Predators

It's pretty clear with this film that producer Robert Rodriguez and director Nimród Antal set out to do two things. The first was to pay tribute to one of the best action movies of the 80s. The second was to be the only film since the original featuring the titular antagonists to actually be entertaining. It mostly succeeded on both fronts. It's not a great movie, and it honestly handcuffs itself quite a bit by adhering so steadfastly to the story beats set in place by Predator, but it does succeed by combining science fiction, action, and a bit of horror in a similar way. There's nothing terribly original or surprising about the movie, but it has a few likable characters, some brutal and exciting action scenes, and some solid fan service without overdoing it.

There have been comparisons made between Predators and Aliens, both sequels to classic monster movies that up the stakes, which is obviously something they were going for. That's pretty much where the similarities end for me, though. It points to the difference between truly great sequels and merely solidly entertaining ones like this. Anything Predators and Aliens have in common is something that the Predator already did, excepting multiple antagonists. Aliens changed the game by following up a tense, claustrophobic thriller with bombastic large scale action, while Predators just copies Predator with more blood and special effects. It's an approach that works well enough, but it makes any parallels with superior movies seem hollow.

Anyway, the movie itself. It kicks off with a bang as the heroes are forcefully introduced to the wilderness and continues in a fairly wonderful slow burn as they try to figure out where they are and why they were picked. The danger ratchets up slowly, before they eventually discover what they're really up against, and after a slight detour involving a pretty great scene of exposition where everything is laid out by a wonderfully unhinged Laurence Fishburne, it starts to get really violent. I don't think the balls-out violence of the second half is as effective as the slow burn of the first, but I guess I went to see the movie for some Predator violence after all, so I can't complain that much. The mix of characters adds some fun and humor to what could have been a pretty flat script, and Adrien Brody somehow pulls off the gruff loner act without looking like a fool. That was key, because while he's no Dutch, he does manage to keep the movie going as the tough hero, something I wasn't really expecting to see him do quite so well. A lot of the cast is recognizable, including Rodriguez' cousin Danny Trejo as an early victim, Topher Grace as a doctor who doesn't seem to belong, and Walton Goggins from The Shield as a version of his completely trashy persona that's on the wrong side of the law this time.

So anyway, the gang of survivors gets slowly whittled down over time by their hunters, before the telegraphed climactic conclusion where the shirts come off in favor of mud as the humans make their last stand. It's a pretty predictable movie, which is one of the reasons its reliance on reminding you of why Predator was awesome makes for a slightly less impressive final product. Maybe that was necessary though, because the other movies with predators in them tried to take them to difference places or situations and it just didn't work out. It's interesting how the film makes it clear that it's in the same universe as the original, yet completely ignores anything else that may or may not have happened. It seems like a genuine attempt to make the series relevant again after the pandering yet generally terrible crossovers with that other alien series, and I'd be interested in seeing more of what they can do even if the conclusion and ending weren't nearly as strong as the beginning. There were some issues with the foundation of the premise and a few odd directorial choices here and there, but it was mostly a fun time at the movies.

Spider-Man 3

Hmm. Spider-Man is my favorite super hero. I used to read some of his comics as a kid. I didn't know what was really going on, since the big story lines were spread over four books every month and I only read one. I still really liked the character though. Spider-Man is easily related to by a lot of people, because he isn't perfect. He starts out as a nerdy kid in high school. He has to deal with normal problems while fighting super villains who want to kill him. His entire career as a crime-fighter started when he made a mistake that led to his uncle's death. He's interesting because of his flaws as much as his ability to do good.

I loved both of the first two movies. I thought they were an excellent combination of story, character, humor, creative action scenes, and awesome special effects. My expectations were high for the third movie, but some things about the previews tempered them a bit. Three villains? The first two movies both did very well with just one. They were interesting because they weren't just pure evil, they had connections with Peter Parker and sympathetic in some ways. I'm fine with Harry succumbing and turning into the second coming of the Green Goblin, even if it seemed a bit soon with so many villains unexplored of yet. Sandman is pretty cool I guess, though I never saw him in a comic. But making him Uncle Ben's killer? What the hell? Part of what made Ben's death interesting and so important to Peter was that it was just a normal criminal that killed him who Peter could have stopped. That shame is what causes Peter to be who he is. The movie handles this situation somewhat satisfactorily, but it's still irritating. Seeing the black suit in the trailer, my thoughts immediately went to Venom. Obviously, you can't bring the symbiote to earth without Venom appearing eventually. My question was whether he would figure prominently in the story, or, as I hoped, merely be all set up for a sequel. It became clear though, eventually, that he would be fully featured as a third enemy. Why bring him into it, when Venom is so popular among fans that he could easily hold an entire movie, and you've already made preparations for Lizard to appear eventually?

It seemed overloaded, and maybe it was. Sam Raimi still does a pretty admirable job of handling all the threads, even if the plot ends up being a bit convoluted because of it. What irked me more than the excess of bad guys was the continued romantic problems Peter faces with Mary Jane. I thought the situation was pretty much set. They were together, she knew who he was, and it seemed all right. Whenever I read the comics, she was always there as a strong character supporting Peter when he struggled. She had her own things to do, but they had a strong relationship and lived happily. After I stopped reading they split up for a while, but since had made up and are happy again. Why over-complicate things when you already have this much stuff to juggle? It's fine for her to have something to do, but more friction is not what the movie needed.

Peter with the black suit was interesting. He gradually becomes more and more of a dick during the movie, but it was played more for laughs than actual story tension. It corrected itself when it needed too, but I thought that pretty much the entire thing could have been better if it was treated more seriously. It's funny to see Tobey Maguire dance like an idiot who thinks he's cool, but is it actually good for the film? No. That aspect of the movie just didn't work for me. Fortunately, the ship is righted in time for the final act. I won't say what happens, but in addition to being pretty damn fun to watch, the final conflict brings together all of the separate elements and concludes almost all of them in a way that eased most of my misgivings and made me appreciate the movie a lot more than I might have otherwise. I guess all's well that ends well. I liked Spider-Man 3, not as much as the first two films, but enough to recommend it to anyone who has any interest. We know there will be more Spider-Man movies, but we don't know who will be directing and starring in them. If Sam, Tobey, and Kirstin come back for the fourth, I'd be happy, as long as they reign it back in a bit. If they don't, then I'll come away from the first trilogy satisfied with what took place and how they handled it.