23. The A-Team

Speaking of mucking around with source material…

It certainly seemed like The A-Team was a movie that couldn’t miss. The original show was beloved, but nothing about it seemed sacrosanct, other than the necessity to avoid mocking Mr. T’s propensity for pitying “foo”s.

The cast seemed likewise stellar. Who doesn’t love a winking, wry Liam Neeson? Or Bradley Cooper in full-on crazy mode? Not to mention a severly unhinged Sharlto Copley? And Joe Carnahan’s the sort of director who knows how to shoot an action sequence, even if it sort of seems that maybe that’s all he knows how to shoot.

And on some level, The A-Team did kind of work. Watching Cooper grin maniacally while firing on fighter jets from a plummeting tank is great fun. I especially loved the way Copley seemed to actually be a mental patient who had somehow wandered in front of the camera while they shot the movie.

But somewhere along the line, I felt like maybe the screenwriter hadn’t been able to finish the script, and had instead written “BOOM!” on each of the last 20 pages. During the big finale, when the team was supposedly enacting a strategy of deception and slight-of-hand, we instead saw about ten minutes of explosions, followed by a random Jon Hamm cameo, then credits.

I love a good mindless action thriller as much as the next guy, but even those have some sort of vague plotlines and recognizable goals. Most of this was just muddled, boring madness.

24. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

There are a few things you should know about me before I begin to review this film.

First, that I am a lifelong fan of all of C.S. Lewis’ writing. I was raised by this man. I can’t remember when I first read the Narnia series for myself, but I do remember that when we started reading them at the beginning of 4th grade, my first thought was “oh, this again? I read these ages ago.” I read the whole series through about once a year. So if anyone’s going to be attached to the original work and fiercely resistant to changes a movie makes to the original books, I would likely be near the top of that list.

That said, I’m also a defender of a movie’s right to be its own creation. It’s necessary for a film to break from its source material in order to become a worthwhile creation, and the best examples of book-to-film translations – Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Pride & Prejudice, etc. – have shown a willingness to mix new ideas into the film, while maintaining a healthy respect for the source material.

The problem is when a film’s producers begin to view the original book as a loose map for creating a film, and make substantial changes to a story. While sometimes these decisions are tremendous improvements – Forrest Gump, the film, is a vast improvement over a decidedly mediocre book – I wonder if at any point the filmmakers say “hey, are our ideas any better than the ones that made this book so beloved by so many for so long?”

They certainly didn’t ask that this time.

The Voyage of the The Dawn Treader is not a terrible film. It’s not a good one, certainly. But it could be worse.

The problem with it is that it’s a wasted film. It takes a very good book, filled with adventure and epic discovery, and tacks on a number of cumbersome narrative devices. New characters are introduced, yet none of them are developed. New storylines are created, but often brushed aside in a headline dash for the big finale.

Now, I understand the need to try to create a Big Conflict in order to make this movie work. Much of the book is just people sailing around, looking for some old people they lost a long time ago. It’s tough to make that gripping. But if you’re going to add a villain, why not add a real villain? Instead, the filmmakers added a Green Mist, a magical substance that is the essence of evil, jealousy, and pride.

Go ahead, read that sentence again. I’ll wait.

How does someone even pitch that? How does someone say, “we need a villain character. Can we just add an evil green mist that tempts the characters to think only about themselves?” I’m baffled how that idea even makes it out of someone’s own head, never mind into an actual shooting script.

What’s more disorienting is that the Green Mist takes the form of the White Witch, a memorable evil character from the first two movies. She isn’t really there, but her form appears to tempt one of the characters to do… something (it isn’t totally clear what). Now, if this movie had decided that the White Witch would be a character in this movie in order to give the heroes a clear antagonist, I would have been aggravated, but I would’ve understood the need for it. But why bring back the character as a ethereal temptation? It’s like a movie that resurrects the spirit of Hitler – not to lead the enemy forces, but to tempt the American soldiers to switch sides. It’s thoroughly illogical in every aspect.

And that’s without touching any of the other glaring holes the movie possesses. The heroes are required to gather up the swords of all of the fallen Lords and lay them on a table in the middle of an island. If they do that, the Green Mist will disappear and evil will be conquered. Why? How? No one seems to care. At one point, one of the characters is magically transported back to this island without the faintest explanation as to how this happened, other than that it expedited the plot.

Adding to all the madness is the clear cut in production values from the first two movies to this one. The budget’s been slashed, and often the actors are seen acting in front of a blank wall, pretending that there’s a massive city around them that is quite patently not there. In a dramatic scene, a bunch of the sailors disguise themselves as everyday citizens and hide in the crowd in the slave market, before casting off their disguises and taking over the marketplace. The problem? The “crowded marketplace” only had about four or five extras in it. What was the budget for this movie again?

After a rocky road to get to the screen, the Narnia franchise was counting on a big box office in order to get to make another one of these films. Since essentially no one besides myself went to see this one, I think we can probably safely assume that’s not going to happen.

I’ve got to say, I’m relieved. I really don’t think I could deal with them mucking around with these books any more.

Top Twenty-Four Movies of the Year

I went back through the year, and I saw 24 movies in theaters this year - double features on my day off, mostly, or dates on Friday nights. Since I rarely go see a movie just for the sake of going, all of the movies I've listed here are movies I was fairly excited to see. So I might be a touch hard on the more disappointing ones (I'm looking at you, Dawn Treader), but I think all of them are worth a rental. So bear that in mind while I'm burying a film, I might've been a little dissatisfied, but all in all, I had a pretty good time.

Likely Oscar Nominations

This is based mostly on what I've seen around in blog, plus my own personal guesses from watching these films. I think I'll be fairly accurate at the top of each list, less likely in the later picks.

They're ordered by likelihood of winning. Nominees I'm certain will be nominated in those categories are in bold.

 

BEST PICTURE

1. The Social Network
2. The King’s Speech
3. Inception
4. The Fighter
5. Black Swan
6. True Grit
7. Toy Story 3 
8. The Kids Are All Right 
9. The Town
10. Winter’s Bone

I actually think 127 Hours might have a good shot at that last spot, but I'm rooting against it.

BEST DIRECTOR

1. David Fincher, The Social Network
2. Christopher Nolan, 
Inception
3. Tom Hooper, 
The King’s Speech
4. David O. Russell, The Fighter
5. Joel & Ethan Coen, True Grit

Tough to leave Daron Aronofsky off the list, but I don't see room for him. Nolan should win this, but I think it's just gonna be The Social Network's year.

BEST ACTOR

1. Colin Firth, The King’s Speech
2. James Franco, 127 Hours
3. Jesse Eisenberg, The Social Network 
4. Jeff Bridges, True Grit
5. Javier Bardem, Biutiful

Tough to leave Robert Duvall off, but once again, a great year for acting. This category is over - Firth has already won this.

BEST ACTRESS

1. Natalie Portman, Black Swan
2. Annette Bening, 
The Kids Are All Right
3. Jennifer Lawrence, 
Winter’s Bone
4. Nicole Kidman, Rabbit Hole
5. Michelle Williams, Blue Valentine

It's a two-woman race between Portman and Bening. Everything else is unnecessary.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

1. Christian Bale, The Fighter
2. Geoffrey Rush, 
The King’s Speech
3. Jeremy Renner, 
The Town
4. Mark Ruffalo, The Kids Are All Right
5. Andrew Garfield, The Social Network

No offense to Rush or Renner, but I think Bale has this locked up.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

1. Melissa Leo, The Fighter
2. Amy AdamsThe Fighter 
3. Helena Bonham Carter, The King’s Speech
4. Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit 
5. Mila Kunis, Black Swan

I have no feel for this category. I think this one could be a wild card. Anyone could win.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

1. Toy Story 3
2. How To Train Your Dragon

3. The Illusionist

It's either The Illusionist or Tangled, I'm not sure. The Illusionist certainly feels like Oscar bait. By the way, don't be certain that Toy Story 3 has Best Animated Feature locked up. I think How To Train Your Dragon could be a real player.

 

Likely All-Star Teams

Voting for the NBA All-Stars finishes next week - the paper balloting finishes Monday, in case you only vote for your team from dilapidated McDonald's alongside the highway - but we can be pretty sure of a lot of the starters at this point. I entered these in as the voting for starters stand now. Sure, Rondo could swing ahead of Rose again by then, or Garnett ahead of Stoudemire, but since all of those player will be making the squad anyway, I can't imagine it matters. 

 

WEST

STARTERS

C Yao Ming (HOU) (injured, likely to be replaced by PF Paul Gasol (LAL) – 18.5 PPG, 10.9 RPG , 1.9 BPG)
PF Kevin Durant (OKC) – 28.5 PPG, 6.2 RPG
SF Carmelo Anthony (DEN) – 23.8 PPG, 8.2 RPG
SG Kobe Bryant (LAL) – 25.3 PPG, 5 RPG, 4.5 APG
PG Chris Paul (NO) – 16.4  PPG, 4.2 RPG, 9.8 APG, 2.8 SPG

SUBS

SG Manu Ginobili  (SA) – 18.9 PPG, 4 RPG, 4.7 APG
PF Tim Duncan (SA) - 13.8 PPG, 9.3 RPG
PF Dirk Nowitzki (DAL) – 24.1 PPG, 7.4 RPG
PF Kevin Love (MIN) – 21.5 PPG, 15.7 RPG
PF Blake Griffin (LAC) – 22 PPG, 12.7 RPG
PG Deron Williams (UTA) – 22 PPG, 9.4 APG
PG Russell Westbook (OKC) – 22.2 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 8.3 APG

Anyone have a problem is we replace Duncan (playing only 29 minutes a game these days) with LaMarcus Aldridge (POR) (averaging 26.3  PPG and 11.3 RPG this month, as well as 21 PPG and 9 RPG for the year)? He’s playing to give his mother, who has cancer, something to look forward to.

I think they’re probably more likely to give his spot to Monta Ellis (GS) (25.7 PPG, 5.0 APG. 2.3 SPG) or Eric Gordon (LAC) (23.7 PPG, 3.3 RPG, 4.5 APG) if they give it to anyone.

 

EAST

STARTERS 

C Dwight Howard (ORL) – 21.9 PPG, 13.4 RPG, 2.3 BPG
PF Amar’e Stoudemire (NY) – 26 PPG, 8.9 RPG, 2.7 APG, 2.4 BPG
SF LeBron James (MIA) – 25.4 PPG, 7 RPG, 7.2 APG
SG Dwyane Wade (MIA) – 24.9 PPG, 6.5 RPG, 4.2 APG
PG Derrick Rose (CHI) – 24.3 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 8 APG

SUBS 

PG Rajon Rondo (BOS) – 10.9 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 13.4 APG
PF Kevin Garnett (BOS) – 15 PPG, 9.5 RPG, 1.7 SPG
SF Paul Pierce (BOS) – 19.2 PPG, 5.2 RPG, 3.4 APG
PG Raymon Felton (NY) – 17.9 PPG, 3.9 RPG, 8.8 APG, 1.9 SPG
PF Carlos Boozer (CHI) – 20.5 PPG, 10.1 RPG
PF Josh Smith (ATL) – 15.9 PPG, 8.7 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.9 BPG
SF Danny Granger (IND) – 20.9 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 2.8 APG, 1.2 SPG

Possible spoilers -  Chris Bosh (come out huge the past two months - 18.7 PPG, 8.3 RPG), Andrew Bogut (defensively dominant: 13.2 PPG, 11.8 RPG, 2.9 BPG) and Al Horford (good stats - 16.1 PPG, 9.7 RPG, 3.3 APG, 1.1 BPG – but two Hawk players might be too much to ask).

That look about right to everyone?