Friday Film Festival Vol. 7: A Visual Spectacle

This weeks F3 gets posted a day late because yesterday I had a day off (about time!) and spent most of it gaining material for this post. That may not have been the intent for the days plans, but it certainly worked out that way.

We drove to a theater north of here that is not only far nicer than any of our local cinemas, but also has an IMAX screen. Since we were driving that far, we decided to make a day of it and take in a couple of movies. At first glance they had almost nothing in common, but after seeing them both, I realized that perhaps there were similarities I hadn't considered.

First we checked out the 3D IMAX undersea documentary Aliens of the Deep. Somehow this comes from James Cameron, the same man who brought us Aliens (but not Alien), Terminator (1 and 2) and Titanic. The film takes on a journey down to the portions of the ocean which never receive any sunlight, yet have a diverse, thriving ecosystem.

For years, the basic assumption has been that all life is dependent on the sun. The sun shines down to the Earth's surface and drives photosynthesis. Animals then eat the plants, only to be eaten in turn by other animals, and so on. Remove the sun from this progression and nothing ever happens. No sun, no life. This belief was turned on its head a few decades ago when life was discovered in regions of the ocean that never saw the sun. If there was no photosynthesis to start the food chain, then how were there animals living down here? The answer was microbes. Around hydrothermal vents, microbes live off of the chemicals coming up from the beneath the ocean floor. All sorts of creatures from shrimp to crabs to small fish live by eating the microbes then are eaten by the larger animals, higher up on the food chain. The same ecosystem as up above, only without a sun.

As we journey down to the depths, we experience life in all its beauty. Faced with what we would consider impossible conditions-almost freezing water in most areas, boiling hot water spraying up from the ocean floor, no light, pressure high enough that it should crush everything that far down-there are creatures that are not only living, but growing...thriving. The crew on these dives included marine biologists, geologists, and astrobiologists. The astrobiologists view these areas as the closest we can get to examining the possibility of life on other planets. While we may have perfectly hospitable environments here, few other places we can see would be suitable for our photosynthetic based ecosystem. A much more likely scenario would be for an ecosystem like that at the bottom of our own oceans.

While I watched this film, I couldn't help but think that this is what 3D technology should be. Forget about the space battles and the monsters jumping off the screen at you. The beauty of nature leaping off the screen. Not muted like the pictures from the old-style 3D films that required the red/blue lenses, but clear and sharp. Cameron used special effects by the boatload (if you'll pardon the pun) in his previous films, but here he is content for much of the film to let the images exist on their own, resorting to special effects only when absolutely necessary to show space travel or the possibility of life underneath the ice crust of Jupiter's moon Europa. Even so, these effects take a backseat to the amazing visuals of the reality of our own world.

The Verdict: 2.5 Stars. Recommended (the only thing preventing this from getting a Highly Recommended is that I realize that many of you are not quite as much of a nerd and therefore may not be as interested in the subject matter.)

The second film we watched was Sin City. Based on 4 graphic novels by Frank Miller, Sin City is an episodic neo-noir telling the stories of Basin City, a place where nothing is free from corruption: not the police force, not the elected officials, not the clergy. First, let me say that this was certainly one of the most brutal movies I have ever seen. The violence was more than over the top. At times, it was so outrageous that it became almost funny. At other times, it was cringe-inducing and stomach-turning. Much of the movie was in black and white (more on that later), which helped to tone the gore down slightly. The gore, however, wasn't all that made it so brutal; it was the atmosphere and the callous disregard for anyone and anything by almost all the characters, but then again, that's Sin City.

Like the other film, the visuals were simply stunning. Rodriguez took Frank Miller's art and words off the page and brought them to life on the screen. Most of the film was set against a digitally created backdrop, with the color schemes set up like Miller's original works. The background, the characters and the props were all in black and white with the exception of a few items Miller had colored because of their significance: Goldie's hair, Junior's yellow flesh and a few others.

I ended up feeling somewhat conflicted about the movie in general. It did almost nothing to alter my thoughts on Robert Rodriguez as a director. The look of the film: great. Style and atmosphere: great. Action scenes: enthralling. (Can't really look at dialogue for Rodriguez this time since he basically used Miller's text word for word in most places) Acting...well, here's my issue with Rodriguez: From all evidence, he simply cannot coax a good performance out of anyone from whom you would not already expect it. Looking back at Once Upon a Time in Mexico, the movie is saved by Johnny Depp, but we've come to expect near miracles from him on screen. In Sin City, performances by Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Benicio del Toro and Clive Owen were all good, but not surprising. Brittany Murphy was nothing other than her typical self, and Michael Madsen was simply horrid. In fact, he was bad enough that we discussed later that we both wondered during his first scene if it was intentional. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Was it good? Some things were some weren't. Was it like everything else Hollywood puts into our theaters every week? No, definitely not, and I feel that I have to cut it some slack for taking that risk.

The Verdict: Too conflicted to assign a rating.

Even if they had almost nothing else in common, both films were visually stunning. The day was a virtual feast for the eyes, and a literal one for the mouth with all of the popcorn, soda and candy.

Before I go, I must point out that we saw a preview for House of Wax before Sin City started. The whole thing left me quite perplexed. Apparently there isn't enough of an issue with making yet another teen horror film (without any teenagers actually in it) or with having Elisha Cuthbert go the Jennifer Love Hewitt I Know What You did Last Summer tank top route, so they had to put Paris Hilton in it? Why? Was her family paying for the movie? Were they trying to lower expectations to the point that they might actually reach them? I need to understand.

Until later...