Tim's Star Trek Into Darkness Review - MAJOR SPOILERS!

Tim here. First let me start with stating that spoilers will follow in this review as this movie cannot be properly analyzed without at least discussing these spoiler filled plot points. If this is an inconvenience and you wish to see the movie unspoiled then please see it first before reading this review. 

That being said this was a great continuation of the new Star Trek series brought to us by director J.J. Abrams.

The movie opens with Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) in command of the USS Enterprise and not following the "Prime Directive" rules set by Starfleet when he chooses to save his friend and colleague Spock (Zachary Quinto) from certain death. This sets up the necessary distance that Kirk and crew need to have from Starfleet as they embark on a mission of vengeance of both a commanded and personal nature. The mission is to kill John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) after he has bombed a secret Starfleet facility and assassinated much of the high ranking officers at Starfleet headquarters. More on the story will follow in a bit.

First let's talk about the writing and performances in general. Overall it was very well written and acted. Chris Pine is great in the role of Kirk, continuing to develop what he started in the first movie. As well Zachary Quinto performs well as Spock, and continues to play the half-Vulcan, half-human, first officer of Enterprise with great poise and humility. However, it is Benedict Cumberbatch who steals the show as the main antagonist Khan. Did I just spoil that plot point? Yes, John Harrison is in fact really Khan who was woken from his cryo slumber by Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller). Weller is the secondary antagonist, and he's good and sufficient in his role as a war mongering Starfleet admiral. Again, Benedict Cumberbatch cannot be matched as he steals the thunder in every scene he performs in. Other notable performances belong to Simon Pegg as Scotty, who delivers a large amount of humor while also fulfilling his duty. Zoe Saldana is wonderful again as Uhura and she plays the hurt lover by Spock's earlier choice to die for the greater good before being saved by Kirk. She handles those emotions perfectly. However, it is Alice Eve as Carol Marcus who gets the better emotional performance when she pleas with her father not to destroy the enterprise. I will comment more on this in the story section along with the cinematography section.

With cinematography the 3D conversion must also be discussed. The movie was brilliantly shot as a 2D movie, but it didn't quite lend itself to helping the 3D conversion with the lens flares. The lens flares were toned down in this one, but not enough in some instances. One that was absolutely terrible was a distracting lens flare that interfered with the touching dramatic performance as Alice Eve pleaded with her father from the Enterprise. Why? That was a really poor choice because it hurt the performance and was a distraction. It didn't add anything to the moment and was fully capable of destroying the suspension of disbelief. In fact with the 3D conversion the lens flares completely ruined that suspension of disbelief that 3D can help. Yes, humans do see lens flares in real life, but not to the same degree as a camera lens. In fact the lens flares too often draw attention to the fact that there is a camera in the scene. Not to mention the anamorphic lenses used on the cameras created a warp to some images that made the 3D conversion odd. A few times because of the 2D cinematography there were screen violations because foreground objects in negative parallax were too far to the side of the image frame and caused slight discomfort. This was unforgivably detrimental to making this movie worth the 3D conversion. However, there were plenty of moments where the stereo was good.

The visual effects were top notch as always. They played really well in 3D because all the elements that are built in 3D programs can be rendered out in stereo. However, that doesn't mean that some were ruined by lens flares. Why lens flares in space? I commented about this for the last Star Trek because by having a lens flare in space you acknowledge that there is a camera in space filming this event, and as a result make the filmmaker's presence part of the audiences awareness.

Now for the story, which was very well done. It was a good continuation. A lot worked well for it, but at the same time there were questions. For example, why demote Kirk only to have him quickly reinstated to his same position in less time than the demotion can sink in and have an effect? That plot ploy was a bit weak. However, it did help in giving Kirk the distance he needed from the rest of Starfleet's high ranking officers. Next, was Scotty's resignation, which worked wonderfully. It was believable and worked well to serve as a means to get Scotty to be able to go off and do his own exploration and be in the right place at the right time to save Kirk and crew's lives. Now, as soon as Kirk starts beating Khan (still John Harrison to the audience at this point) and doesn't make a dent it brings to light that Harrison can't be human. The fact that he looks human and thus must be some superhuman instantly makes anyone with knowledge of the series and previous films know he has to be Khan. When he's revealed to be Khan I couldn't help but cheer, but get annoyed at the ploy to hide his identity. Then Spock contacting future Spock (Leonard Nimoy) to inquire about Khan completely changes the dynamics again. It shifts the arch nemesis status of Khan away from Kirk and moves it over to Spock. Even giving Spock the famous "Khhaaan!" scream. However, it worked. Especially the role reversal where Kirk is put in the Spock position and sacrifices his life for the crew. Bringing him back to life using Khan's blood was in fact something that worked well to keep him part of the series, but rendered his sacrifice less effective. It even gives a new dilemma: How can anyone die for the rest of this series when all they need is a blood transfusion from Khan?

No matter what issues rise from these new developments in the story, the movie is still a fun ride with well written action sequences and dialogue. The film is filled with great performances. And despite some drawbacks the cinematography is very well done. The 3D conversion however was wasted. Not only because of the way it was shot but also the way it was edited. Honestly in the future I will primarily see this movie in 2D even if there were some nice conversion work done by StereoD. I give this movie 4.5 stars out of 5, and most of the points against it have to do with those lens flares and as well doesn't counter in the 3D. Grading the 3D conversion and the use of 3D I give it 2 out of 5. If you haven't seen the movie I suggest you do. See it in 3D or 2D, it's up to you, but no matter what format you see it in you should enjoy it.

MUST WATCH: MASSIVE New Trailer For PACIFIC RIM!!

Just take my money now.



Here's the storyline for the movie:
When legions of monstrous creatures, known as Kaiju, started rising from the sea, a war began that would take millions of lives and consume humanity’s resources for years on end. To combat the giant Kaiju, a special type of weapon was devised: massive robots, called Jaegers, which are controlled simultaneously by two pilots whose minds are locked in a neural bridge. But even the Jaegers are proving nearly defenseless in the face of the relentless Kaiju. On the verge of defeat, the forces defending mankind have no choice but to turn to two unlikely heroes—a washed up former pilot (Charlie Hunnam) and an untested trainee (Rinko Kikuchi)—who are teamed to drive a legendary but seemingly obsolete Jaeger from the past. Together, they stand as mankind’s last hope against the mounting apocalypse.

PACIFIC RIM opens on July 12.

Movie Review: THE GREAT GATSBY - 9.5 Stars, Spoiler Free!

What a treat! If you've read other critics panning the movie - do not listen to them! I can't emphasize this enough. Make up your own mind. But do go and see it. Take a look at RottenTomatoes. The critics have THE GREAT GATSBY at 49% currently (a joke), while the actual paying audience has it at 84%! These critics are WAY out of touch with reality. Further, TGG enjoyed an opening weekend of $50m+!

I felt reinvigorated and thoughtful upon leaving the theater. Think the opposite of how you feel after a explosion filled action movie. Think culturally relevant. If you don't go see this movie in theaters, in 3D, you are doing yourself a disservice. This is art in motion and in sound.

Here's the storyline for the movie:
Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), a young man from Minnesota, moves to New York to learn about the bond business. He rents a house in the swanky West Egg district of Long Island. He eventually meets his neighbor Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) and gets caught up in his world of extravagant parties and people. 

Based on the novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald, this story deals with the allure of fame and fortune, as well as the unbreakable bond of first love.


I'm going to jump right into the review...

Story - 98%. Adapted from one of the greatest writers we have ever known, F. Scott Fitzgerald, THE GREAT GATSBY delivers an extremely satisfying drama that pulls you in and doesn't let go. Brilliant characters illuminate the story from beginning to end and their journey is full of joy and peril. Life can flip on a dime and these characters live it. Almost flawless and wonderfully adapted, you won't want for a better trip away from your own joys and perils.

Acting - 95%. Leonardo DiCaprio is Jay Gatsby. His development as an actor has been a work in progress over the years. I remember seeing him in THE QUICK AND THE DEAD and thinking wow, this kid's going to be amazing in a few years. He hasn't let me down. His portrayal of JG captures his intense yearnings, patience, timidness and ultimately his obsessiveness - all brilliantly done. Director Baz Luhrmann's camera captures every nuance of JG's emotion through all the glitz and glamor of the era. I can't think of better casting. One scene in particular, again in the hotel room - Jay Gatsby reveals a chink in his emotional armor and perfectly summed up my thoughts on DiCaprio as Gatsby: Range and authenticity.

The only reason why I didn't give the acting a 99% or even 100% is Tobey Maguire. I am not a fan. His personality is appropriate diminutive in this movie, hinting at why he was cast, but Maguire just doesn't have believability. Nick Carraway needed to be more in awe, more out of place, more insane (at times) and have much more of a change by the end. He witnesses a great deal of things. Carraway needed to CHANGE much more than Maguire portrayed and I just didn't believe him as an actor. Still, he wasn't horrible. Miscast, but ok.

I've become more and more of a fan of Carey Mulligan of late. I first took note of her in DRIVE - she plays wonderfully enamored women who seem to fall for the wrong man. Perfectly cast as Daisy Buchanan.

Character Development - 92%. A wonderful and gradual exposure to Jay Gatsby was timed perfectly to continue with the wonderful and gradual exposure of what he was up to! Maguire's character should have gone deeper visually (the story was fine). I loved the evolution of Daisy 's character into the pure state of confusion. I must revisit this movie again soon to see how Luhrmann did it! Normally I am watching technique as much as the story itself, but I was lost in this movie so many times that I simply must investigate Luhrmann's technique in certain scenes once more. The hotel room scene toward the end in particular.

Suspension of Disbelief - 88%. I am conflicted on this section because on one hand sits the most wonderful treatment of Times Square I have ever seen for that era or any era for that matter (especially with the 3D), but on the other rests some fairly poorly painted mattes that had me shaking my head. Further the industrial blue collar zone outside of New York looked like more of a fantasy than reality. Like a purgatory. Perhaps it is meant to be that metaphor. I haven't read the book (I know!) so I can't comment on the various book club discussions on it's meaning. Perhaps it's due to it being told through the memory lens of an insane Carraway. Regardless, Times Square was amazing and I so wanted the camera to linger on that scene for much, much longer. The modern score helped draw me in as well. Not as a historical piece no, but as if I were there - accepted into - and at home with these characters.

Directing - 98%. What can I say? Almost perfect. This is art to me. Something I could watch over and over and over again and see something new every time. Without exception. That's art. It reminds me of standing in The Louvre and ogling paintings for hours, then going back and doing it again. It's moving to see beauty and it's all the more rare these days to see it in a motion picture. Heck, THE GREAT GATSBY belongs IN the Louvre. There are some continuity issues (pen position on paper, etc) but that's nitpicking (it did however break my suspension of disbelief). Baz Luhrmann's movies are pieces of art, but none as effectively done as THE GREAT GATSBY. It's a tour de force of imagery, sound and story magnificently woven with the unforgettable strands of a literary classic in stunning 3D immersion.

Sound / Score - 95%. Luhrmann took a big risk (as he likes to do; ROME + JULIET in Shakespearean tongue for example) with the music for GATSBY using modern day artists and their music as the thunder behind his visual lightning. And when I say modern artists, I mean an impressive list of the who's who in today's music: Jay Z, Beyonce, Amy Winehouse, Lana Del Ray, Kanye West, Frank Ocean, Bryan Ferry, will.i.am, Fergie, The xx and U2. Of course there's a little Cole Porter in there too. Some small amounts didn't work - like Beyonce's "Crazy In Love". All that did was flash some of the music video in my mind. For me, 95% of it worked. Big time. It drew me in. I was engaged and actively participating in all the grandeur. Just a wonderful, wonderful double edged palette knife of sight and sound being mixed together and presented on the giant Real D screen. Thank you Baz Luhrmann for taking risks.

Cinematography - 99%. Yeah. It's tight. As close to perfection as you can get with actually being perfect. The lighting! WOW. Just spot on lighting. I was just sitting back thinking to myself "Just soak it all in". I was in awe of just how magnificent everything looked! Opulence. Opulence. Opulence. The makeup was amazing too. Closeups betrayed nothing out of place. Even when Gatsby returned from the rain (in the trailers), his closeup and full shot was flawless - arguably one of the most important shots of the movie (Jay meeting Daisy again). Why not 100%? Some of those matte paintings. That's it.

Visual / Special / Stunts - 82%. The only real weakness of the movie. Matte paintings were weak. The car racing scenes were great but could have been better. Times Square brought me back over 80% satisfaction though.

Stereoscopic 3D - 95%. This my friends, is a BIG deal. THE GREAT GATSBY is an adult drama that utilized 3D the way it was meant to be - to draw you into a story. Just as Luhrmann's use of visuals and sound draw you in, his artistic use of 3D sealed the deal. I WAS there. In the parties. In the emotion. In the story! You have to see it to believe it.

A standing ovation for 3ality Technica for their impeccable native 3D services and equipment! I'm proud to have them as a sponsor. I truly am.

One shot in particular has Jay Gatsby throwing an object into his pool on an angle from the camera and the resulting splash was just at the right perspective (perfect really) to have me 'think' to move, but not too much to have me flinch! Such subtle command and control of the moving going experience has me giddy with anticipation for the new tentpoles that are shooting in native 3D. Luhrmann probably did the pool splash just to show you he could toy with you if he wanted to - he just doesn't want to water down his movie. Nothing that I can recall breaks the plane of the screen. It was all about immersion into the decadence of THE GREAT GATSBY. Luhrmann used 3D as one of his tools in this obvious labor of love. And I indeed loved it!

Do yourself a favor, go see this movie. Treat it like a cultural event... for the edification of your mind. Because that's what it is. Art. Culture. Life. Bravo Baz!

THE GREAT GATSBY is now playing.

Thank you to Empire Theaters for the screening! The Real D presentation was well lit and sounded remarkable!! The service was the typical excellence I have come to expect.

New Behind The Scenes Shots From THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2: Visual Spoilers!!

Hey guys, got some cool new behind-the-scenes (BTS) shots from Marc Webb's THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2. We'll start with the one that has been circling for a bit (Sent from Marc Webb's Twitter account yesterday) and leave the remaining shots for after the jump to protect those who don't want to be spoiled.

Here's the storyline for the movie:
In The Amazing Spider-Man 2, for Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), life is busy – between taking out the bad guys as Spider-Man and spending time with the person he loves, Gwen (Emma Stone), high school graduation can’t come quickly enough. Peter hasn’t forgotten about the promise he made to Gwen’s father to protect her by staying away – but that’s a promise he just can’t keep. Things will change for Peter when a new villain, Electro (Jamie Foxx), emerges, an old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, and Peter uncovers new clues about his past.

Yes there are spoilers in the photos after the jump! Don't click unless you're sure you want to see them. You have been WARNED.

Click here to hit the jump...

James Franco Joins Wim Wenders' Next 3D Project: EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE

Yet another adult drama being shot in 3D! The timing for this announcement couldn't be better with the pending release of Baz Luhrmann's THE GREAT GATSBY. We're entering a new phase for 3D - one that says 'I don't care what genre you're shooting in - make it 3D'.

World renowned director Wim Wenders (PINA) has just inked James Franco to star in his next 3D project entitled EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE.

Says Wenders on the movie: "A family drama, unraveling over the course of twelve years. ...And I’m convinced that the medium (3D) lends itself really well to an intimate story."


Here's the storyline for the movie:
A writer (Franco) who accidentally causes the death of a child and the story that follows him over the next 12 years as he looks for the footprints of the accident on his life, as well as on the life of the child’s mother.

More when we get it! Assuming this project will be shot in native 3D as was Wenders' Oscar nominated PINA.

Source: THR

Teaser Trailer for Gravity Released!

Tim here, and I'm very exciting to help reveal the very first teaser trailer for Alfonso Cuarón's Gravity! It's his first movie since 2006's Children for Men, and it looks like another masterpiece from the reknowned director.

Here's the synopsis for Gravity:

Sandra Bullock plays Dr. Ryan Stone, a brilliant medical engineer on her first shuttle mission, with veteran astronaut Matt Kowalsky (George Clooney) in command of his last flight before retiring. But on a seemingly routine spacewalk, disaster strikes. The shuttle is destroyed, leaving Stone and Kowalsky completely alone–tethered to nothing but each other and spiraling out into the blackness. The deafening silence tells them they have lost any link to Earth…and any chance for rescue. As fear turns to panic, every gulp of air eats away at what little oxygen is left. But the only way home may be to go further out into the terrifying expanse of space.

GRAVITY opens in 2D, 3D, and IMAX 3D on October 4.

First Peek At Alfonso Caurón's GRAVITY!

It's not much as far as length, but George Clooney's in a space suit again - how great is that? I am itching to see more of this thing and Entertainment Tonight promises more on Thursday. Aside from the anticipation for just how Cauron will pull it off (including his amazingly long opening take), seeing Clooney and Sandra Bullock in orbiting peril will be dynamite.

Even more exciting (for me anyway) is the fact the Cauron and his son Jonas wrote it. When a director is involved with multiple facets of his/her movie, that's when you know it's a personal passion play. It's kind of like when a musician writes his own material. It's just... better.

Here's the storyline for the movie:
Dr. Stone (Bullock) is a brilliant medical engineer on her first shuttle mission, with veteran astronaut Matt Kowalsky (Clooney). But on a seemingly routine spacewalk, disaster strikes. The shuttle is destroyed, leaving Stone and Kowalsky completely alone—tethered to nothing but each other and spiraling out into the blackness. The deafening silence tells them they've lost any link to Earth... and any chance for rescue.

GRAVITY opens on October 4.



via The Film Stage