"Legion" Review

You can almost feel the English language bend in trying to convey the ineffable awfulness of a film like "Legion." The girders of syntax simply can't support the weight of the adjectives necessary to condemn such lazy, irrelevant art. To the mercifully uninitiated, "Legion" is a religious action-horror flick in which God being "tired of all the bullshit" suffices for plot exposition, and Bible mythology is simultaneously demeaned and validated. However, it's mostly an unabashed third-rate "Terminator" knock off, which worst of all, is rarely even fun.

And campy fun was all I had hoped for from a film whose poster features the archangel Michael with a dagger in one hand and an automatic weapon in the other. How could you not have a sense of humor releasing an image like that? I imagined a gleefully irreverent action film that would be bad, sure, but nothing if not cheap entertainment. "Legion" instead presents itself with an embarrassing self-seriousness that quickly subsides into numbing boredom.

Still, the beginning of the film is palatable enough, with the expected expository introduction to each of our protagonists--a cliched smattering of patrons and employees caught at the "Paradise Falls" (Har, har) garage and diner--and Michael, who's opted for mortal strife over enacting God's order to eviscerate mankind. Fortunately for us, the best trick God seems to have up His sleeve is "possessing" individuals, which turns them into silly zombie/vampire hybrids with rubber necks, nubby teeth, and the power to walk on ceilings.

The group's first encounter with one of these creatures works if only for the sheer weirdness of the circumstance. The vessel is an elderly woman, and the "Looney Tunes"-esque shotgun sequence that plays out as she scuttles across the ceiling is tonally more comparable to "Drag Me to Hell" than "Legion" on the whole. Regrettably, what follows is wave after tedious wave of the possessed arriving (inexplicably by car), only to emerge as rifle fodder in a shameless co-opting of "Dawn of the Dead."

"Legion" may wear its influences on its sleeve, but never manages to forge the joie de vivre that make the films it's imitating so successful. The better part of the second act is bogged down by interminable character development, during which the cardboard characters bond in the most artificial, writerly way imaginable. Would you believe that a father and son make amends and a rebellious teen with a conservative mother falls for a black guy? It's groundbreaking stuff.

And the most egregious crime of the film is that it doesn't even pitch to its target audience. I don't generally care for schlocky action, but even I concede that the last thing "Legion" needs is relatable characters. I'm okay with the fact that we meet them as movie cliches, but as such I have less interest in how they feel than what they do, and for about half of the film, they do absolutely nothing. The finale then culminates with a knock-down, drag out fight between Michael and fellow-angel Gabriel, but watching them swing a mace at one another for fifteen minutes is exactly as exciting as it sounds.

"Legion" is the first feature from director Scott Stewart, who has an impressive history in effects work, though his talents in that field are conspicuously absent here, as is anything beyond the occasional, incidentally amusing moment or unsolicited laugh. The film fails to commit to its Christian apocalyptic premise and ends up feeling vague, boring, and muddled as a result.

Worst of all, Stewart is unfaithful to audience expectation, and "Legion" falls shy of even "so bad it's good" territory. It's a pointless, worthless January abortion that even has the gall to presume itself a sequel. If I ever see a "Legion 2," I think the English language might just snap.

1.5/5

WMD! (Weekly Movie Diary) - February 8

Chronicling my adventures in home video

“Dune” (David Lynch, 1984)
I’ve been on a Lynch kick recently, and despite every warning, wanted to see what he did with “Dune.” I’m unfamiliar with the source material, but the first sentence of the Netflix synopsis (“In the year 10,191, the world is at war for control of the desert planet Dune -- the only place where the time-travel substance Spice can be found.”) sounded intriguing, and the cult following it’s built convinced me that I would be uncovering a misunderstood masterpiece.

I couldn’t be more wrong. Roger Ebert put it most succinctly in saying, “This movie is a real mess, an incomprehensible, ugly, unstructured, pointless excursion into the murkier realms of one of the most confusing screenplays of all time.”

The film is over two hours long, and torturously paced. It simultaneously feels as though a trilogy is being stuffed into a single film and as if absolutely nothing is happening. I understand that there’s an extended cut available, but the prospect of watching an even longer version is frankly unthinkable.

Lynch works best on an intimate level, and it feels like “Dune” just got too big for him. We’re never properly introduced to any of the characters, and as a result, it becomes exceedingly difficult to care what happens to them. The sets are bland and the effects are unimpressive. To make it to the credits is a trial of will in itself.
Score: 2/5

Twin Peaks (Mark Frost & David Lynch, 1990)
I got the Twin Peaks “Gold Box Edition” for my birthday two years ago and never made it very far. I think I felt daunted by the prospect of committing to ten discs and soon retired the set to my shelf. I decided to give it another shot last month, and without the pressure of feeling obligated to get through it, found myself really enjoying it.

The second and final season is pretty widely disliked, seemingly as much by the cast and crew of the show as its fans based on the behind the scenes interviews I watched, but going into it with low expectations, I found it overlong but enjoyable. The big controversy is that halfway through the season, the crux of the show—the mystery of Laura Palmer’s murder—is solved. Some peg this revelation as the series’ downfall.

Personally, however, I think the season improves after the plotline is dropped. I prefer the weird, goofy, tangential second half of the season to the first, which feels like it’s artificially extending the Palmer case. Had Twin Peaks continued, I think it would have been interesting to tackle one main mystery a season.

The show is somewhat dated, and the acting and effects aren’t always top notch, but it’s still worth watching, and watching all the way through.
Score: 4/5

Carnival of Souls (Herk Harvey, 1962)
I think I remember hearing of “Carnival of Souls” in some famous person’s top 5 films list on Rotten Tomatoes, and with that in mind, found it generally disappointing. By no means bad, it’s a somewhat bland black and white horror film in which a young woman experiences strange phenomena after crashing her car into a river.

Mostly this phenomena boils down to an omnipresent ghoulish-looking man who haunts her at every corner (growing less and less effective with each appearance). Nevertheless, there’s some interesting imagery when she explores an abandoned midway, with a scene not unlike “The Shining” in which an entire ballroom comes to life with the waltzing undead.

The movie also has an interesting social dynamic to it, with the introverted protagonist being courted by a sleazy boarder across the hall. Their relationship really comprises the bulk of the film, and watching them interact is genuinely discomforting.

If nothing else, I think I just expected something more consistently bizarre from a film called “Carnival of Souls,” which turns out to just to be a moderately successful pre-“Night of the Living Dead” social horror film.
Score: 3/5

Primer (Shane Carruth, 2004)
The east coast snowstorm afforded me the unusual opportunity to watch movies for an entire day between shoveling, and the second film I watched, available via the Netflix instant queue, is the 2004 Sundance Grand Jury Prize winner, “Primer.”

From a filmmaking standpoint I was instantly underwhelmed by the low-budget aesthetic and DIY casting, but assumed the championed story would win me over. Its heady approach to time-travel has been insanely well received, but as the movie wore on, I felt my comprehension of the plot gradually deteriorate until I was left with nothing.

Determined to see the greatness I had missed, I proceeded to read 11 pages of a thesis essay explaining the plot of “Primer” point by point. When I reached a level of satisfactory understanding, I decided that I didn’t like the film very much. It’s convoluted to the point of absurdity, and the direction is muddled, disorienting, and inelegant. “Primer” is a brilliant film blundered.
Score: 2.5/5

The Birds (Alfred Hitchcock, 1963)
This really qualifies as a “I Can’t Belive You’ve Never Seen.” I’m shamefully poorly versed in Hitchcock’s films, and though I’ve seen bits and pieces of “The Birds” here and there, this past week was the first time I sat through it from start to finish.

What’s really surprising is how the perception of Hitchcock’s films differ from the reality. For example, the first time I saw “Psycho,” I imagined the shower sequence would be the finale, and with “The Birds,” I was pleasantly surprised that the plot is more about a blossoming relationship than a swarm of killer crows.

A huge chunk of the movie, and a huge chunk of all of the Hitchcock films I’ve seen, is just about the way people interact with each other. He chooses fascinating characters and his absolute control and subtle manipulation of the audience in shot choice and framing is incredibly impressive.

“The Birds” was far from my favorite of his films, but Hitchcock is undeniably a master of the medium.
Score: 4/5

Beetlejuice (Tim Burton, 1988)
Tim Burton should have stuck to comedy. I remember watching “Beetlejuice” as a kid and thinking it was pretty great, but was still surprised by how well it holds up ten years later. The script has a great satirical edge to it, and Burton’s weird imagery really works when he doesn’t want you to take it seriously.

Once we get into the “Sweeney Todds” and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factories” of his career, he still employs the same aesthetic tricks, but in a context where he wants us to respect his goofy art direction and silly effects. Not to mention that the CG nonsense he’s pumping out now is infinitely less charming than the creative practical effects in “Beetlejuice.”

There’s a lot of surprising cast members and terrific performances here from the likes of Alec Baldwin, Catherine O’Hara, and Michael Keaton. The movie is witty, fun, and reminds me why a uniform distaste for Burton’s filmmaking is an absolute oversight.
Score: 4/5

FARCE/FILM Episode 31: Legion, The Blind Side

--> Episode 31: 02/07/10 <--

Hosts: Colin George, Brian Crawford, Suman Allakki, Jon Mauer

Intro - 00:00

Discussion - 00:45

(2010 Oscar Nominations)

Top 5 - 10:55

Legion (spoilers) - 16:12

The Blind Side (spoilers) - 35:30

Events and Outro - 51:22

"Legion"

Colin:
Crawford:
Jon:
Suman:

"The Blind Side"

Colin:
Crawford:

'5 Fast 5 Furious?'

I’m a little confused as to how a series like “The Fast and the Furious” has managed to survive five iterations, and all I can come up with is that Vin Diesel must be working cheap.

All kidding aside, “Fast & Furious” did rather well for itself last year, and it looks like Universal Pictures gave its inevitable sequel “Fast Five” (no giggling) the greenlight on Wednesday. The film will reunite stars Diesel and Paul Walker with director Justin Lin (“Tokyo Drift,” “Fast & Furious”), screenwriter Chris Morgan, and producer Neal Moritz.

And as if getting the gang back together wasn’t reason enough to start revving your engines, the series is going the “Smokey and the Bandit” route this time around, with a plot that casts our heroes as “fugitives being pursued by legendary lawmen,” according to the press release.

At this point, “The Fast and the Furious” is only a step or two behind “Saw” as America’s most prolific modern franchise (not counting the likes of the Harry Potters), and it’s because Universal has found a way to keep the series profitable that we, if nothing else, will be continually amused by whatever silly title their marketing department tinkers up.

There’s not even a solid release schedule for “Fast Five” yet, but feel free to offer your own sequel titles below. Personally, I’m going with “Fast & Furious: Six Appeal” and “The Furious Seven,” (Diesel hops a DeLorean to Feudal Japan).


Thanks to /Film.

Podcast Update: We're Probably Seeing 'The Blind Side'

After much deliberation, it’s looking like episode 31 of the FARCE/FILM podcast will feature late reviews of “Legion” and “The (Best Picture Nominated) Blind Side.” Based on the Academy's recommendation, I’m ready to eat my words and give (Best Actress Nominated) Sandra Bullock a chance to win me over after what I consider one of the worst and most overplayed trailers of 2009.

I'll be joined by Brian and Suman on this excursion (pictured, above), which if nothing else, should prompt some interesting discussion. Also included on the show will be our comments and predictions for the 2010 Academy Awards.

Old Timey Religion and Football! Our All-American Episode 31 should be available for download early next week

"A Town Called Panic"/"Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs" Combo Review

I hate to keep having to repeat myself, but 2009 was a kickass year for animation. I said the same months ago having only loved “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” “Ponyo,” and “The Princess and the Frog,” but the past two weeks have afforded me the opportunity to catch the French language stop motion farce “A Town Called Panic” and Sony/Columbia Pictures’ “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs,” both of which expand the scope and breadth of last year’s animated achievements, if not necessarily setting the highest benchmarks themselves.

“A Town Called Panic” is a minimalistic affair, aesthetically not unlike Cartoon Network’s “Robot Chicken,” but without its “Family Guy” brand of referential humor. Rather “Panic” is a surrealist comedy of error: zany and unpredictable for the entirety of its breezy 75-minute running time.

The film, based on a Danish television series animated by Aardman Studios of “Wallace and Gromit” fame, begins with three characters (Cowboy, Indian, and Horse) and a simple premise: Horse’s birthday. Of course, Cowboy and Indian have forgotten gifts, and the plot quickly ramps into absurd comic situations including but not limited to the accidental purchase of 50 million bricks, a journey to the center of the earth, and a run-in with a mischievous team of scientists and their enormous mechanical penguin.

Okay, it may not be a marvel of storytelling, but in a way, that's kind of the point. What really works about “A Town Called Panic” is the kinetic goofiness of it all. It has a refreshing, careless vitality to its pacing that may turn off or annoy as many as it delights, but those who sync with its weird sensibilities won’t be disappointed.

Then you have “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs,” which if nothing else, is a pretty incredible looking film on blu-ray. Besides being a non-Pixar branded CGI outing, it had another strike against it from inception, being adapted from one of my favorite children’s books. The art direction as showcased in the trailer seemed overly cartoony, which clashed with my memory of the book’s illustrations.

Ironically enough, it’s precisely because “Meatballs” is so unabashedly cartoony that it ended up winning me over. It’s one of the only CG films I’ve seen that doesn’t feel like either an emulation of Pixar’s oeuvre or witless kiddie pandering. The dialogue is sharp and the visual gags are clever, but what I appreciated most was the sardonic bite to the joke writing. And it's no wonder coming from directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller, two of the creators behind MTV’s adult-oriented “Clone High” animated series.

“Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” is an immediately palatable film that for me achieves what some argued “Kung-Fu Panda” did last year in besting Pixar’s work on a level of pure entertainment. I wouldn’t argue that “Meatballs” is a better film than “Up,” but I do think it’s more fun.

I'm tempted to say these films close the book on 2009 animation, but with the Oscar nominations just released, there's still this "Secret of Kells" thing to check out. I'm hoping for another pleasant surprise.


PANIC - 4/5
MEATBALLS - 4/5

Best Picture Noms--Your Comprehensive Gripe

Nominations for the 82nd annual Academy Awards were posted Tuesday morning, and henceforth we, the internet, have conducted our annual foot stomping, arm crossing, and frantic, pretentious blogging (hey, that’s my cue!).

The big news this year is the expansion of the best picture category from five to ten films, presumably in effort to coax a more diverse range of moviegoers into tuning in, and to generally bait more people out to the theater. But honestly, beyond casting recognition on films that would otherwise be relegated to the outskirts of our collective conscious, the Academy’s new capacity is fairly pointless. Every other category still sports only five nominees, and there can still be only one best picture.

And if you’re the gambling type, then I’d suggest scrolling past the lucky films to this year’s honored directors. You’ve got Bigelow for “Hurt Locker,” Cameron for “Avatar,” Reitman for “Up in the Air,” Tarantino for “Basterds,” and Lee Daniels for “Precious.” This existence of this category alone is like having the 50/50 lifeline on “Who Wants to be a Millionaire.” You can bet that “Serious Man,” “Blind Side,” “District 9,” “Education,” and “Up” are going to walk away empty handed for the last award of the night.

So who won’t?

Most of the time, predicting best picture is a matter of gut reaction with acknowledgement to the hype machine, and my impulse is to guess “Hurt Locker” for tops in 2010. But I’m not certain. Much like a real “Millionaire” 50/50, halving the options only cuts out the obvious. “Blind Side” will be deemed too sappy and unhip, “District 9” will be discarded for fanboy fantasy action, “Basterds” is just too bloody, “Education” and “Serious Man” are too far under the public radar, and “Up” will win best animated feature and likely nothing else.

I have a feeling “Precious” will be too abrasive and potentially alienating to win, which leaves “Avatar,” “Up in the Air,” and “The Hurt Locker.” It’s hard to argue with what’s now domestically the highest grossing film of all time, but after Cameron’s film stormed the Globes, I think the academy judges will skew more highbrow. “Up in the Air” and “Hurt Locker” are both topical, but let’s face it, historically, comedies don’t have the best odds come Oscar night. I think the prospect of inducting an Iraqi war film into the best picture pantheon will appeal to the judging body more than Cameron’s 3D camera, and more than Reitman’s cross-continental comedy.

It’s hardly worth getting worked up over the Oscars anymore, though, and it’s been years since my personal favorite film has synced with the Academy’s. I’m satisfied with the selections given that “Inglourious Basterds” and “A Serious Man” made the cut, and in a perfect world, the Coens would walk away with it. But I know Oscar all too well, and he’s got his target locked and loaded.