Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

The biggest lesson to be learned from the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy is never end a film on a cliffhanger if it means the next film has to spend an hour fixing what that cliffhanger set in motion. As you may remember, the last film, Dead Man's Chest, ended with Captain Jack Sparrow meeting his demise at the jaws of the Kraken. We all knew Jack wouldn't stay dead for long, but unfortunately he still stays dead for longer than we'd like. For about an hour we have to wait for our heroes to rescue Jack from Davy Jones's Locker before they get back on track and resume the story of the last film. This opening hour is so dull that the film is unable to recover. By the time it finally does start to get interesting, you've kind of already lost interest.

There are about as many unfulfilled opportunities in this film as there are fish in the sea. While I've found myself to be in the minority, I really liked where Dead Man's Chest was leading us and was expecting this film to deliver on everything the last one promised. Instead this film kind of shrugs off certain stories set up by the last film. Perhaps my favorite element of DMC was Norrington's character arc. I fully expected him to play a big part in the ending, but instead all that character development is thrown out and he gets about five minutes of screen time. Why set him up so perfectly in one film if you don't intend to utilize him in the payoff? It's things like this that will irk viewers, who will certainly walk out of this film wondering "That's it?" It all kind of stumbles to a close instead of racing to one.

Perhaps the one thing to be thankful for, though, was the return to form for Johnny Depp's Jack. The last film really underused him, but here he is his inspired self again. Of particular enjoyment was his descent into madness while all alone in Davy Jones's locker. Not faring quite as well is Geoffrey Rush's Barbossa. He was so well fleshed out in the first film, yet his reappearance here feels wasted. He's neither very funny nor threatening. We never get a real sense why he has been resurrected, nor why he is so chummy with the people he once tried to murder. His addition also helps underline a major problem with the film: we are never sure who is on whose side at any given moment. Every character has their own hidden agendas, and it seems they each are working with both the good guys and the bad guys at some point in the film. It's very confusing, and you are never sure who you should be routing for, so you ultimately don't care who wins in the end.

Still, if you liked the last two films, you'll enjoy moments, especially Johnny Depp. But in the end it all feels like a wasted opportunity. And I suspect a lot of fans will be both confused and angry by how the Will/Elizabeth story is resolved. If I understood it correctly, it was pretty dark, and not something you'd expect from a breezy summer blockbuster.

Shrek the Third

How many movies really, truly deserve a sequel? We live in a time where money is the only driving force for a sequel, while story takes a back seat. There was no reason to continue the Fantastic 4 franchise, but because the first made a lot of money, we're getting another one this summer. Yet on very rare occasions a film actually creatively demands a sequel. One such film was the original Shrek, a film that showed us a world so eclectic that it felt like we only scratched the possibility of what could be done. Shrek 2 delivered in many ways, ways I think we take for granted. How inspired was it to make Prince Charming the villain in this bizarro fairy tale, for example? While the abundance of pop culture references make it feel dated after only three years, it was a largely worth while sequel. But did it demand another sequel?

No.

Watching Shrek the Third, a number of things become clear, not the least of which is the fact that Shrek as a character has become the least interesting in his own franchise. Where we felt invested in his grumpy quest to save Fiona in the first film, here we have nothing to route for; he's a shadow of his former self. When Shrek is told he must either find Fiona's cousin Artie or inherit the throne from her dying father, it comes more out of a need for a plot than from him as a character. When Shrek learns he's going to be a father, he never gets a real chance to come to terms with it. He's reluctant about it, he has a nightmare about it, and then that's it until the end, when he is suddenly fine with it for no reason. Whereas the first film used the plot as a way to examine Shrek, here it uses Shrek to move along the plot.

And what a dull plot it is. While Shrek, Donkey, and Puss in Boots are off finding Artie (a woefully miscast Justin Timberlake, who seems to be a genuinely strong actor in other roles), Prince Charming rallies the Fairy Tale Villains and takes over Far Far Away. In many ways it is a repeat of the basic structure of the last film, complete with a raid on the castle by our heroes in the final minutes. Yet it all feels so much smaller and less significant. Indeed, the Shrek series has gone from refreshing to being as predictable and cliched as the fairy tales it once tried to parody.

The laughs are also almost nonexistent. The most consistent laughs come from Merlin (brilliant casting in picking another Python alum, Eric Idle), who is depicted as a loony hermit. But Merlin is only a very small part of the film. The best gag, though, is once again given to the Gingerbread Man, who sees his life flash before his eyes. That single scene had me laughing uncontrollably and made this film almost redeemable. Almost.

Sadly, the Shrek series went one film too far. Had they been smart they would have ended with two, and then branched off with other tales set in this world. I know a Puss in Boots movie is coming, and that has some potential, as Antonio Banderas seems to be the only returning cast member that is actually giving it his all. But I can't imagine anyone wanting to see more of Shrek as a character, especially considering what the final scene would imply for a fourth film's direction.

Severance

I'm excited to see the horror-comedy Severance finally get a release this Friday. I caught an early preview of this film last fall and was frustrated that I had to wait a half year before I could finally talk to anyone about it. Well now it's here, so let me be the first to say that if you love horror movies, you won't want to miss this one. You aren't likely to find a better mix of chills, laughs, and gore this year.

Planning to spend the weekend working on team-building exercises, the employees of Palisade Defense head up to the company's newly acquired mountain lodge. However, once there they realize something isn't right. What are those wooden structures in the trees? Is there a man following them through the woods? And who exactly left those meat pies in the kitchen? It quickly becomes apparent that someone has it out for them, and they must work together like never before if they want to survive the weekend.

Severance right off the bat does two things that make it better than 90% of other horror movies released in recent years: it centers on interesting adults, and it spends a lot of time getting to know them. This makes for a much more satisfying second half when all hell breaks loose, as we are actually invested in their survival. Yet the film doesn't sacrifice thrills for character development - the first half hour is just as tense as the rest of the film, at times more so as we aren't sure what is going on out in those woods. The film also balances the tension out with genuine laughs. There have been a number of comparisons to The Office in the way it presents its characters, and I'd say that's very accurate. Even when people start dying, the deaths can be pretty funny: I don't think I've seen a funnier decapitation in a film.

Perhaps one of the strongest elements of the film is the villain. He is a very realistic character with real motives for his actions, and that makes him all the more frightening. This is the kind of villain that you actually could stumble across on a camping trip. Also, because I walked into this film with no knowledge of what it was, I was unprepared for a startling twist regarding the killer's identity late in the game. I suspect that the trailers for the film have thoroughly spoiled this twist, so I advise you to avoid them if at all possible, as it's a great surprise.

Severance is the best film of its kind since Shaun of the Dead. It alternates between uproarious jokes and shocking thrills with ease, so much so that at times you aren't sure if you should wince or laugh. These days, when every horror film is either a remake or sequel, it's nice to finally find something that is this unique and fun.

The Ex

Quick, pop quiz: what do you call a movie that is so unmemorable that you forgot you watched it, so bland that you'd have more fun eating vanilla ice cream, and so indistinguishable that it has no trait that lends itself to a meaningful title?

The Ex.

Did you answer correctly? If so, you might not be the target audience for this blandfest.

The Ex stars Zack Braff and Amanda Peet as Tom and Sofia, a married couple that moves to Ohio so that Tom can support his wife and newborn son by working for his father-in-law's ad agency. We are introduced to such quirky characters as Bob (Charles Grodin), Sofia's slightly loopy dad, Don (Donal Logue), the new age boss, and Chip (Jason Bateman), the hot shot handicapped mentor to Tom. However, it quickly becomes clear that Tom and Chip do not see eye to eye, and it's not just because Chip is in a wheel chair. It seems Chip and Sofia once dated in high school, and he may still have a thing for her.

Zach Braff and Jason Bateman were the stars of two of the best, most original sitcoms of the decade, Scrubs and Arrested Development, respectively. So the fact that this feels more like an episode of According To Jim is depressing. There is nothing subversive, nothing original, nothing daring here. Every joke, every plot point feels stolen from something else. There is honestly no reason at all for this movie to even exist, we've literally seen it all before. The film also wastes a surprisingly strong set of actresses. Amanda Peet is reduced to sitting at home playing with the baby and feeling lonely. Amy Poehler seems to be setting up a storyline, but then she mysteriously disappears halfway into the film. And Oscar nominee Amy Adams pops up for no real reason other than to give Sofia an antagonist for two scenes. In short, this film is an assemblage of some great talent and everyone is utterly wasted.

I hate beating up on films like this, because they are essentially harmless. I especially hate beating up on Braff and Bateman, who I truly like quite a bit. But did no one at any point stand up and say "What are we doing here? Can't we fix this?" That kind of laziness is depressing, and the cold hard fact is that there was no reason for this movie to ever be made, and even less reason to see it.

Charles Grodin came out of retirement for this?

Spider-Man 3

I've always felt that the Spider-Man series has been poorly cast, written, and directed from the first installment. I recognise that this opinion puts me in the minority, but I think it's something worth contemplating if you like these movies. Do you like these movies because of Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst's questionable acting? Do you like it because of Sam Raimi's dull and repetitive storytelling (how many times does he have to resort to the villain kidnapping MJ in the third act)? Or do you like it because it's Spider-Man, one of the most entertaining comic book characters created? Yes, these films could have been a lot worse (just ask Joel Schumacher), but it seems like everyone involved settled for "agreeable" and not "extraordinary." With the negative reviews and word of mouth coming off of this latest installment, I almost feel like people have finally started to see the flaws that have been there since the first installment; it just took two movies for that initial awe of seeing Spider-Man on the big screen to wear off.

Spider-Man 3 essentially gives us a week in the life of Peter Parker, and it is very episodic. Peter and Mary Jane are having relationship troubles because he is so enamored with his fame as Spider-Man. Harry finally vents his anger towards Peter and assumes his father's alter ego. Flint Marko, a petty thief on the run, accidentally stumbles on a science project in the marshes and gets turned into the Sandman. And Eddie Brock is the new hotshot photographer gunning for Peter's job. These four stories don't so much intertwine as they happen independently of each other. When one story runs dry, they move to the next. When that one goes as far as it can, they move on again. It isn't until the end that all these stories actually come together, so as a result it feels like you're watching multiple movies at once, and not one finely crafted, multi-arching story.

I've already said my piece about Tobey and Kirsten. They were miscast and they don't improve much here. James Franco does alright with his part, but it felt like he was shortchanged after two movies setting up his storyline. But then, that's kind of a running theme in this film: shortchanging any story that isn't Peter and Mary Jane's relationship woes. Thomas Haden Church is well cast as Sandman, giving unexpected depth to an otherwise two-dimensional villain, but sadly 75% of the Sandman's screen time is CGI, so he is largely wasted anyway. Yet the film is almost single handedly saved by Topher Grace, who gives the most entertaining and dark performance of the film. He has more energy and enthusiasm for his part than anyone else, and when he shares the screen with anyone it feels like they are asleep by comparison. He is both slimy and sympathetic, depending on the situation, and I can't help but think what an exponentially better series this would have been had he been cast as Spider-Man.

One plot point I haven't hit upon yet is the introduction of the Symbiote, a black substance that crashes to Earth and attempts to take over Peter. What could have been a dark and interesting story is instead turned into Jim Carrey's The Mask, culminating with a dance number by Peter in a jazz club. I think that's what has bothered me most about these movies: Sam Raimi treats everything like it's a joke, he finds a way to wink at the audience in far too many scenes. So when he asks us to care about the relationship troubles between Peter and Mary Jane, we just don't care. It was all goofy so far, so why should we suddenly act like these people's problems are even half serious?

On a more personal level, I think that what Raimi did to the character of Venom is insulting. Mild spoilers for the rest of the paragraph, folks. Since the first movie, Raimi has stated that he hates Venom and will not make a movie with Venom in it. The studios consistently informed him that Venom was one of the most recognisable and popular villains in Spider-Man mythos, so he finally gave in and included Venom. While not as disrespectful as Shumacher's treatment of Bane in Batman & Robin, Raimi found a way to include Venom as little as possible, as well as guarantee that if he makes a fourth film, he won't have to use Venom again. Raimi set it up perfectly to make Venom a multi-film character in the same way that Harry has been, and this one could have ended with the creation of Venom. Instead, he squeezes Venom in at the last minute just so he can get everyone off his back about it. What makes it all the more frustrating was how cool Venom seemed for those fifteen minutes, and what a great job Topher was doing with the part.

On the up side, the final battle scene is pretty well done, and I liked the way we saw things as if it were being filmed for a TV news broadcast. That made Venom much more frightening, almost like something out of Aliens. Between that and Topher Grace, this film barely rises above being horrible to be just mediocre. I really hope they aren't kidding when they say this is the end of the Spider-Man series as we know it, because I think there is a lot of talented actors and filmmakers out there who could do something really special with this franchise if given the chance.