: The Lady
Expectations: none too high - it is Luc Besson, after all