Monday, November 13, 2017

"I have Discovered the Truth, and it is Profoundly Disturbing." Murder on the Orient Express (2017) Review

Murder on the Orient Express
3/5
Directed by: Kenneth Branagh
Rated: PG-13

           High on top of the cold and unforgiving mountains of Eurasia, the Orient Express, a symbol of luxury and excellence, lies on its side derailed. Inside the train's dining car 12 passengers sit in silence in the harsh light of electric lamps; exchanging accusatory glances and then hiding their fearful faces. In the first class coach are three people, M. Bouc, the esteemed director of the Orient Express, a dead body, murdered in a bloody frenzy, and the great Belgian detective, M. Hercule Poirot. This scene makes for a riveting mystery and an enjoyable time at the theatre, but in this film it is unable to impact or effect its viewers.
           In Murder on the Orient Express Sir Kenneth Branagh stars as Agatha Christie's famous Hercule Poirot. Purveying his magnificent moustaches and an equally massive theatrical presence, Branagh's performance is engaging and compelling. Along with one memorable and charismatic performance, comes a diverse ensemble; each actor and actress suiting their role to the best of their abilities. A few stand out performers are Johnny Depp as the cold and commanding gangster M. Rachett, Daisy Ridley as the lovely and upfront governess Mlle. Debenham, Leslie Odom Jr. as the charming and brazen Dr. Abuthnot, Michelle Pfeiffer as the sultry and seductive Mme. Hubbard, Josh Gad as the amusing and aloof M. Macqueen, and Judi Dench as the indomitable and frightful Princess Dragomiroff. Though each of these accompanying performers does a good job portraying their character, their characters do not play well off of each other. It is as if each actor and actress, aside from Branagh, thought they were performing a one person show.
           Murder on the Orient Express also boast of impressive technical aspects. This film's visuals are engrossing. The train's production design is immaculate, and the film's deep blue color scheme is aesthetically pleasing. The camera's movements through this set are free spirited like a bird. This often creates curious camera angles inviting audiences to examine familiar scenes from new perspectives. Though these shots are beautiful, they do not flow well from one to the next. It is jarring jumping from one gorgeous long take to the next, and the camera's flamboyance can only distract viewers from the film's story for so long.
           Viewers need to be distracted from the story, because the film's screenplay suffers from the performers' and visuals' similar shortcomings. Though the screenplay's dialogue is at times humorous and yet also lends itself to dreadful tragedy, it feels dishonest to the presented characters and their inner secrets. It is almost as if there are far more poignant phrases characters want to say, yet they hold back and say only what sounds good on face value. There is little depth in the film's dialogue, so the characters feel like personas in a murder mystery and less like a tangle of strangers finding themselves caught in a web of deceit.
           Even though this film suffers, It is clear Branagh and his team have exerted great effort to make this film an interesting adaptation. It is also clear Branagh's team did not have much communication with each other. The biggest downside with Murder on the Orient Express is that each scene is remarkable but when they are combined in this manner they are lackluster. The film has good aspects, but its poor synergy diminishes the story's weight and impact. Audiences will enjoy this film while they are watching it, but after they leave the theatre most will ask themselves what was the film's greater purpose. This places Murder on the Orient Express in a unique predicament, where the film is worth seeing in a large theatre but it is not worth watching or owning on home release.

Verdict: Kenneth Branagh's Murder on the Orient Express features good performances and remarkable individual scenes, making it a worthwhile time at the theatre but only for enthusiastic moviegoers.

Sunday, November 5, 2017

"Point me in the direction of whoever's ass I have to Kick!" Thor Ragnarok Review

Thor Ragnarok
1.5/5
Directed by: Taika Waititi
Rated: PG-13

           The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) is extensive, and it is slowly building towards its climax, Avengers Infinity War (2018). Within this franchise's nine years of existence, audiences have seen great heroes team up with unlikely allies, take on hordes of evil and laugh and cry all the way through it. In the MCU's new action comedy Thor Ragnarok audiences will receive more of the same...but worse. This sequence of events that appeared on a screen in front of a viewer's eyes, otherwise known as a movie, provides lack luster entertainment, unstimulating visuals and little to no impact.
           Thor Ragnarok's most entertaining element is its characters, or rather its collection of walking and talking warriors that have their own quirks. Thor, Chris Hemsworth, is a brazen and brutish battler who wants to save his kingdom from the evil Hela, Cate Blanchett. Loki, Tom Hiddleston, is a conniving and charismatic combater who defeats his enemies through tricks and fakery. Valkyrie, Tessa Thompson, is a fierce and frigid fighter who drinks to her heart's content and won't take back any insult or injury. The Hulk, Mark Ruffalo, is a hearty heavy lifting hothead who speaks in broken English and breaks his challengers' backs. Based on these descriptions, it is expected that audience's should spend the majority of their time watching these people fight each other and various bad guys. While this is somewhat true, as there is enough fighting in this movie to keep a person in their seat with their eyes open, every battle is against a CGI opponent. Since the bad guys our heroes are unleashing their might upon are mostly computer generated faceless mobs, the impact of every punch, slam, kick, slice and smash is nullified.
           Other than a few interesting moments in this movie, Thor Ragnarok is not fun. The movie's dialogue is at moments comedic, but its primarily unenthusiastic and bland. The visuals in this movie are colorful, but the production design's color palettes are not emotionally rich. The villain is overpowered and worthy of being defeated, but it comes to a point where it does not matter how she will be defeated. All that matters is when, because that will signal the end of the movie. In addition to this Thor Ragnarok's orchestral score is forgettable and the movie's pacing is choppy and might make the story difficult following. The most effort this movie put forth was in its action scenes, but they are all fake and poorly choreographed. It is difficult separating each battle from another or recalling how someone took down their opponent. For all this movie's physical traits, it lacks an emotional center and the mental competence to make the movie impactful and worthwhile.
           There can be some enjoyment had with this MCU entry, but it mainly comes through knowing the backstory and previous character development that occurred in earlier entries. To best understand Thor Ragnarok's basic plot audience members should watch Thor (2011), The Avengers (2012), Thor the Dark World (2013), Avengers Age of Ultron (2015), and Doctor Strange (2016). It appears impossible for any new MCU entry to be watchable in its own right. The MCU shall eventually crumble under its own weight, and when that time comes only this franchise's best titles will be remembered and revered. It doesn't seem likely Thor Ragnarok will be amongst the chosen. As Thor would say, this movie is "not worthy."

Verdict: Thor Ragnarok is a poorly executed semi coherent sequence of events about a group of hotheads who take on a CGI army, and the movie lacks emotional impact and worthwhile entertaining value.