Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)

Simply put, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is a worthy sequel to Rise of the Planet of the Apes. I don't intend to spoil much, but if you're planning to see it, I suggest you do so before reading this review, as there are some things that are just more exciting to discover without knowing too much beforehand - particularly just how advanced along the journey from the Planet of Men to the Planet of the Apes the story currently sits.

I'm gonna gloss over the typical review fodder, like special effects, and actors, and all that, because I found it all to be satisfying in this movie, to focus instead on the things that really interested me - like the dramatic themes and symbolism. The movie kicks off with a demonstration of the apocalyptic impact of the "Simian Flu" that we were introduced to at the end of the last movie, and then follows with an introduction to Caesar's ape community in the California redwoods.

For a while it seems as if maybe there really are no humans left, but then, of course, they show up. And what follows is a tense and evolving standoff between the ape community who simply wants to be left alone, and a human refuge in San Francisco, that needs to get into the forest to repair the dam and get the power back on. Obviously, the apes are distrusting of the humans, considering their treatment at their hands before the Simian flu wiped them out. At the same time, Caesar - an ape of intelligence and honor - remembering the human who raised him, wants to believe that humans can be trusted, and that just maybe, man and ape could live together in harmony.

And this is the central conflict that tears the ape community apart - with Koba, Caesar's right hand ape, more distrusting of humans, and thinking Caesar is being too soft and putting the entire ape community in jeopardy. The brilliance of the movie is that, even though you may not identify with each side, they each feel justified, and so long as you're not entirely sure of the motivations of the opposing players, the suspicion and paranoia and self-doubt is warranted.

And the best part of the movie is the demonstration - as Caesar eventually learns - that man and ape are not so different after all. From the beginning, there is definitely the feeling that Caesar's community could be this experiment in an evolved, utopian sort of community. Apes are, presumably, free from the flaws that made humans betray and fight one another over petty gains. Humans are the ones who cruelly imprisoned and abused apes, and now these apes - given the intelligence to see their plight and understand the humans' failings - are in a position to do better.

But in the end, it proves to be true that apes are just as human as man. It's pretty depressing, when you think about it. But rather than believe that apes are good and men are bad (or vice versa, if you desire) as you have a tendency to want to in this movie, eventually it becomes clear that there are simply good apes and bad apes, just as there are good men and bad men. It seems obvious when stated straightforwardly, yet it is a powerful realization.

So, yeah, it was a good movie. When spoiler spoilered spoiler (you can probably guess what I'm talking about if you've seen the movie), I was actually genuinely shocked - that was a very exciting scene. And at the end, when the last human on screen fades into the darkness of a doorway, yielding to the apes' celebration, it seemed to me powerfully evocative of the transfer of the planet from the humans to the apes.

That having been said, this movie ended with the promise of a rather more immediate sequel than I was expecting. All along, I'm thinking, this is the evolution toward the Planet of the Apes of antiquity. And I guess I was kind of hoping to see the series end in a retelling of that story. But then maybe the point of these movies is not to get there, but merely to show the journey to it. I don't know what the filmmakers have in mind, but I'm a little bit cautious of dragging the story out too long, and catering to fan demands. But I haven't lost faith yet. A lot will depend on how the next movie turns out.

Machete Kills (2013)

Back in 2007, Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez joined forces to pay homage to the gratuitous sex and violence of the grindhouse era of cinema in their double feature theatrical release Grindhouse, combining Rodriquez's Planet Terror and Tarantino's Death Proof. At the time, several fake trailers for non-existent exploitation flicks were produced, to enhance the grindhouse experience of the double feature. One of them, Robert Rodriguez's Machete, starring Danny Trejo as the titular Mexican ex-fed, eventually blossomed into a feature film that was released in 2010. It was spectacularly gratuitous. And in 2013, it got a sequel - Machete Kills.

Machete Kills is every bit as bombastic as Machete was. Danny Trejo returns, with another star-studded ensemble cast. Particularly noteworthy were Mel Gibson's appearance as a tech CEO/cultleader, and Lady Gaga (among others) as a shapeshifting bounty hunter. Charlie Sheen (billed as Carlos Estevez) stars as the President of the United States, and Demian Bichir plays one of the film's most charismatic characters, a Mexican crimelord-turned-revolutionary. As for Machete himself, if this wasn't the case already, his international reputation, fighting prowess, and survivability is growing to superhero levels.

The stakes are high in this installment of the Machete series, with a threat that eventually escalates to the level of nuclear holocaust, giving the film the feeling of a gratuitous Mexican version of a James Bond flick. The sexual innuendo is blatant (if never very explicit), the violence as gore-tastic and over-the-top as ever (I loved the molecular blaster), and the straight-faced humor heavy. In fact, what might have begun as an ode to the grindhouse days seems to be evolving into something of a tongue-in-cheek parody (making comparisons to Austin Powers more and more applicable).

But it is a loving and playful parody. And nowhere is this more obvious than in the film's unselfconscious treatment of its own advertising potential. Since Machete began life as a trailer, it doesn't seem so out of place that Machete Kills plays up a new trailer to its own as-yet-unproduced sequel (which, I'll be honest, if I didn't see it listed as "in production" on IMDb, I would have thought was just a joke) Machete Kills Again... In Space! - which obviously parodies both Star Wars and Jason X (featuring that other popular violent marauder who loves to wield a machete). If you think that's taking even over-the-top to an over the top level, I'd be inclined to agree. But you have to admit, Danny Trejo wielding a light-machete is an image too hilarious not to take advantage of!

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

I've never exactly been a Planet of the Apes geek, following the franchise through countless films over the years, but I've always appreciated the original, and its fertile sci-fi premise. I can't imagine this is actually a spoiler anymore, as it's probably on the level of Darth Vader's paternal relationship to Luke Skywalker in the original Star Wars trilogy, but the big reveal at the end, that the Planet of the Apes was really Earth all along, is perhaps one of the most stunning and emotional twist endings in popular sci-fi history.

Naturally, being a prequel of sorts, Rise of the Planet of the Apes makes no secret of that fact and chooses to explore how modern technology and human civilization as we know it (more or less) today could possibly have led to the passing of the baton from humans to apes, and in the Earth originally becoming the Planet of the Apes. Which is also a fascinating premise, especially given how familiar most people are with the old story. Modern cinema technology, also, has enabled us to tell a convincing and emotive story featuring apes as central characters who are not (yet) evolved "ape-men", and are closer to the "primative" ancestors that live in zoos and jungles today.

I missed Rise of the Planet of the Apes when it played in theaters, but I heard a lot of good things about it, both from the press, and from people I know who had seen it. And with the sequel, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, scheduled to hit theaters very soon, I made it a priority to sit down and watch Rise in preparation. And my verdict is that it was as good as everyone says. The story was fantastic, the digital effects impressive, and the characters sympathetic. Especially Caesar, the chimp who changes everything - brought to life by Andy Serkis, the man behind Gollum in the Lord of the Rings.

I also appreciated the little nods to the classic Planet of the Apes - as well as, presumably, the future fate of this story - both in the appropriate placement of the infamous line "get your stinking paw off me, you damn, dirty ape", and in the subtle hints at the manned Mars mission which apparently goes missing. I'm not sure what the plans are for this movie franchise, but I would be excited if they make it into a trilogy, with the final installment tackling the original Planet of the Apes plotline, with all of the precedent and creative talent of the other two titles in the series backing it up.

I am now looking forward even more to the sequel, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. I'm not sure what story it will tell, but I hope it's some intermediary, further tracking the progress of the ape revolution in taking the planet over from the humans. I thought the plot device of the man-made chemical - developed in the relentless pursuit of science to conquer man's weaknesses - being responsible not only for the intellectual evolution of the apes, but also (spoiler) the ostensible extinction of man via viral pandemic was clever, unexpectedly propitious (from the perspective of the apes' coming revolution), and also reflective of modern fears (I couldn't help thinking of 28 Days Later at various points in this film).

I look forward to the continuation of the story in the sequel.

Maleficent (2014)

I was excited to go out and see Maleficent since it features the darling Elle Fanning as a Disney Princess (Aurora by name), even though the entire concept of the film is a re-envisioning of Sleeping Beauty with the focus not on the princess but on the evil villain Maleficent - played to great fanfare by Angelina Jolie. To prep for the new movie, I watched Disney's original Sleeping Beauty from all the way back in 1959. It suffers from the same singing-animals-and-happily-ever-after tone as your typical Disney movie (unlike, say Dragonslayer), but, the animation looks very nice, and at least as far as Disney movies go, it was pretty good. Maleficent herself makes a very brilliant and terrifying villain, culminating in a climactic scene involving her transformation into a vicious dragon.

This is all the more reason why a new take on Sleeping Beauty with Maleficent at the center of the story was such a good idea. Unfortunately, though, instead of being a chilling portrait of a villain (like, say, Maniac was), this movie goes a little too far in making the character sympathetic, such that it ultimately takes her fangs away to a large extent. It doesn't even work very well as an exploration of how somebody good could ultimately turn so cruel, because in the end, she's never actually that cruel. That's not to say that this version of Maleficent is not a good character - and truly, Angelina Jolie is fantastic in the role - but it just doesn't feel like the terrifyingly sadistic villain everybody loved to hate from the original Sleeping Beauty.

Indeed, one of the prime directives of this movie seems to be to spin a new yarn, revealing the "truth" of how things happened differently from the fairy tale everyone knows and loves, and manages to succeed pretty well on that count, in subverting some of the crucial plot details and playing with fans' expectations. For this reason, I was glad I went back and watched the original Sleeping Beauty first, to be able to appreciate these new twists, although the ultimate determination of which was the better story will be up to the individual fans. Certainly, though the trope of subverting fan's expectations - particularly in fantasy tales - seems to be beginning to verge on the cliché these days, it may not have made much sense to tell the same story that's already been told before. And as much as I have the habit of going into a story I've seen or read before, and wanting things to happen just so, I think I learned with Carrie that it can be problematic if you follow the blueprint too closely.

My main criticism of Maleficent, other than de-villainizing the titular character (and not featuring more of the princess :p), is the abundance of digital effects in use. I think that ultimately it comes down to a matter of taste - because the effects are certainly not poorly done - I just think that too much of them makes the movie look too fake. And it may be ironic to call for realism in a fantasy story, but one of my favorite fantasy movies of all time is Legend; and while it utilized many fantastic elements, even if some of them ultimately looked "costumey", it just felt more real. I fear it may be evidence of me actually losing touch with modern sensibilities, because it's obvious that elaborate digital effects are the soup du jour. I think Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings looked fantastic, but ever since then, it's gotten out of hand (and the new Hobbit movies are victims of this as much as anything else), and every fantasy movie is starting to look the same, with the same ridiculous-looking digital creatures (not the same creatures, but the same stylized look).

All that having been said, despite all of these flaws, Maleficent was not a bad movie, and I enjoyed it, to the extent that I could. For those who like the story, or fans of fairy tales or animated features in general, I still recommend the original Sleeping Beauty from 1959. And a note to Elle Fanning's agents: please, oh please, somebody cast her in the role of an elven maiden. She's got the perfect look for it. Seriously, she could replace Orlando Bloom in the next Hobbit movie, or even play his daughter. It's the perfect match of character to actress, and I will be sad if noone capitalizes on it.

P.S. Juno Temple was completely wasted in a throwaway role as the prettiest of the three bumbling fairies (who, in this version of the story, offer none of the wisdom or pathos of their previous counterparts, and serve instead purely as The-Three Stooges-like comedic release).

Highschool of the Dead (2010)

Highschool of the Dead has the distinction of being a Japanese anime series on the subject of zombies. While this may be a plus for zombie-obsessed Western audiences, as an anime fan AND a horror fan, I have to say that it is a very mediocre entry into the worldwide collection of zombie stories that are out there.

To be honest, I thought the idea of a zombie outbreak occurring in a high school, with a focus on several high school students (and maybe their teachers) - which is a popular theme in Japanese anime but not many Western zombie stories - was intriguing and original. But the setting of the story does not remain in the high school for the entirety of the series, and it quickly becomes an average attempt to tell the same kind of formulaic zombie story that any zombie fan has seen a hundred times before - with boring, cliched characters that an anime fan has seen a thousand times before.

If that were all, it would simply be a mediocre series. But I have a problem with the excessive fan service on display. Don't get me wrong, it's not the fact that there is fan service in this series, or even that there's a lot of it, that bothers me. I enjoy scantily clad female characters, and I don't believe that nudity or even sex scenes ever need to be "justified" in any type of media, as they serve as their own justification. But the fan service in this series is ridiculous.

The point of view frequently goes so far out of its way to exhibit this or that character's striped panties or perpetually jiggling boobies (along with the typical, annoying "boin boin" sound effect - I have never once heard a breast make this noise in real life) as to take me out of the show. And the juxtaposition of the psychological trauma of mutilating the reanimated, flesh-eating corpses of the dead, with the copious sexual objectification of the show's female characters is confusing and a little bit concerning. I honestly can't decide if the creator was more dedicated to writing a show about zombies or a show about women's underwear and big boobs; sticking them together is an odd choice.

I wouldn't have a problem with a zombie show where all the (living) characters were naked for no reason at all (why is it only ever just the women?). And I wouldn't have a problem with a zombie show where the (living) characters had sex at every opportunity (who wouldn't, in that situation?). Hell, I wouldn't even have a problem with a zombie series that shatters the taboo surrounding necrophilia, as long as it was done effectively. But the fan service in Highschool of the Dead (which, in typical teaser fashion, never actually shows you anything of significance) is ridiculous and draws too much attention to itself. And the zombie story hiding behind it, while not being complete garbage, isn't really good enough (and doesn't have the chance to develop far enough) to really be worth watching.

Dead Snow (2009)

Finally made the time to sit down and watch Dead Snow, a Norwegian film about Nazi zombies, tonight. I've seen a lot of movies in my day, so I wouldn't put it past someone to make a serious movie about Nazi zombies, but obviously the first thing you think when the plot synopsis mentions "Nazi zombies", is, "are you serious?" But actually, the movie does start out pretty seriously, setting the stage for what looks to be a fairly standard horror flick in the teen slasher vein (albeit from a Norwegian perspective).

But the movie's self-awareness quickly becomes evident in the form of a character who is a movie buff, with some early explicit references to horror classics like Friday the 13th and Evil Dead, and who wears a Braindead (a.k.a. Peter Jackson's Dead Alive) t-shirt, all of which this movie makes copious homages too, and which informs the tongue-in-cheek brand of black humor that infests the latter half of the movie - for better or worse (probably better, since I think this movie would ultimately have been less successful as a serious movie than simply as a fun one).

Before things get too silly, the Harbinger - as The Cabin in the Woods would undoubtedly label him - appears unexpectedly at the cabin in the woods (actually a snowy mountainscape), and gives one of the better performances of his ilk (among the myriad slasher films in existence), with a history lesson that plays out more like an around-the-campfire ghost story and that sets the scene for the coming appearance of the frozen reanimated Nazi corpses. After they show up, the film ramps up the scares and the gore, but also the straight-faced and situational humor. Meanwhile, the blood keeps getting poured on in good Braindead fashion, and many of the characters face humorously ironic ordeals and demises, that might elicit a chuckle but will definitely induce a grimace (or four).

It's hard to say how I actually feel about this film, given my preference for the serious over the humorous (despite my tempered appreciation for the Braindead-style over-the-top approach). And let's be honest, this film had what was probably the least erotic sex scene in a slasher film I've probably seen in...ever. The humorous appropriation of Nazi imagery doesn't offend me in the least, but it doesn't particularly get me excited, either. The locations, however, were suitably isolated and really very beautiful, offering something unique in place of the typical wooded lake kind of setting, even if it meant less scantily clad coeds. But, purely as a zombie film, Dead Snow is a bit too frantic, and lacks the shambling feel of a classic zombie movie. It's really more of a monster-in-the-woods slasher kind of flick, especially of the tongue-in-cheek, self-aware variety. Whether that's a plus or a minus is up to you.

Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013)

Last year I watched Insidious, which proved to live up to the hype of being one of the better and more original horror films released in recent years. And a few days ago, I noticed that the sequel - Insidious: Chapter 2 - was available on Netflix, so I made a point to watch it.

I'd say that the quality of the movie is comparable to the first. It is not completely free of cliches or jump scares, but, like the first, its usage of astral projection to explain ghosts, hauntings, and possession keeps it fresh amongst a never-ending onslaught of movies on those themes.

Being a sequel, the concept is not as new as it was the first time, but it's not as if its use was exhausted in a single movie. Plus, the sequel utilizes a clever temporal anomaly to keep things interesting, and though you feel that you can predict exactly where the plot is heading through the first half of the movie, there are some welcome twists to keep the viewer guessing.

The astral scenes are also comparable to those in the first movie, creating a fairly creepy atmosphere, with a few pretty terrifying images. The whole setpiece in the one rundown house was very scary. It might be worthwhile to mention that there are some scenes when the cast is exploring some old buildings that are shot partially in a "found footage" perspective.

Spoilers Below!

If I have any complaint about the movie - and it's a minor one - it would be the usage of a certain plot device that's become somewhat of a cliche, where a character's sociopathic tendencies are explained by childhood trauma in the form of a parent forcing them to be the wrong sex.

Not to say that it's necessarily unrealistic or implausible, but as much as I like to see transgender issues come up in movies (and let's be honest, this little boy looked pretty cute as a girl), when they come up more often in this context than in more positive ones, it has a tendency to reinforce the still-too-common belief that a child who really is transgender is being forced to be that way by parents, and that it is an abusive and traumatic experience.

Spoilers Above!

But that's more of a political complaint; it didn't really hamper my enjoyment of the movie too much. I'd like also to mention that the people in charge of casting did an excellent job casting the young version of Lin Shaye's character. I actually spent some time wondering if they just had a phenomenal makeup department, making the veteran actress look twenty-something again - but, to that effect, they also did a great job aging (or rather decaying) Patrick Wilson, as required per the movie.

Long story short, Insidious: Chapter 2 is pretty much more of the same, so if you liked the first one, you should definitely give this one a watch. It wraps up the story of the Lambert family, while keeping the door open for a Chapter 3 - and honestly, I'd be interested to see another installment of Insidious, particularly given the direction hinted by Chapter 2's ending.