Showing posts with label Roland Emmerich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Roland Emmerich. Show all posts

Sunday, June 26, 2016

Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) review


In 1996, director Roland Emmerich released what would become his first major foray into the disaster film genre, Independence Day. Starring a large ensemble cast that included Will Smith, Jeff Goldblum, and Bill Pullman, the film revolved around a massive alien invasion and the efforts of various people across the world to combat the alien threat, which just so conveniently happened to occur during the Fourth of July weekend, hence the title of the film. Independence Day was a massive commercial success upon release, grossing over $817 million worldwide and becoming the highest grossing film of its year. Seriously, no other film released that year even came remotely close to reaching those kind of numbers at the box-office. But even though the film ended up being one of the most successful blockbusters of all-time, it took quite a long time for a sequel to get made. It wasn’t until a few years ago when Emmerich and Dean Devlin, who co-wrote the original film with Emmerich but hadn’t worked with him since 2000, finally got an idea down for not one but two sequels to the original film with the goal being to shoot them back-to-back. And while it’s unclear at the moment if a third film will ever get made, we finally have a sequel in the form of Independence Day: Resurgence. Mirroring the gap in years between films, this new film takes place 20 years after the events of the original film and once again finds the people of Earth dealing with a massive alien invasion. And even though the film is most certainly just as cheesy as its predecessor in terms of its execution, it also carries the same sort of playful tone that is just enough to make it an enjoyable popcorn flick even when taking its shortcomings into account.

It has been 20 years since the aliens’ initial invasion of Earth was thwarted by the human race, primarily thanks to heroes like then-U.S. President Thomas Whitmore (Bill Pullman). Since then, humanity has come together to not only rebuild in the wake of the devastating attack but to also prepare for the likelihood of the aliens’ return. The latter goal comes primarily through the formation of the ESD AKA ‘Earth Space Defense’, a united global defense program led by fellow war hero David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) and whose military force is captained by the late Steven Hiller’s son Dylan (now played by Jessie Usher). As the 20th anniversary of the ‘War of 1996’ approaches, David finds an intact alien ship in Africa that had been drilling a hole leading to the planet’s molten core prior to the aliens’ defeat 20 years prior. This ship also ends up sending out a distress signal which leads to a new mothership that is, to quote David, ‘definitely bigger than the last one’ arriving to attack the planet, once again causing a considerable amount of collateral damage. With the odds once again stacked against them, David, Whitmore, and Dylan, along with others including Whitmore’s now grown-up daughter Patricia (Maika Monroe) and her fiancĂ©, pilot Jake Morrison (Liam Hemsworth), once again look to stop the aliens before they can harvest the heat of the Earth’s core and destroy the planet. To do so, they end up acquiring the help of some of the aliens’ biggest ‘enemies’ who hold the key to defeating them.

Like the original film, there’s no denying that this alien invasion film is very, very cheesy in terms of its plot and overall execution. In fact, it’s so cheesy that if it wasn’t for the more elaborate modern-era visual effects, you’d swear that this film was made back in the 90’s when the original was made. But even with that in mind, the film actually does manage to maintain the same sort of light-hearted and action-packed atmosphere of the original Independence Day even after all of these years. A lot of this comes from the light-hearted comedic banter between characters that was also present in the original film, something that I’m sure was at least one of the reasons why the film was as successful of a crowd-pleaser as it was. Admittedly Resurgence does have a bit of a slow start and like its predecessor, more focus is spent on the action than it is on developing the plot and its large cast of characters. However, as the film went on, I gradually started to become more and more engrossed by it all to the point where I was totally hooked by the time the finale rolled around. Sure it may not carry much of the emotional depth that it wants to have but it’s still full of fun and exciting action sequences. It certainly isn’t boring, which is something that I’ve seen a few critics argue. Obviously the gap between films means that the sequel uses a lot more CG than the previous film, which actually did utilize quite a lot of practical effects. And with that said, the visuals in this film are quite excellent and they very much up the scale when it comes to epic alien vs. human action. That has usually been the case with most of Emmerich’s disaster films. For as ludicrous as they can get plot-wise, he certainly delivers when it comes to scenes of epic destruction.

The film’s ensemble cast is a mix of both new and returning characters, although some of the latter were re-cast. Specifically, Dylan Hiller is now played by Jessie Usher, having previously been played by Will Smith’s Fresh Prince of Bel-Air co-star Ross Bagley in the first film, and Thomas Whitmore’s daughter Patricia is now played by Maika Monroe, with the latter recasting attracting quite a bit of controversy over the supposed dismissal of Mae Whitman, who played the part in the 1996 film. But of course one of the most talked about developments regarding the film was the fact that Will Smith wasn’t returning to reprise his role as Steven Hiller. I’ll admit that I thought he was going to make some sort of cameo despite all of the denials but it’s true; the sequel is very much Will Smith-less as it’s established that his character died a few years prior to the events of the film. As a result, the film does lose a bit of the original’s charm that came courtesy of its charismatic lead star. But even if there may not be any ‘award-worthy’ performances in this cast, as was the case with the previous film, the cast still seems to be quite game for a film of this nature. While Smith doesn’t return, both Jeff Goldblum and Bill Pullman return as David and Whitmore, respectively, and both are still just as memorable as they were in the previous film, with Goldblum once again providing plenty of the film’s humorous moments and Pullman yet again proving to be quite a badass ‘leader’ as the former President that gave one of the most epic speeches of all-time in the original film. Plenty of the new additions are solid as well, particularly Usher and Liam Hemsworth who do actually manage to provide a good chunk of the charisma that someone like Smith was able to provide. Though as is the case when working with a large ensemble cast, some characters are fairly underused, including both new characters like David’s co-worker Dr. Catherine Marceaux (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and even some returning characters like Hiller’s widow Jasmine (Vivica A. Fox).

I’ve noticed that reviews for this film have gotten much more negative these last few days. For the record, it was faring pretty decently reception-wise before its release date, hovering around a 50% on RT. But once opening day rolled around, suddenly reviews for it started to get much more vitriolic with plenty of people calling it ‘one of the worst films of the year’ and so on and so forth. And I’m rather surprised by that because the film really isn’t as bad as those recent reviews imply. Now don’t get me wrong, this film is by no means perfect. Like its predecessor, it is very, very cheesy and definitely doesn’t really do that much in terms of story and character development. It could very much be argued that this is one of those cases of a sequel that came way too late given how much blockbuster films have evolved in the years since the original ID4 as this film feels very much like its predecessor in regards to feeling like a 90’s-esque action film. And yet by the end, I was legitimately hooked by it. Yeah it’s totally stupid but it is what it is. At its core, it’s just a fun little popcorn flick that never really tries to be something that it’s not. Yeah it does start off on a rather awkward note but it does manage to smooth things out for the most part by the end. And sure, the film does end on one hell of a blatant ‘sequel-baiting’ note and it’s unclear if a third film is even going to happen given the generally negative reaction to this film. Still, I won’t lie in saying that I would be interested in seeing how Emmerich and Devlin plan on concluding this supposed trilogy. Hopefully if a sequel does get made, it won’t take 20 more years to happen like it did the first time.


Rating: 3/5

Friday, May 16, 2014

Godzilla (1998) review


Spread across three separate ‘eras’ from 1954 to 2004, the Godzilla franchise is one of the longest-running film series in history, with 28 films made by Toho starting with 1954’s ‘Gojira’ and recently concluding with 2004’s ‘Godzilla: Final Wars’. However, while the franchise has definitely been very successful in its native country, it wasn’t always that big of a hit in other areas of the world, namely the U.S. Sure, some films were released here but not all of them and most of the films in the series that were released in the states were edited for American audiences. It wasn’t until 1998 when the first major American ‘Godzilla’ film was released, directed by Roland Emmerich, fresh off of the 1996 smash hit ‘Independence Day’… but you see, this is a ‘Godzilla’ film that fans of the series wish never happened. Even though it isn’t actually part of Toho’s official series (it was made by Tristar), many Godzilla fans rank this as the worst ‘Godzilla’ film ever made, mostly for not following the source material and re-inventing the titular creature in ways that were drastically different from the creature’s original design. But is it really as bad as what the majority of people say it is? Well, if it’s not compared to the original Toho films that much, it’s really not… that bad. I can’t say that it’s that good either, but not being a big fan of the Godzilla franchise, I’m not really going to go as far and say that it ‘ruins’ the franchise.

Interestingly enough, the plot of this film mirrors the plot of the original ‘Godzilla’ quite a bit, like the part about how the creature was created as a result of nuclear radiation, and how it first attacks a fishing ship before it makes its big entrance on land. While all of this is going on, Nuclear Regulatory Commission scientist Nick Tatopoulos (Matthew Broderick) is hired by the military to investigate just what had caused the shipwreck. Soon, this mysterious and giant creature, referred to as ‘Godzilla’ by many people, (although later films in the Toho series have referred to it as ‘Zilla’ due to the reaction towards this film) arrives in New York City, causing much destruction throughout the entire city. As the military look to stop this creature before it’s too late, Nick discovers something about the creature and what it’s doing in New York, which could start even more trouble if that’s not taken care of as well; the creature has been laying multiple offspring and the eggs are about to hatch…

While the plot of the film is sort of similar to the original film, there has been plenty of backlash against how the creature in this film is portrayed, so much so that many people like to refer to it as G.I.N.O. (Godzilla in Name Only); heck, even Toho had it renamed when it was featured in ‘Godzilla: Final Wars’ because even they knew that this creature wasn’t Godzilla. While the visual effects for the creature are fine for the time, this ‘Godzilla’ really can’t compare to the original Toho Godzilla. It’s fairly smaller than Godzilla (though it’s actually about the same height as the original creature from the first Godzilla film), it doesn’t have atomic breath (I’m not sure if that scene where he ‘breathes’ fire really counts as him breathing fire), and to top it all off, he’s easily defeated by missiles and Godzilla fans know that Godzilla is never killed by missiles. It’s pretty much a given that in every Godzilla movie, the military is powerless against Godzilla no matter what they throw at him and yet here it turns out that this ‘Godzilla’ isn’t as powerful. Aside from that, this movie is basically just your generic monster movie with some bland dialogue, flat characters, and an ending that feels more like a mix between Jurassic Park and Aliens than an actual Godzilla film. Also, as hard as it tries, it doesn’t really capture the same serious tone of the original film and sometimes comes off as a bit campy.

But with that said, there are a few ‘good’ things about this film. Some members of the cast are pretty good, like Jean Reno, who plays a member of the French foreign intelligence agency who teams up with Nick to deal with the nest of Zilla’s offspring. Overall, the movie’s just a fun little popcorn flick and even though the film doesn’t really capture the essence of a Godzilla movie, I never found it to be boring. It’s sort of the same case with Emmerich’s previous film, ‘Independence Day’. I’m admittedly not the biggest fan of that film but it is a fun little popcorn flick and really nothing else. To me, that same scenario applies to this film. I understand why fans of the Godzilla franchise would hate this film as it really isn’t a Godzilla film (I agree with Cinemassacre’s James Rolfe in that it probably should be renamed ‘Zilla’ as it really isn’t worthy of the addition of the ‘God’ part of the title) but overall, I find this film to be a fairly decent guilty pleasure (a term that I don’t use, but it can definitely apply to this film). If you’re willing to accept that it isn’t a ‘Godzilla’ film, then it’s okay… though hopefully this new Godzilla film turns out to be much better.

Rating: 2.5/5


P.S. Before I finish, I want to address the attempted 'parody' in this film involving the characters of Mayor Ebert (Michael Lerner) and his assistant Gene (Lorry Goldman), poking fun at Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert after they had given negative reviews to the last two films made by Roland Emmerich, 'Stargate' and 'Independence Day'. I can see what they're trying to do, but ultimately the filmmakers don't take full advantage of the situation. To quote Gene Siskel, "If you're going to go through the trouble of putting us in a monster movie, why don't you at least take the advantage of having the monster either eat or squash us?"... and that sums up why their attempted parody does not work... though I will say that both Lerner and Goldman definitely bear striking resemblances to Siskel and Ebert in this film and heck,  I'd say Lerner could've even played Ebert if they had done a biopic on him around that time.