The Host

First Hit:  Well intentioned and not well crafted or executed.

The idea that an alien life form could use our bodies as a host and use them with less anger, violence, and angst is interesting.

The idea of what happens to the person whom had the body prior to being inhabited is thought provoking. Would our violent nature fight against the intrusion?

Would humans see the wisdom of the species taking over their body, or just see the quiet nature and simple robotic way of being as a way to kill our spirit? Or would humans know they are inhabited? All interesting questions and not explored very well in this film.

There were moments where Melanie / Wanderer / Wanda (Saoirse Ronan) who was a human holdout (as Melanie), captured and given new soul (Wanderer / Wanda). The two spirits (Melanie/Wanda) live inside Melanie’s body. She is hated by her former human boyfriend and other humans in a colony headed by Jeb (William Hurt). The souls outnumber the humans but the audience is pushed by the story and director to take sides that the humans are the righteous beings in the universe.

To me the film had a strong possibility to really explore some interesting questions, but only Ronan and Hurt gave the possibility of this interesting story a chance to live in this film. Hurt was hampered by his role as head of the human holdouts and therefore had to have a more human slant. Ronan, however, was able to bring a level of sensitivity to her role and the moment that the camera was about 6 inches above her face as she lay down on the operating table, the tenderness of her human and invader presence was truly felt. She held the film together.

Ronan was the best part of this whole film and it only worked because of her. Diane Kruger as The Seeker, the person charged with converting Melanie from human to Wanderer was very good as her own internal fight with her human aspect became clear as the film progressed. Hurt was fun to see and enjoyable to watch. His natural air of authority rang true. Andrew Niccol wrote the screenplay, playing on human emotions to protect our ways and essence, was a little naïve. It would have been interesting to explore a human getting to know and embrace what was good about the species we were hosting. Niccol also directed this film which showed the limitations of his ability to create a wider more interesting story.

Overall:  Liked some of the acting and the potential of the concept and this execution lacked depth.

On the Road

First Hit:  Why...  This is what I thought about after seeing this film.

Just because a book or writing may be interesting, doesn’t mean it will string together well as a film.

This film represents a failure to make an interesting piece of writing viable as a film. The film is about how Jack Kerouac wrote the book “On the Road”. Sal Paradise/Jack Kerouac (Sam Riley) wants to write but can’t seem to type the words on paper. He can, although, take notes.

He meets Dean Moriarty/Neal Cassady (Garrett Hedlund) and his 16 year old wife Marylou/LuAnne Henderson (Kristen Stewart) who spins his world upside down. They do everything he’d like to do. Have sex anywhere and with any one. They drink all night long while consuming all sorts of drugs, and they party like there is no tomorrow – what the reality is, is that tomorrow does come.

The issue is that this film tries to replicate the book, and along the way it does a great job of showing/documenting their current experiences, but does nothing to give the audience a reason as why they approach life like this and why would we would care.

I didn’t care about the characters and I didn’t have any perspective to put context into their actions. Was the film interesting? To some degree yes, but sitting in the theater I kept wondering why Dean made choices he did and why Sal made his choices.

Although I did sense there was a great degree of respect for Kerouac’s book and legacy by the director (Walter Salles) it didn’t end up on the screen.

Riley is good as Sal (Jack Kerouac). He did provide a level of curiosity and desire to experience life more than others. Hedlund was very good and believable as Moriarty who just couldn’t help but respond to his momentary desires and impulses. Stewart was strong as the young Marylou. This role definitely set her apart from other roles she’s taken and may open up her career to more challenging things. There is a fire under the smolder. Amy Adams had a small but impactful role as Jane (Joan Vollmer). Tom Sturridge as Carlo Marx (Allen Ginsberg) was also very strong and brought intelligence to the role/film. Kirsten Dunst (Camille & Carolyn Cassady) as Dean's wife was good and tried to bring a depth to the film. Jose Rivera wrote this script and unfortunately couldn’t bring a depth to the actions of the characters. Salles directed this film, and although he showed respect to the original material, it missed a depth of character that would have the audience care.

Overall:  I’m glad I saw the film but wouldn’t recommend it.

OZ the Great and Powerful (3D)

First Hit:  Wonderful visuals don’t make up for a too long script.

This film had a lot going for it from the opening credits but faded as the story unfolded and became too long and overly complex.

The square format black and white opening was exquisite. Watching the cutouts of images with names and words in this old fashion looking way was very inviting. Then the film stays in this black and white format (Remember Wizard of OZ) until OZ (James Franco) lands in OZ.

The screen grows slowly out of the square format into today’s large format and in beautiful color. The 3D was done well enough to not be distracting except when the spears went through the smoke. The story is about a traveling carnie con-man who seduces women with magic. While escaping a jealous husband, he gets thrown into OZ via a tornado.

While in OZ and despite his con-man ways, Glinda (Michelle Williams) believes in him to save the Land of OZ from the wicked witches. One saving grace for this film is the china/porcelain girl. Her expressions and movements were a phenomenal result of the CGE.

Franco is good enough as a con-man who wants to do good but the overlong and complex storyline and lack of focused direction didn’t do him well. Williams was good in two roles – as OZ’s real world girlfriend Annie and the good witch Glinda. Mila Kunis (as Theodora) was OK and felt there was more she could have given to the part. Rachel Weisz was better as Kunis's sister in her role as Evanora. Mitchell Kapner and David Lindsay-Abaire wrote an ambitious script that was too long and overly complicated. Sam Raimi did an OK job directing what we saw but he needed to reign in the story and simplify it. Lasting 130 minutes, it was about 30 – 40 minutes too long.

Overall: Although this story is pre-Dorothy’s (Wizard of OZ) visit and is clearly a prequel, it lacks the engaging magic.

Life of Pi 3D

First Hit:  Extraordinary visualization of the story and a little long winded.

This film is worth seeing in 3D because it is, at times, visually arresting.

It is hard making something this beautiful when most of the film is on the blue water, with a blue sky, and a single white boat. But Ang Lee makes it work extremely well. What didn’t work, like the book, was the long winded set up.

A writer comes to visit Pi Patel (Adult character played by Irrfan Khan), to hear his amazing story. Their dialog and the early set up of Pi’s life takes up more of the screen time than necessary. In a book it is sometimes necessary to create long narratives to ensure the readers get the picture.

With film, it is an easier task to make the picture clear in the audience (a picture is worth a thousand words) and this film is proof. Finally when we do get into the heart of the story with Pi Patel (played by Suraj Sharma) it with amazement that we watch how he navigates and negotiates life of living on a small 26-foot lifeboat with initially, an orangutan, zebra, hyena and a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker.

Nature takes its course with the animals so it comes down to just the tiger and Pi creating a tentative working relationship. Again, just like the beginning, it seems as though we spend more time on the water than necessary. There could have been 10 minutes taken out and it would have made no difference to the story. Then we have, like in the book, the questionable ending.

Outside of these issues, this film was very joyous to watch.

Khan was perfect as the older Pi Patel in that he brought the kind of earnestness and life view that could only have been gained from such an adventure. Sharma was wonderful as the boy who had to become a man by living through 200+ days on the sea with a Bengal tiger. He did this through his ability to learn, grow and be creative in his determination. David Magee wrote a screenplay that was right in line with the Yann Martel’s novel. Ang Lee did an amazing job with the visual part of the film, some snipping of its length would have enhanced it.

Overall:  This was an amazingly beautiful film to watch and is worth the 3D price.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2

First Hit:  I couldn’t wait for this to end and I'm pleased that I'll never have to watch this story again. This film got old within the first 15 minutes. The convoluted story about some Italian Vampires being the ruling class (Like the Pope over Catholics) was insipid. The acting and drama being attempted by Bella (played by Kristen Stewart) and Edward (played by Robert Pattinson) to create a caring viable story is even worse. The best thing about the film is some of the outside scenery shots of the State of Washington. Some of the other characters were amusing but in the overall scheme of things this series of books needed to be filmed in 1 or 2 films (not 5). Although the films might be financially successful, from a film point of view they will be lost in a few years and not show up as having much redeeming value.

Stewart continues the role in the same way she began the series but at least now there is more to her. Pattinson still cannot act and what he does has been worn very thin. Taylor Lautner is OK as the Werewolf who likes to hang out with Vampires. Melissa Rosenberg wrote this insipid script while Bill Condon phoned in direction which came out as “I don’t really care about making a good film”.

Overall: Don’t waste time or energy sitting through this movie.