Reviews of the Past: ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Andrew Garfield

I am not a comic-book reader. I may have pointed that out when I reviewed “The Avengers” back in May.

I have great respect for people who read graphic novels (I think that is the term these days). In a way we are kindred spirits: both of us have hobbies based on the consumption of narratives; theirs are printed and illustrated, mine are moving images on a screen. I write all this to say, I am not evaluating “The Amazing Spider-Man” as someone who has read or fully understands the Spider-Man lore. I am just a film-lover who likes a good comic book adaptation.

I also want to state that I am a big fan of the original “Spider-Man” trilogy with Tobey Mcguire playing the title role. If I were ranking those films this would be the order, best to least, 2, 1, 3.

Now let’s consider the new film, “The Amazing Spider-Man.” First, there is great casting here. I liked Tobey Mcguire a great deal, but I think Andrew Garfield brings a whole new dimension to the character. He is great as the shy nerd who is scared of his shadow but he is even better once he gains confidence along with his powers.

I also prefer Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacy to Kirsten Dunst’s Mary Jane. Garfield and Stone have real chemistry and their onscreen relationship seems more real and authentic; possibly because Peter Parker confides in her early in this film. Martin Sheen and Sally Field do a lot with their small roles as Uncle Ben and Aunt May respectively. (I miss Uncle Ben saying, “Remember, with great power, comes great responsibility.” in this film, but Sheen does have a good speech nonetheless.)

Rhys Ifans does good work as both victim and villain in the film. And finally, it is good to see Denis Leary on the big screen again in a pivotal role.

Beyond the casting, this is a stunning film visually. The effects are great especially Spider-Man swinging through New York. The fights are nearly perfectly choreographed. We have seen all of this before, but this time it looks clearer, sharper, more real, and dare I say it, amazing. I am not sure New York ever looked this good in the former trilogy.

Then there is the story. Yes, this is a reboot of the Spider-man origin story. In many ways the first hour of the film are almost exactly the same as the original film of 2002. There are deviations but all the general strokes are the same: Parker is a weak nerd. A spider in a lab bites parker. Parker gains new abilities. Tragedy comes to Parker. Spider-Man is born.

One of the biggest differences here is that it takes much longer for Parker to become noble. Maguire’s Parker decides to be a hero fairly quickly; Garfield’s version stays on a vendetta much longer, and actually has to accomplish something heroic before deciding to be the hero. I like this account better, it seems more honest and realistic. Villains are not usually born evil and neither are heroes born heroic.

The second half of the story is the battle between Spidey and the Lizard-Man. We expect this. The big battle is always the climax. (See “Avengers,” “Men in Black III” and every other comic book film.) But this time it is done exceptionally well including a couple of deeply moving emotional moments that made me want to cheer and shed a tear or two simultaneously.

There are moments in the original trilogy that moved me, and I am glad that director Marc Webb delivered some in his version as well. (By the way, Webb’s previous work is directing the best romantic comedy of the last twenty years, “500 Days of Summer.” If you have not seen it, go and rent it tonight.)

To conclude, and I know this is going to frustrate some people, “Avengers” will be remembered as the biggest film of 2012, but I am not sure it is the best comic book film of this year. And the debate may be moot in two weeks when “The Dark Knight Rises” opens on July 20.

The Amazing Spider-Man” is a smart, fun, exciting, moving, well-cast, well-delivered, visual feast of a film. It belongs beside “Spider-Man 2” as one of the best tales of Peter Parker.

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $262,030,663

Foreign gross: $495,900,000

Production budget: $230 million

Opening weekend: $62,004,688

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Little cinematic scares for the season

I could write a whole column discussing the classic horror films. Instead, I decided that rather than praise the classics that are universally hailed as great thrills, I would take my last column before Halloween to promote several scares that might be forgotten or have gone unnoticed. You can go to the local video store or a website like Netflix or Amazon to find these films … if you dare.

The Woman in Black (2012)

Daniel Radcliffe doesn’t appear to be at Hogwarts. (Photo courtesy of CBS Films)

This film caught many people’s attention because Daniel Radcliffe, formerly Harry Potter, plays a widower with a young son. “Woman in Black” is again one of those horror movies that succeeds more with startling scares rather than blood and gore. I have shown this film to a group of people in my home and it is as much fun to watch them squirm as it is to watch the film. Radcliffe plays a man who must go to an old house to close out the accounts of an estate. Only once he arrives at the home, he begins to see strange things. Wickedly fun if you like a good jolt.

The Hole (2009)

Chris Massoglia and Nathan Gamble go exploring. (Photo courtesy of Big Air Studios)

This film is not in the same league with the four previous titles, but I placed it on this list because I think it is the perfect horror film for pre-adolescents. This is the first horror movie I showed my children and they loved it. The plot is simple. A mother and her two sons move into a new home and the boys discover that there is a hole in their basement. The strange thing is that the hole seems to have no bottom. Soon, frightening things begin to happen. “The Hole” is directed by Joe Dante, who made “Gremlins” many years ago. If you like Gremlins, you will enjoy “The Hole.”

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

Alison Lohman looks for answers to her recent run of bad luck. (Photo courtesy of Universal Pictures)

Written and directed by Sam Raimi (co-written by his brother, Ivan). Raimi has given us the first three “Spider-Man” films and one of my all-time favorites, “A Simple Plan.” “Drag Me to Hell” is not at all how the title sounds. It is the story of a young bank executive who is cruel to a client in an effort to get promoted. Instead, she ends up cursed and both humor and horror ensue. I can still remember when and where I saw this film for the first time.

Let Me In (2010)

Chloë Grace Moretz is not your average vampire. (Photo courtesy of Relativity Media)

The American remake of a Swedish film (“Let the Right One In”). Both are outstanding, but “Let Me In” is a little more accessible. This movie contains the most gore of any on my list. It is a vampire movie for those who desire thrills rather than teenage angst with their vampires. Beyond the creatures of the night, the film is also about loneliness, bullying and friendship.

The Orphanage (2007)

Just who is this guy? (Photo courtesy of Picturehouse)

This movie, a foreign film, tells the story of a woman who, along with her husband and young son, buys and moves into an old house that was once the orphanage where she grew up. The film is incredibly creepy, and the mystery that develops is spellbinding. Almost no gore, just great storytelling and plenty of chills.

 

Cinema Corner: Oct. 30, 2014 (Halloween edition)

Reviews by Roger Thomas. Design by Jason O. Boyd, The Stanly News & Press.

Reviews of the Past: ‘The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Bill Nighy, Penelope Wilton, Judi Dench, Celia Imrie and Ronald Pickup (left to right)

J. R. R. Tolkien wrote: “All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.” Peter Jackson was wise to make sure that line found it’s way into his script for “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring”. I have quoted those words myself many times. There is great truth in that one line.

Recently I found myself thinking of that quote after viewing “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”. For you see, the plot of the film, or at least the catalyst to get the plot moving is the decision by seven senior adults to travel to India to spend what time they have left at the hotel described in the title of the film.  (Perhaps more accurately, six of them go to India with the intent to stay; the seventh played perfectly by Maggie Smith, intends to remain only long enough to have surgery and a period of recuperation.) After arriving in India, each of them makes the decision of what to do with the time that is given to them.

To offer any more hints about the plot, or plots of this film would an abuse of the power of a film critic. Some movies, most movies, should be discovered by the audience. I will only add that there are numerous threads that weave the tapestry of this film and every one of them is fascinating. Seven major British characters, plus at least two plots concerning Indians the group meets through the hotel, and all of these have stories with more depth and emotion than much of what comes to the cinema each week.

There is much to like about Marigold Hotel. It is a beautiful film. The colors, the cinematography, the art direction and sets all create an amazing view of India. Much like the Oscar-winning Best Picture “Slumdog Millionaire”, Marigold Hotel plays like a travel guide with so many shots of the different settings and almost all of them beautiful.

The cast is outstanding. Not since Harry Potter has so many prestigious British actors been assembled for one film. Oscar winner Judi Dench is perhaps the female lead, narrating much of the film as her character Evelyn writes a blog about her time in a foreign land. Oscar winner Maggie Smith gets the largest volume of laughs for a role that keeps her in a wheelchair for most of the film. Oscar nominee Tom Wilkinson has the most poignant story and gives the most heartfelt performance. Penelope Wilton delivers an irritating performance that rings so true because almost everyone has known someone like her character Jean Anslie. Bill Nighy, Ronald Pickup and Celia Imrie round out the septet, each with stellar performances.

The best description I can give for this movie is that it is the best “Grown-up Film” thus far in 2012. (I use the term “Grown-up Film” because I think the words “Adult Film” have taken on a unique meaning in our culture today.) In a season of superheroes, explosions, and non-stop special effects, much of which I have enjoyed the last couple of months, Marigold Hotel is film that provokes thoughts and feelings. It is the first film this year that I am sure I will be quoting five or 10 years from now. Though I am not as old as any of the seven British characters, nor as young as the two main Indian characters, I found myself relating to all the issues in this film. That will most likely be true of many viewers. Regret, the yearn for companionship, a need for adventure, the desire for better health, or to just be useful, these are all universal emotions, hopes and dreams. And my guess is most people who have seen at least four decades of life will find some part of themselves among the guests of the Marigold.

I cannot urge you enough to check in to “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.”

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $46,412,041

Foreign gross: $90,424,115

Production budget: $10 million

Opening weekend: $737,051

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Reviews of the Past: ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Quvenzhane Wallis as Hushpuppy

There are four films that are generating a lot of Oscar buzz in these very early days. I say early days because, of course, most of the big Oscar contenders will not be released in our part of the country until late December or early January. So right now, these four films seem to be strong contenders for Best Picture nominations: “The Avengers” (no film has ever had a domestic gross of more than $600 million and not received a Best Picture Nomination), “The Dark Knight Rises” (the Academy all but ignored Nolan’s superior work, “The Dark Knight”, so some think they will honor the final film of his Batman Trilogy with a nomination), “Moonrise Kingdom” (not my choice, but it is the critic’s darling for now), and finally “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”

First, I am not sure what the Academy will do with a film like Beasts of the Southern Wild. It is not mainstream fare. The Academy likes to nominate the unusual (think Terrence Malick’s beautiful “The Tree of Life” last year), but rarely gives it the prize. “The Social Network” was not mainstream enough (there was no real hero), so the Oscar went to the lesser film, “The King’s Speech.” I can envision a nomination for “Beasts”, but a win is more than I can imagine.

In many ways, “Beasts” is similar to Best Picture nominee “Winter’s Bone” from 2010. Both have strong young females as their leads. Both of these girls are concerned about their fathers. Both girls live in poverty with almost nothing upon which to survive. The major difference is that the world around Ree of “Winter’s Bone” is very hostile toward her while surrounding “Beasts’” Hushpuppy are people who love her, care for her and often aid her in various ways. The hostility in “Beasts” comes from outside the community not within.

There are many things I liked about the film. Much of the cinematography is beautiful. There are also some splendid special effects in the film, the kind that make you ask, “How do they do that?” The story of this young girl growing up in a Southern Delta community is both inspired and inspiring. Based on a play, the film has some strong moments, but it requires astute attention throughout and an ability to embrace the surreal. (Something that the Academy is seldom good at doing.) And finally, there is little doubt that young Quvenzhane Wallis has given the juvenile performance of the year as Hushpuppy. Though Oscar does not have this category, many of the end-of-the-year critics’ awards do; Wallis’ name will be called often.

On a personal note, as I watched this story of people who seek happiness without electricity, clean running water, air conditioning, or any of the creature comforts I demand every day, I found myself reflecting on the truth that community and relationships are paramount for the characters. A simple life, but one still fulfilled, perhaps even more so than those of us who strive to have it all.

I wish I could tell you what I think of “Beasts of the Southern Wild”, but I am still processing it. I may even need to see it again, or several times. That is not a criticism of the film, but rather of the viewer.

It is not my favorite film of the year, and I doubt it will be that for the majority of the Academy members, but I hope many people will see it. I would like to have someone with whom to discuss it.

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $12,795,746

Foreign gross: $8,312,000

Production budget: NA

Opening weekend: $169,702

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Reviews of the Past: ‘The Odd Life of Timothy Green’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Jennifer Garner, CJ Adams and Joel Edgerton

I have been watching the trailer of “The Odd Life of Timothy Green” for at least six months. It has played often before whatever film I was about to watch and also appeared on several of the DVD’s I have purchased recently. It had reached the point that I could almost quote the trailer word for word.

But as I sat in the theater and watched the film begin, I realized something; I had no idea where the story was going to take me. I knew the premise of the film: a couple, Cindy and Jim Green, are unable to have children so they write down all the descriptive terms for the child they will not have and bury them in a wooden box in their garden. Following these events, a dirty child appears in their home in a way that convinces the couple it is magic. If you have seen the trailer, you too already knew that much. 

Of course, there is more. The movie actually begins with the parents telling the story to a third party who did not experience any of the events. Then there are conflicts with extended family members. There are struggles at the workplaces of both Jim and Cindy. There are snooty spoiled people, bullies and a girlfriend. There is loss. And there is love, lots of love.

My guess is that most people will go into this film suspecting a certain ending. I know I did. I will not comment about the film’s conclusion, but I will say there are many surprises and twists along the way. Things that are thought to be small are large points, and the things that seem to be significant turn out to be less important.

The film, or course, is a fantasy but it deals with many issues found in reality. “Odd Life” deals with parenting, often times in very subtle ways. A coach makes a comment about overbearing team parents. A mother is worried that her children are not yet bilingual. And Jim and Cindy are constantly questioning their ability to parent since it was thrust upon them by a miracle. (Which is actually true about all parents, just not a miracle from the garden.) Lessons on honesty and integrity are also presented. 

From the trailer, one might think this is a family film geared mainly toward children and the parents who accompany them. Children will enjoy the story and humor, but much of the deeper subtext of this wholesome film plays to adults, and most specifically to those who parent.

“Odd Life” also boasts some beautiful settings and cinematography, capturing the beauty of autumn in the South. (According to the closing credits the film was shot in North Carolina and Georgia.)

As I watched “Odd Life”, I found myself thinking of plot holes. Questions I had as things developed. It is that way with most fantasies, so perhaps one is not supposed to think too much about it. With “Odd Life”, as the film continued, I cared less and less about my questions and more and more about what would happen next for these characters.

Finally, “Odd Life” is a very sentimental film. It oozes sweetness. And it is very manipulative. It strives to make the audience feel for this family. I could have predicted that from the trailer, but that was only a drop compared to the flood that comes with the film. I went into the theater preparing to be offended by their attempts to pluck my heartstrings. However, I was not prepared for what I experienced on screen. Striving to always be an honest reviewer, I have to admit I cried more in “Odd Life” than I have cried in the theater in quite a while. Actually, I sobbed during this film. I most certainly wept more in “Odd Life” than any other film I have seen in 2012. Timothy Green’s life is odd, but a more fitting adjective would be stirring, touching, moving or inspiring.

“The Odd Life of Timothy Green” is one of the best films of 2012, at least thus far.

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $51,854,875

Foreign gross: $NA

Production budget: NA

Opening weekend: $10,822,903

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Reviews of the Past: Top Ten of 2012

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

All the big film critics who go to the early screenings did their lists weeks ago. I, of course, have to wait for some of the best films to open at a “theater near you.” In most cases that means Charlotte. But after just a couple of weeks, I feel fairly confident that this is my list. 

There were 29 films nominated at least once by the Academy in the 19 competitive categories. This excludes the Documentary, Short Subject and Foreign Film categories because few of these are shown in our area and these films compete differently than the other 19 categories. 

Of the 29 films that were nominated for at least one Oscar, I have currently seen 27 of them. “Chasing Ice” and “Amour” have not opened in Charlotte. So I have considered most of the films the Academy members think are the best, and a few of their choices also made my list.

First, here are a few films that could have made the list, and all are something really special: “Anna Karenina,” “Bully,” “Chronicle,” “The Impossible,” “Les Misérables,” “Life of Pi,” “Ruby Sparks” and “Safety Not Guaranteed.”

No. 10 – “Zero Dark Thirty”

Five Oscar nominations including Best Picture. This is the film I waited to see because it did not open until 11 days into 2013. The buzz and early awards made me even more anxious. The film is strong in many ways, but I think the one thing that impressed me the most is the focus on one woman. It is her story. What was it like to spend years trying to locate Osama Bin Laden? The film offers a glimpse of the real life determination, and that is a very compelling thing to watch. Think you already know the story? See the film. And as for the controversy, it is a movie; I, for one, am OK if they embellished some elements for dramatic purposes.   

No. 9 – “Looper”

No nominations for this time travel tale starring Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Gordon-Levitt is the only actor I believe who shows up in two films on the list; the other film is “Lincoln.” There have been many movies that raise conflicts between the present and the future and the potential of traveling between the two. Few films of recent memory have raised such thought-provoking issues and clever twists. “Looper” makes my list because I cannot quit thinking about it.

No. 8 – “The Odd Life of Timothy Green”

No film moved me more in 2012 (in this case to tears every time I watch it) than “Odd Life.” It also took me on an unexpected journey, and that is always a welcomed experience at the cinema. I do not want to know where I am going when I am being lead by a gifted director and screenwriter like Peter Hedges. “Odd Life” is a small film, the smallest on my list and I suppose I have rewarded the larger achievements more, so this film ends up at number eight. That still makes it better than the 80 or so other films I saw this year. It should have been nominated for at least Musical Score and Screenplay but it failed to get any attention from the Academy.

No. 7 – “Django Unchained”

Yes, it is a very violent film. However, it is also a film that tells a powerful story of love, friendship and the brutal injustice of 19th century slavery. Only Quentin Tarantino could make a film that uses wit to boldly proclaim not just slavery but all racism to be both tragic and worthy of ridicule. As history, it might be questionable, as social commentary, it is a masterpiece. The Academy seemed to agree giving “Django” five nominations including Best Picture.

No. 6 – “Cloud Atlas”

I went into the theater planning to not like this nearly three-hour, multiple-plotlines movie from the directors of the “Matrix” series and the director of “Run, Lola, Run.” As I wrote earlier this year, about an hour in I realized something, I loved all six of the stories which were playing out on the screen. In fact, I was so enthralled with the film, I resented when the focus shifted to a different story. Why this film did not receive multiple Oscar nods, I do not know.

No. 5 – “Bernie”

I described it to many as the “best comedy I have seen in years.” One other comedy ranks higher on my list, but it is a romantic comedy and that is really a completely separate genre. “Bernie” is a full-blown, outrageous comedy based on a true story of murder in a small town. That alone should inspire you to run to the video store. Why the Academy did not shower this film with Oscars, I do not know.

No. 4 – “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”

Not one single Oscar nod. Poignant, beautiful, often times hilarious, this story of aging, lost love, new love, declining health and loss of purpose are all demonstrated in a film that soars above so much that filled the cinema this past summer. At the end of June I declared it to be the Best Film of the First Half of the Year. Six months later, it is still my fourth favorite film. The motion picture that is “Marigold Hotel” can best be summed up by a single line of dialogue from the film: “The light. Colors. Smiles. All life is here.”

No. 3 ­– “Lincoln”

Many will say it belongs at the top of the list. The Academy gave it 12 nominations so they certainly like it. It is a beautifully written, acted and directed film. I personally would hand it Oscars for Adapted Screenplay, Actor, Supporting Actor and Music Score. Perhaps a few others as well. The film tells a powerful story that needed to be told in such an elegant way. Thank you Steven Spielberg and screenwriter Tony Kushner.

No. 2 – “Silver Linings Playbook”

The best romantic comedy of the second decade of the 21st Century.  “500 Days of Summer” is still the best of this century, thus far. Smart, witty, wise and deeply emotional.  Beautifully dramatized receiving four acting nominations that puts it in the company of “Network,” “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” and “A Streetcar Named Desire.” The ending is a little contrived, but by then, one does not care because this journey has been so uniquely special.

No. 1 – “Argo”

When I first saw it, I proclaimed it to be the best film of 2012 and I never saw anything that could change my mind. Funny, thrilling and beautifully executed. The fact that the story is true makes it all the more powerful. Seven Oscar nominations but no Best Director nod for Ben Affleck makes if difficult to win the Best Picture Oscar. However, I was glad to see that the Golden Globes and the Broadcast Film Critics agreed with me. Two brilliant films about the Middle East this year, and this one is by far the best. 

Ranking movies is a very subjective thing. Another day, I might shift one or two of these, but I will not change my mind on one thing: each of these films are truly something special.

Reviews of the Past: ‘Hotel Transylvania’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Dracula (voiced by Adam Sandler)

To begin with, Pixar is still king. “Hotel Transylvania” does not come close to the wonder, emotion, and creativity of any of the films in the Pixar canon except maybe the two “Cars” films. But, Pixar is a pretty high standard for this film from Sony Pictures Animation.

And speaking of Sony Pictures Animation, “Hotel” is not even their best work. After all, this is a company responsible for “Monster House” (an Oscar nominee), last year’s “Arthur Christmas” (which bombed at the box office but was listed by me as one of the five grand unseen movies of 2011), and this year’s “The Pirates! Band of Misfits” from the people who created “Wallace” and “Gromit”. All three of these films offer a great deal more for the viewer than “Hotel Transylvania” and they are available or are coming out in the next few weeks on DVD.

So how does “Hotel” match-up against a film of similar subject matter such as the animated “ParaNorman”. Both films deal with frightening creatures including zombies. Both films have lots of humor. But there is much more truth, wisdom, and originality in Norman’s story than I ever found at the “Hotel”.

And speaking of originality, as I watched “Hotel” with my children, I found myself thinking back to my own childhood. Arthur Rankin Jr. and Jules Bass, the men responsible for such television Christmas classics as “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”,  “The Little Drummer Boy” and “The Year Without Santa Claus”, made a film back in 1967 entitled “Mad Monster Party”. I saw that film when I was a young child and have never forgotten it. When I found it on DVD a few years ago, I was glad to add it to our family’s collection. I cannot help but believe that film was an inspiration for “Hotel Transylvania”, even though their plots deviate greatly as each plays out.

Another memory from my children arose in my mind as I was watching the film. Some will remember the Saturday morning series in the early seventies called “Groovie Goolies.” It is hard to imagine that this series did not also offer inspiration to the filmmakers as they planned “Hotel”. In a way, I suppose I am grateful for all the fond memories this film resurrected in my head.

With all that said, the greatest strength of the film is the animation. Bright, colorful and often filling the screen, sometimes there was so much to see that is was hard to know where to focus one’s eyes. And that is a compliment to the animators for creating awe-inspiring big moments in the film. The animation was also brilliant in several of the action sequences that often drove the film’s pace. 

On the other hand, when the scenes were less crowded, and the film action slows, the film seems to drag. Almost all films need quieter moments. At the heart of this film is a story of a vampire father who is reluctant to give his 118-year-old daughter her freedom.There are heartfelt moments along the way and some work better than others. The lesser ones do more harm than good to the over success of the film. The same is true about the humor; some jokes work, others fall flat.

But what do I know. My children liked it a lot. “Hotel Transylvania” set the record for the largest September opening ever with $42.5 million. Surely some of those people liked it more than me. I am just saying, one can find a superior animated feature in theaters or on home video. Perhaps even check out the classic “Mad Monster Party!”   

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $148,313,048

Foreign gross: $210,062,555

Production budget: $85 million

Opening weekend: $42,522,194

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Reviews of the Past: ‘Snow White and the Huntsman’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Chris Hemsworth and Kristen Stewart

There was a moment while I was watching “Snow White and the Huntsman” that I found myself anticipating the release of Peter Jackson’s “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey”. I am not sure that the filmmakers of “Snow White” hoped for an audience yearning for another film during a screening of their movie. But alas that was my experience.

There are some strengths to “Snow White and the Huntsman”. The film looks great: beautiful cinematography, art direction and state of the art special effects. I would also praise the filmmakers for not releasing it in 3D. There are some performances I enjoyed. Charlize Theron oozes evil as the Queen. Kristen Stewart is more appealing than she has been in the last three “Twilight” films, but then again that is not a high benchmark to clear. Chris Hemsworth, who has played Thor in two films in the last year, does a good job as the huntsman in the title. And I especially enjoyed seeing “Deadwood’s” Ian McShane as one of the eight dwarves. (Yes, I said eight.) Just the fact they could so successfully make McShane look three feet tall should garner the filmmakers an Oscar nomination for special effects. So there were things about the film I liked; I cannot deny that.

And yet, it never truly captured my heart. There was one scene, near the end, when an impassioned speech was given, and that moment almost won me over. But then there were the other things that forced me to resist a complete commitment to the inspired dialogue.

First, the film tried to be too much like the “Lord of the Rings” saga. Peter Jackson worked wonders with that series; it is easy to imagine why others would want to emulate it. The shots of the group climbing hillsides seemed too reminiscent of Jackson’s shots. The battle scenes seemed almost lifted from the Rings series, and yet could not match the intensity of the battle at Helm’s Deep. I suppose these elements caused my mind to drift to the previews I have seen of “The Hobbit”, a film I hope can live up to Jackson’s legacy of Tolkien adaptations.

Another weakness in the film comes from an all too familiar story. Most people grow up hearing the story of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. And though the filmmakers took many liberties with that tale, it all still seemed predictable. There was one moment when a twist is the story worked, but even that was not enough of a surprise to make a difference. There is not enough passion in the love triangle that is a centerpiece of the story. The action sequences are often too fast and too disjointed to fully comprehend what is happening. And whole sections of the film seemed rushed. There is a really interesting middle interlude in a village of scarred women living on a shore of lake. I wish there had been more time for this segment. Perhaps more time for the love triangle would have helped the film as well. There may be a much better movie on floor of the film editor.

This past year the ABC Television Network has been airing a series on Sunday nights entitled “Once Upon a Time”. This, too, is a retelling of the Snow White story, among a great many other things this series is. Make no mistake, “Snow White and Huntsman” looks a lot better than “Once Upon a Time”. The filmmakers had a much bigger budget to make trolls, dwarves and castles that look very real. But the emotions of the television series, the feelings that are inspired in viewers, those are much more true in “Once Upon a Time” than they ever are in ”Snow White and the Huntsman”.

Finally, the film concludes and needs no further story, and yet it is also set up for a sequel. If they make one, they should keep the artists who devised the look of the film that creates awe in the viewer, but they should also find a script and a story which can produce equally strong emotions for the characters. Then this retelling of a familiar fairy tale will truly be new again.

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $155,332,381

Foreign gross: $241,260,448

Production budget: $170 million

Opening weekend: $56,217,700

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com

Reviews of the Past: ‘The Company You Keep’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Robert Redford

The trailer for “The Company You Keep” wants to impress us with the pedigree of the actors who populate this film. A list appears at the end of the previews that acknowledges the accomplishments of many of the stars. It is a stellar cast. If I counted this right, there are nine Academy Award nominated actors in the film. Collectively this cast has 18 Oscar nominations and three wins. Add to that list a twice-nominated director, Robert Redford, who has a Best Director Oscar on his shelf. If past awards meant anything, “The Company” would be the frontrunner for this year’s Awards.

Alas, that will not be the case. There are moments in this film that work well. Most of the aforementioned actors are basically doing cameos, and some of them have powerful or at least effective scenes. There are a few action sequences that almost seem inspired. But in the end, the film fails.

This is a film about a fictional domestic terrorist event. Viewers do not witness the past action that left one person dead but rather only hear it discussed. The mystery of the film is about whether or not one of the major characters was or was not involved in the event. A young reporter is trying to find the answer to that question. During his investigation, he turns over a few other stones as well. None of these revelations amounts to much, and the only suspense comes when the protagonist of the story may get arrested before he can clear his name. That suspense wears thin quickly.

I think the greatest weakness of the film is the lack of serious conversations. Make no mistake, “The Company You Keep” is a dialogue-filled film. Someone is talking in almost every frame. Each of the prestigious cast members gets a speech. Some of the battles of words work well like the first conversation between the reporter (Shia Labeouf) and director Robert Redford’s character, Jim Grant. They have the best scene in the film.     

However, I wish the film had taken more risks. The screenplay tiptoes around the terrorism issue. There should have been more heated debates about politics. There should have been more discussions about the morality of past actions, or one character that truly asserted pacifism over violence. A better film might have been to gather all these fine actors in a room, playing the same characters and debating the issues that are only slightly mentioned. Certainly all films do not have to be political or even have messages, but “The Company You Keep” seems to want to do both, and yet also wants to appeal to a larger audience, and finally ends up failing on all counts.   

Do not misunderstand me. There are plenty of films playing right now that are worse than “The Company You Keep.” But none of those contain so much talent. I would almost watch many of these actors read their grocery list. I just kept hoping their slight roles in this crowded movie would offer something a little more captivating.

After nearly two months playing in a theater near you, “The Company You Keep” has grossed only $4.5 million. Obviously, word of mouth is not generating a lot of attention. Perhaps others feel as I do, all that talent with almost nowhere to go.

Director Robert Redford has given us some good films through the years; my favorites would be “Ordinary People” (which garnered him his directing Oscar), ‘Quiz Show” and “A River Runs Through It.” Here’s to hoping he gathers up another great cast and makes a more thought-provoking film.

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $5,133,027

Foreign gross: $14,500,000

Production budget: NA

Opening weekend: $131,718

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com