Predators (2010) = 4/5
Finally, a nod to 80s-90s action films that doesn't come off as tongue-in-cheek. Predators is essentially about a bunch of badasses (with the exception of Topher Grace, who is such a douche bag in this film) who fight alien predators on a planet. Simple as that. Not too often do we get films that embellish on such a simple plot and puts its actors in action sequences, and does it well. It makes sense for Rodriguez to produce a film like this, a film that could have easily been made in the early 90s with a smaller budget and a granier camera filter. Laurence Fishburne is batshit crazy and, unfortunately, Danny Trejo's part is cut short in the beginning. But there's a memorable fight scene in the film between a tatt'd-up Yakuza member and a predator which sorta made a nod to early-Kurosawa cinema. Let's just say it's the closest you'll ever get to a beautifully-shot samurai sequence in a Predator film. Contextually, the scene works and succeeds; any other film and it would have looked retarded. The third act was kind of weak, though, because Topher Grace sucks. But the film is still impressive, comparitively, to other sci-fi action films, especially with this wave of vampire/action films. Doesn't achieve the brilliance and anxiety of a film like Aliens... but it's still pretty damn good and fun.
Splice (2010) = 4/5
If you get past the sorta cyberpunk attitude some of these characters have (like I don't really know any cool scientists...), then you'll see that this film is kind of ballsy. Takes lots of odd, left-field plot turns and puts its characters in some awkward and fucked up situations. While watching it, I thought of Cronenberg's The Fly, and sort of realized that Splice could've been way more awesome if Cronenberg directed it. Regardless, this film ends on a really uncomfortable and sour note, but it's a satisfying one, regardless. It's also one of the better science fiction films to come out in the past five years.
Alien 3 (1992) = 3 1/2 / 5
Kinda late to watching this one, but my radio station recently hosted an Aliens movie night and I was finally able to see Alien 3. I'd heard so many bad things about it and y'know I'd completely understand why any fan of the first two Alien films really disliked the third. It's a complete change of pace, tone, characters, etc. The only thing that really remains in this film is Sigourney Weaver and the Bishop character (he's really only in it for like 5 minutes?). But, the film ain't bad. Let's, for starters, state the fact that the pacing and structure of Alien 3 is completely different, and relies more on horror tropes than suspense tactics like the ones used in parts 1 and 2. This film has multiple plots running at once: Ripley's conflicts with the inmates, the tension between the inmates because of Ripley, and, of course, the third eye watching the alien itself. That's what's different-- the fact that in this film, we see what the alien is doing while the other characters settle their quarrels and solve problems. The first two films took on the point of view of its characters, thereby bulking up on the suspense and mystery of the creature by only seeing what the characters saw. We never got to see the queen hatch an egg until Ripley saw it towards the end of the second film. Also, none of these characters are really that likeable. The doctor and maybe the black inmate are probably the most redeemable. The Ripley character in this is just really fuckin' bitchy. She sleeps with the doctor and then keeps quiet about the possibility their might be an alien in this maximum security prison. That's pretty selfish of her. The film, otherwise, is pure Fincher. It's one of his earlier films, but you still get the greys and browns, with a very sleak and steam-punk aesthetic that gives the film a more grainy tone. The autopsy scene is just a classic Fincher scene, and you can really see how much liberty was given to him. That might've been the film's downfall, though. With the first two films, there was a specific mood and color. It was filled with blues, greys, blacks and whites. Scott was very specific with the look of the film, and Cameron continued that palette. But Fincher was given too much freedom with the whole Alien universe, changing characters' behaviors, setting up new colors and giving the alien a whole new motive. That caught me off guard as well. The aliens in the first films sought to get humans so they could harvest their bodies and lay eggs. The alien in this one, first off, came from a dog, so for some reason it came out more animalistic than other aliens. Second off, it just killed characters willy-nilly without even saving their bodies. Though, that gets explained towards the end of this film with a major detail that I wish would've been omitted from the script. The film is good, but I feel I would've been better off stopping at Aliens, just so that there's better closure.
Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans (2010) = 4 1/2 / 5
A surreal crime thriller (bordering on stock police procedural) in the same vein of a film like Sexy Beast, Bad Lieutenant Port of Call New Orleans is an off-kilter Nicholas Cage character study. He fucking carries the weight of this film on his shoulders. Herzog knows what he's capable of and I think Cage should definitely choose more roles that require him to just be eccentric and absurd... since that's what he's good at. Cage finds a perfect balance between weird-as-fuck and batshit crazy. There's a scene between him, Xzibit and a loanshark with his cronies that pretty much sums up the entire film's tone... and it's one of the best scenes I've seen in a while. Any time you make a movie and put Nicholas Cage in the same shot as Xzibit and someone breakdancing deserves 4 stars. Because Val Kilmer shows up in this, I give it an extra half of a star.
Toy Story 3 (2010) = 5/5
The first Toy Story introduced a really original story. Part 2 sort of tried to build momentum on that same story and failed, at least for me. But part 3 is where this movie really triumphs. It's essentially the same plot structure: toys having adventures. Kind of interesting actually, the idea of toys and their role in society and in this film: play things that are usually played with by children are actually being played with by themselves. There's a really entertaining, but dichotomous, introduction in the film that has Andy playing with the toys... but it's set in his imagination, so we see a train track, explosions, car chases, Woody on horseback, etc. You see these toys being played with and in action in a fantasy setting, void of any reality. Then juxtapose that with how they react to reality, which is the same adventure, except they are bound by the rules of reality... except they're not... nobody is playing them, they're playing themselves. Haha, I'm getting ahead of myself and detracting from a simple critique and that it's a really entertaining, heartbreaking and oddly human film. One of the best Pixar films and definitely the best out of the franchise. There's a scene towards the end where it seems the film will end in the toys' demise, and the most heartbreaking humanely conditional moment occurs where all the toys hold hands and accept their impending death. That's not a toy thing. That's a human thing. It was deep shit. Pixar tends to input some really intense themes and subject matter in their films, more suited for PG-13 films than G films. But I guess that's their way, of both, expanding markets and demographics, while inputting some tough, but valuable, lessons for the younger audience.
