Lucy: A hot mess of intelligent musings

A smart thriller with little identity and poor execution puts Lucy on the road to nowhere.

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV): Get some aggressive,action-packed trailers to showcase a sci-fi / fantasy sweetheart Scarlet Johannsen with super-powers and the magic just happens. Doesn’t it? An original (sounding) idea and a big budget sci-fi screenplay with a couple of heavy box office hitters should have been gold but the story of “Lucy” is a solid swing and a miss. and if we are talking about the continuity of the trailer’s promise and the final film, that would be strike two. What do you say, Ponty? Did you have any Continuity thoughts for this movie? 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): Lucy seems to be an original story Vader…but I was very much reminded of “Transcendence,” even down to the Morgan Freeman appearance. Apparently going “everywhere” is all the rage these days… everybody’s doing it.

ACTING, DIRECTING AND CASTING 

AV: Lucy needed a complete screenplay re-write to become a movie that would matter. The pacing was a mess. The tempo was a train wreck and the direction, oh P-Man, the direction. While the concept was VERY good, running complimentary imagery to run in tandem with the  storytelling was a truly unique idea. One that was handled very badly. The fast cuts, the out-of-synch pacing made what could have been movie gold a veritable train wreck. Morgan “Voice of God” Freeman and Scarlet “Black Widow” Johansen are two box office titans who could have almost carried this murky movie idea forward. 

TP: Honestly, I like Scarlett Johansson better when she’s wearing black tights and hanging out with Captain America. This role just didn’t have enough depth for her to shine (except for the very beginning) and her performance seemed somewhat flat as the film progressed. I get that she was becoming something more than human, but she didn’t make me care. It seems these days Morgan Freeman is being used just to fill theater seats. His role was (once again) cursory and didn’t allow for the use of his considerable acting skills. Most of all what was wrong with this film began and ended with the script and not even the best talent can overcome that. 

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: Expected effects for Lucy I’m afraid old friend. There are a few moments of visual effects brilliance, but for the most part there were the standard, entry level effects that did little more than push the story forward. The ‘super AI ultra computer’ that moved amorphously in black with ominous red back lighting was cool but did little for the film in the end. 

TP: The special effects were good, but nothing we haven’t seen before. I think they made better use of the analogous footage of wildlife than they did with the actual effects. Some of the scenery clips were amazing, but didn’t really advance the story (as if anything could). With no breakthroughs in effects, no really breathtaking effects… I think this part of the film was a missed opportunity to compensate for the story.

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: Lucy was a movie that just wasn’t finished baking, Pontificator. Yep, director Luc “The Professional” Besson could have had a stellar flick on his hands but this film just felt rushed and thrown together. Hardly Scarlet or Morgan’s finest hour, this movie toyed with some great concepts that were never quite realized. The onscreen countdown to the amount of brain capacity Lucy was able to access throughout the film became predictable and annoying. It would have been better as a running count-up clock that was cycling up at the lower right corner of the screen. 

Whether it was the techinicolor space explosions in Scarlet’s bloodstream or her decomposing cell-restructuring in an airplane lavatory, the movie just seemed like it was a bunch of first or second takes. An excellent story arc in these days of the coming singularity, we get no sense of impending danger of any kind. The poor plot and dialed-in acting made for a movie that was one the summer’s biggest disappointments. Even the film’s end message was cryptically frustrating… “[we were gifted with life a million years ago now you know what to do with it.]” No, Lucy. No, I don’t. Unless, of course, it is to NOT make a poorly written, under performing film. 

TP: I can only imagine the number of people that just didn’t get this film Vader. There were people actually walking out of the theater during the film when I went to see it. The science (or pseudo science) was very heavy and detracted from the overall enjoyment. I mean, if I have to sit and ponder what I’m being told, it’s taking away from the following seen (cause I’m pondering). Some parts of the film just didn’t make sense…like why even leave the drug kingpin alive after you kill all his personal guards, stick knives in both his hands, and rape his mind for information? Increased brain power and intellect makes this a good idea? How about later when you are nearing godhood, and you don’t just wipe put all the bad guys so you can conduct your business unmolested? Instead you leave the task to an ill-equipped and outgunned police force? Speaking of guns…should I take this film as a sign that in Europe you can walk around with guns visible and nobody will even blink at the spectacle? I’m sorry, but there is no amount of explosions or displays of power that can cover up such huge plot holes.

ON SEQUELS

AV: What would be the point? Seriously? Just... no.  

TP: I’m hoping they let this one rest in peace and don’t attempt to clarify this film with another one. Leave us all confused and scratching our heads… so at least that way we are thinking about it instead of it being forgotten as soon as we leave the theater.

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates Lucy: In the footprint of this movie one can easily see the earmark of greatness. But no one watches a movie for what it could have been. The movie is somewhat entertaining but is a mere shadow of what the movie’s trailers and ad campaign had promised. The bogus screenplay coupled with yawn-inducing dialogue and nothing-new visual effects forces me to use only 10% of my brain’s capacity and give Lucy on 30% (3) of our total capacity of Busted Blocks. 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates Lucy: With plot holes big enough to drive a truck through and a shoddy script, there was no amount of talent available to improve this film. Despite some great scenery shots and interesting use of file footage, this film could only evolve five (5) busted blocks… leaving the other five lost somewhere in the script. 

Lucy: 4 / 10 Busted Blocks

Me, Watch: I, Frankenstein

With monstrous special effects and a budget that would make any village restless,  I, Frankenstein lumbered into theaters this January. 

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV): This is not the Frankenstein’s monster I grew up with, Ponty, though this newly re-imagined look is curiously compelling. Mary Shelly’s original fiction about a scientifically reanimated corpse was a cautionary tale to the science community and society at large. The subtext was this; when women create life it is of the natural order of nature and life. When man creates lives, you get… well a monster. Sadly, Frankenstein is still a story that men are still butchering nearly 200 years later since this movie has nothing to do with Shelley’s anonymously published tale originally published in 1818. 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): I have never read the comic graphic novel this film is based on and know this film bares no resemblance to Mary Shelly’s classic. That said, I found the idea to be intriguing even though it wasn’t nearly as interesting as it could have been. 

CASTING, DIRECTING & ACTING

AV: As for acting, there just isn’t any in this film. The casting could have been far worse than Aaron Eckhart and Bill "Are you sure this isn't Underworld" Nighy. And while Yvonne "Killer Elite" Strahovski is easy on the eyes, I'm not altogether sure what role she's supposed to play. Damsel in distress? Naive, well-meaning doctor? Deceived do-gooder? Confusing at best. Sadly, though Eckhart is not necessarily a believable re-animated monster, he does hold a menacing sort of air. The direction was undeniably dark and with lots of sweeping wide-angle shots for me to lap up the big battle sequences. The camera does a solid job of keeping the effects shots prominent. 

TP: Aaron Eckart takes a crack at being the action hero… and I’m not so sure he sold audiences. He has always been a capable actor, I’m just not so sure this was the role for him. Bill Nighy is one of my favorites. No matter what he plays in, he brings something special to the screen and his role here was reminiscent  of his head vampire role in Underworld. Truth be told, there were really no standout performances and the rest of the cast seemed rather two dimensional for me. Never once was I vested in anyone in the film… just intrigued by what Bill Nighy was going to say or do next.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: Good solid, explosions, CGI-built environments and great-looking Gargoyles (you know, you gotta have Gargoyles, Ponty!), the visual effects are solid though I must say… really nothing new. And what the hell (literally) was up with the demons? Their looks, make-up and transformations were all tired and lazy, as if they were all after thoughts. That’s not a good sign for a flick that is trying to sell me on an eye-candy experience. 

TP: There was no new ground broken in this film, but it also didn’t completely screw the FX up either. I found them passable and actually entertaining. The contrast between “descending” and “ascending” was nice and there was one scene where the use of slow motion was done better than I’ve seen it done in a long time. The fights were predictable, but there was one in particular that was obviously well rehearsed and practiced to perfection as I sat wondering why most fight scenes in films I watch won’t invest such effort. Overall, good effects.

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: This movie is the culmination of the writers, SFX artists, producers and even some of the actors from the famed Underworld series. Pontificator, I can sniff out made-for-sequel films from here to Transylvania and this one even ends with a monolithic, 'more to come' feel as the main character's epilogue delivers voice over that is unimpressive and foreboding. He does not have much to say about a senseless story involving demons and gargoyles that is both hard to follow and confusingly trite. The title of the film suggests the monster has fragmented speech but throughout the film, Eckhart's overly handsome 'monster' is articulate, intelligent and resolute. Mixed signals at best. 

TP: Ah Vader…I’m wishing I had something good to say, but instead I have a couple of complaints. Although I liked the idea of the story, the classic good versus evil with the monster of Frankenstein caught in the middle, there were some story elements that just didn’t make any sense… at all. Terra, the human doctor tasked with replicating the process that created Adam (Frankenstein’s monster) has just been told that her world is going to be overrun with demons… indeed, sees proof that they exist after helping Adam defeat one, but still starts the process that will unleash hundreds of thousands of them on Earth to try and reanimate her colleague that has just been killed? Umm… they weren’t lovers, and even so, she’s going to hand the world over to the demons for him? Dumb. Leonore, the head Gargoyle, finds the thousands of demons I just spoke of, in the middle of the reanimation process… and orders the two other other Gargoyles with her to start destroying them… one by one? Say what? How about just destroying the machine that they are all hooked up to and stop the reanimation sequence? Wait… that makes too much sense.

ON SEQUELS

AV: You could tell from this movie’s narrative that it has “Trilogy” written in its DNA. I believe screenplays are already written for follow-up installments of I, Frankenstein. Based loosely on the fairly decent Darkstorm Comic's graphic novel and series written by Kevin Grevioux, there is a great deal of source material for this story, and if I know Hollywood–they will systematically ignore every bit of it. P-Man, how say you? 

TP: While the idea was good, the delivery wasn’t nearly good enough to sink a single dime into another go round. Please, don’t try to bring this back to life.

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates I, Frankenstein: Swing and a miss, Hollywood. TIME Magazine Online reviewed this movie under the title "I, Frankenstein is NOT the worst movie ever made." I concur. Its fun to look at, a great idea (that gets fundamentally butchered as soon as the film begins) and has promise for future installments. Unfortunately, the absence of story, plot or acting (not to mention common sense) as well as a screenplay that assumes the audience is a group of over-stimulated 8-year olds, drops this movie where it lumbers. The movie simply fails to inspire. Still, I went to the lab and stitched together four (4) Busted Blocks and threw the switch still hoping for a spark. 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates I, Frankenstein: Not the worst film of the year, but certainly not the best. Although the acting was lackluster, and the story stalled in some sections, the idea was interesting and there was some entertaining scenes. This movie killed the blocks, but managed to reanimate six (6) of them for mindless entertainment value.

I, Frankenstein: 5 / 10 Busted Blocks 

City Of Bones: Complicated, No Bones About It

The world is a complicated place in
The Mortal Instruments: City Of Bones.

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV): As the first installment to the The Mortal Instruments series of books, City of Bones chronicles 15 year-old Clarissa Fray as she discovers a mystical world woven into our own, shrouded by magic, mystery and mayhem. Wrought with danger and peril at every turn, the young 'Clay' must accept her widening role as a Shadow hunter, a gifted slayers of vampires and demons. According to my 16-year-old daughter, this film is extremely faithful to the source material. Though I have NOT read the series—written by renowned urban teen fantasy writer, Cassandra Clare–my daughter has read the series several times over and she can indeed confirm the authenticity and alignment of the movie. 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): I have never read any of the novels by Cassandra Clare, so I have no frame of reference with which to compare the accuracy of the film... although I will certainly take your daughter’s word Vader, as gospel. It seems that there are a plethora of novels, so I assume there may be more films... which would help to explain all the loose ends in this one.

CASTING, DIRECTING & ACTING

AV: With a cast of mostly young, unknown up-and-comers, this movie holds a delightful energy. The more senior roles, such as CCH Pounder (The Wire) and Jared Harris (Mad men, Resident Evil) help lend their considerable acting chops to City of Bones, the direction, was–for me–a bit heavy-handed at times, but was remarkably well paced and the shot framing kept pace with the film's tempo and story arc. Director Harald Zwart (Karate Kid, Agent Cody Banks) handled a complex story line like a pro. Ponty, you're up… 

TP: The casting wasn’t significant as there were no really big names attached to the film. Lena Headey (300) got to sleep for most of the film and Jared Harris (Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows) certainly wasn’t delivering as he did when he was Professor Moriarty. If I had to sum up the rest of the actors in one word... unremarkable would be that word. To round out the trifecta... the direction of this film was all over the place. I struggled to keep pace with who was who and what was what as the film just kept throwing half thought out ideas and lame dialogue at me for the better part of two hours.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: City of Bones delivers a rich tapestry of visual effects set designs, CGI and audio effects. A few paragraphs ago I mentioned heavy handedness as a note on this film. Now to my eyes, the visual presentation is terrific but in all honesty, it is a bit much. There are sequences that are downright overdone as the "City" is revealed to the audience and the reliance on heavy effects shots is commonly a concern but this movie makes no effort to disguise it's true nature (as is the movie's story) and dazzles the viewer with an array of dizzying effects shots. Overall, I was impressed with the film's handling of SF/X. What did you think my friend? 

TP: Wake me up when they add a component to the effects that make them “special” Vader. Really, no new ground was broken and the stuff we’ve already seen wasn’t even done well. I’m sorry, but there is a barometer now for werewolves and vampires since they’ve been done so much...and the filmmakers should have taken notes. The demons were just ridiculous and made no sense as I wondered if they were just Resident Evil rejects. You’d figure the money saved on getting some talent would have at least been spent to dazzle us.

TAKING A CLOSER LOOK

AV:  While this moving fits snugly into a growlingly aggravating genre for me—namely the "special-teenager-saves-the-world-because-the-stupid-adults-can't" genre—I can see why this film and book series is so popular. It's the single 'mysterious' Mom (with brooding past intact) raising a rebellious, fiercely independent daughter in a broken home, with all kinds of hijinks and interesting characters, mystical and not-so-much, all around her. There's romance, danger and the hint of ancient evil infused in her family tree that dates back for eon's–literally since the distinction between good and evil was defined–which is a familiar and quite frankly, uninspired storytelling approach. In fact, there are no real original thoughts here but the story and the approach taken to tell it are passionate. P-Man, what did you think of this latest teenager-turned-savior adventure? 

TP: Ok... half the film to answer the “who am I question” and the other half to change the answer we finally got. I just don’t think the writers should be smoking the good stuff while planning these films. Character development was tragic and I never felt connected to anyone in this film... indeed, I began rooting for the bad guy just so it could all be over... painfully. I don’t think I have enough fingers to count all the loose ends... worse still, is I don’t really care. Simon was probably the most interesting character to me as he was the “mundane”...the regular human in the pack of half-angel warriors...dealing with repressed love as the desire of his affection fell for her... brother? We never get to see the resolution or development of poor Simon after his abduction and rescue from vampires... as he was obviously changing in some way from the bite he sustained. The bite Clary discovers, but says absolutely nothing about despite knowing it came from vampires (weird). Weirder still is the insinuation that Clary and Jace might still go forward with their feelings... even after finding out they are siblings (ugh). I guess I shouldn’t be surprised since her half-angel mother was shacking up with a werewolf (ugh again).

I still can’t figure out the title... as they spent about two minutes in the actual City of Bones and the significance of the visit was lost the moment they left. That’s like calling Star Wars “Star Wars: Greedo’s Revenge” based on his brief bar scene. I think the point of this film was NOT to make sense. 

ON SEQUELS

AV: This movie is sequel-bond as, down to it's DNA, it is engineered as the launchpad for a trilogy (or greater sum) of films. While this movie doesn't wholly appeal to the adult movie-goer, it conveniently–and competently–fills the hungry teen and tween market-space for fantasy and drama. I am interested to see more as the fantasy element is highly engaging and ventures further into more mature arenas than simply teen love fests between super-empowered kids who are 'learning their true destiny'. I know my daughter is certainly giddy for the next installment. Pontificator, what were your thoughts? 

TP: My thoughts Vader...? I know there are a plethora of books out there with more material that can be shown... I’m just hoping they don’t bother to show it.

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates The Mortal Instruments: City Of Bones: The truth is this movie is fun to watch, if not a hair overcomplicated but, according to my trusted–if not totally biased 16-year-old info source–this movie actually covers all of book 1 and part of the follow-up installment, City of Ashes. While not entirely original, this movie delights and leaves the viewer cued up for future installments. So having not read the series, this sci-fi/fantasy movie-lover gives The Mortal Instruments: City Of Bones seven (7) busted, if not somewhat enchanted, Busted Blocks. 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates Mortal Instruments: City of Bones: I disliked this movie. Granted, it wasn’t the worst film I have ever scene, but it sure was among the most annoying. The story was dumb, the acting was tortuous... and it didn’t even have the gall to make sense. It tried to slice it’s way to the top, but could only manage to cut four (4) busted blocks... and they didn’t even bleed. 

Mortal Instruments: City of Bones – 5.5 / 10 Busted Blocks

R.I.P.D. Off

The all-too familiar premise of Universal Studio's R.I.P.D. is unfortunately D.O.A. 

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV): Well Pontificator my friend, this movie, at best, was going to fight an uphill battle. As a movie, R.I.P.D. was at least somewhat true to it's source material. Ryan Reynold's lead as murdered police officer Nick Walker (or Nick Cruz in the comic), was convincing in a story that just shouldn't have been told so soon after a recent Men-In-Black installment. R.I.P.D. is a pretty creative idea with potential that could have been told with more flair if the source material was adhered to more closely. Thoughts, Ponty?

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): R.I.P.D. is an original movie that... wait, did I say original? Let me put it this way, the events and content in this film have not happened the exact same way in any film prior. With that said, there was an eerie familiarity to this film and although the nostalgia was pleasant, the substance was anything but. I have never read the books, but no doubt they had to have been better than this film.

CASTING, DIRECTING AND ACTING

AV: Ryan Reynolds has become somewhat of a falling stock in the vein of Hollywood leading men especially after the horribly under-performing Green Lantern and the no-fault-of-his-own developments of the mishandled Deadpool character from X-Men Origins: Wolverine.This movie suffers from an unfair–if not unconscious–comparison to the MIB franchise. Jeff "Obediah Stane" Bridges reprises his Rooster Cogburn personae (from True Grit) that is annoyingly charming. I just couldn't get past the old ball-buster cop paired with the unlikely and defiant rookie-ish cop a la Lethal Weapon series, and MIB. That was the.. ahem... nail in the coffin here. 

TP: It doesn’t seem as though Ryan Reynolds will be catching a break anytime soon. Although he is being cast as the comedic type, with hints of a serious side, neither of those sides show a good look in this film. Jeff Bridges is an excellent actor and his role in this film is a good one, even though the film can never do him justice. I can’t say this film was well cast, have to split on the acting and although I enjoyed some elements of the direction, it was listless overall.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: This movie could have had a moment in the sun with some decent effects shots but just fell like a corpse on its face here, Ponty. With a full array of 'been there, seen that' effects shots, I couldn't say that anything really 'changed the game' in the effects arena for me in this movie. In fact, one of the film's most charming details comes when we discover the real-world identities of the undead heroes. Ironically, this required exactly NO special effects and was potentially this movie's only spark of creativity in writing and screen presentation.

TP: At the beginning of the film, I was very much enjoying the special effects. The whole “action-stopped-in-time” sequence was entertaining, even though this wasn’t the first time it was seen in films, it was done rather well. After that, it all went downhill. The CGI was horrible, to the point that I began to wonder if the film meant to make a mockery of itself... as part of the failed comedic formula it was using. I watched this film in 3D, and it was a colossal waste to do so. As with other films that used 3D when it was first introduced, it was poorly done and severely underused.

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: The sad truth is that there just isn't much to R.I.P.D., Pontificator. We have had quite a range of experiences this summer with movies but this film just doesn't offer much to discuss, review or consider. As a stand alone effort, it has moments that make you smile but many parts of this film simply got too cliché, too mired in mediocrity and too dang familiar. That's my opinion but that's why I co-write this Ponty. What did you see when you peered into the microscope, sir?

TP: Well Vader, perhaps if a deeper look was given to this film during production, it would have fared better on the silver screen. I get the idea of making a fun comedy with great talent and cool special effects. I get it... but the makers of this film don’t. I really wanted to be entertained and went in giving this movie the benefit of the doubt. What I got for my openness was a rip-off of Men in Black, minus everything that made those films entertaining. There were times I felt like I was sitting through a Progressive Insurance commercial crossed with Ghostbusters. There were many areas where this film could have been better, instead it seemed to highlight everywhere it wasn’t.

ON SEQUELS

AV: In my estimation, it would take a monumental writing, re-tooling and re-imaging of this property to get it to ascend above where this movies has probably placed movie-goer's expectations. I simply don't see how something this–pardon the pun–lifeless could have any further appeal. Movie-making is a business and all businesses need to prosper to survive. In business terms, this film is a lead-loss. I say put it out to pasture... ehh, so to speak.

TP: When trying to define the essence of a bad idea, making a sequel to this film fits the bill. On the other hand, if wasting money and time is the desired goal, then there is no better endeavor than to make a part two to this. Really though... don’t.

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates R.I.P.D.: As a self-styled movie man I must confess this movie simply couldn't end soon enough. Even being shot in my home town of Boston, Massachusetts, this story was a dead-end (insert pun-induced groan here) and offered little signs of after (or previous) life. With a screen-play as dead as the story arc itself (I can't stop myself, Ponty!) R.I.P.D. lays just three (3) busted blocks down to their final resting place.

THE PONTIFICATOR rates R.I.P.D.: With subpar special effects, shoddy acting to a failed formula for comedy, facilitated by a terrible script and poor direction... this film kills four (4) busted blocks... without hope of any resurrection. I gave it the extra block for being filmed in our home city of Boston, Vader... and for casting Kevin Bacon as the villain.

R.I.P.D.: 3.5 / 10 Busted Blocks

After Thought

The post-apocalyptic After Earth weighs in as a far-future tale that is both gritty and adventurous in its mediocrity.

ON CONTINUITY

ARTH VADER (AV):  After Earth is an original screenplay that doesn't play well, Pontificator. In a summer loaded with already seen and as yet to be seen fallen-Earth storylines, this movie struggles to be relevant in a sea of standout summer sci-fi blockbusters. After Earth is eerily close in story to this spring's Oblivion (Tom Cruise) and the forthcoming Elysium (Matt Damon) among others, and fails to truly establish it's own unique tale. While it has sparks of legitimacy and even moments of brilliance, After Earth–for me–fails to engage the viewer and offers a rather empty overall moviegoing experience. 

THE PONTIFICATOR (TP): An original story, the only continuity to be followed are the events within the film itself. With that, I only had one question about the history in the film Vader, and that was the whereabouts of the aliens that originally unleashed the Ursa into the human population.

CASTING, DIRECTING AND ACTING

AV: With a screenplay that was clearly developed for the Smith family, this movie's big reveal is the direction of the controversial M. Night Shaymalan. This was slipped in way under the radar of all but the most ardent movie watchers. The downplay of this director's interaction was almost deceptive given M. Night's recent track record of under-performing films. The real story here though Ponty, is Jaden Smith.

Big Daddy Big Willie Style (Will Smith) was a stunning, believable badass general–Cypher Raige, mentoring his prodigy, the up-and-coming ranger-want-to-be, Kitai Raige (Jaden Smith). This film–which focuses almost 90% of it's energy on Jaden/Kitai fails because young Jaden carries neither the acting maturity nor the onscreen presence to make this character relevant. P-Man, how say you?>

TP: Will Smith is an excellent actor, without a doubt one of the premier talents in the industry. Here he is asked to limit his range (after all, how hard is it to play a rigid military type?) and still try to convey some embers of actual humanity. Jaden Smith did very well here, but again, the main role was to be constantly scared once he reached Earth. Since I was annoyed at the character throughout the film, I’d say he pulled it off. The direction of the film kept it moving forward, even though the story was predictable, the delivery still had some surprises.

SPECIAL EFFECTS

AV: In a movie like this, special effects matter. After Earth is wholly reliant in the effects as a story-telling element and they don't disappoint. The animals are captivating and look great but the winning effects shots in After Earth are clearly the environments. Dark caves, lava pools, frozen Tundra and impressively expansive Conifer forests make the world(s) of After Earth breathtakingly beautiful and remarkably both Alien and familiar at the same time. 

TP: For a film that doesn’t seem to be doing very well at the box office, the special effects were absolutely beautiful. The future tech was very interesting and didn’t come off as cheesy or ridiculous mainly because the CGI was flawless in these endeavors. Some of the animal shots, particularly the big cats, still didn’t sell me as real, but just real good CGI. The scenery was incredible and really showed how beauty can hide extreme danger. I was particularly fascinated with the smart fabric body suit both regarding the costume design and with the CGI that gave it “intelligence.”

TAKING A DEEPER LOOK

AV: For all the great hype, look and original screenplay, this movie was flat. It was very hard to care about the characters—even Kitai (J. Smith)—whose onscreen presence was whiny and stiff. There were moments there downright awkward to watch, notably the "I won't fail" speech on top of a mountain the character has with his Dad. Insipid, empty and vapid. Which in the end is surprising, both because Will Smith as Dad (both onscreen and for reals) and the fact that Jaden has acting chops he's displayed previously (The Pursuit of Happyness, The Day The Earth Stood Still and the Karate Kid). Hopefully this is just a bump in a what should be a bright and promising career.

TP: Aside from my earlier question about the whereabouts of the aliens that unleashed the Ursa to eradicate humanity, this film was more than just a science fiction popcorn film, it was a story about the relationship between a father and his son. Despite the box office reviews and ratings, I think there are many that can identify with the sometimes turbulent bond between a man and his son. Here, we have a boy that needs the nurturing of his father as only a father can, and doesn’t know how to get it any other way than by emulating who he thinks his father is. His father doesn’t understand the needs of his son, and doesn’t know how to fill those needs, even after they are brought to his attention. As much as this film is about seeking a way to survive and be rescued from Earth, it is about two people seeking each other and trying to rescue their relationship.

ON SEQUELS

AV: Just when you thought you've had enough of this lackluster story, After Earth 2 has a scheduled 2015 release date, Ponty. Personally, I am neutral as this film did NOT engage me emotionally nor did I hate it.  Backed by the entire Smith clan (both Will and Jada Pinkett Smith are co-producers and co-storytellers) this one remains to be seen (or unseen).

TP: The story completes itself and really doesn’t call for a sequel. That said, I can certainly see a door here that can be opened wide provided somebody wants to do a follow-up (and apparently, they do). I’m talking, once again, about the missing aliens that are responsible for the Ursa. Returning them to Nova Prime will have you instantly back into a Will Smith science fiction war film which can revisit the father and son dynamic of the first... or just be a visual popcorn action blockbuster.

RATE IT!

ARTH VADER rates After Earth: Even though it's a Sci-Fi wonder with incredibly interesting ammorphic, alternative material-looking tech, this movie never quite takes off. Shoddy, peace-meal storytelling, sloppy acting and an empty seen-it-before premise, After Earth–for me–offers little. In all fairness, I did like the movie, but nothing to write home (world) about overall. And even though fear is a choice, I'm afraid my choice is to release just 5 busted blocks for After Earth. 

THE PONTIFICATOR rates After Earth: A great film visually, although the conclusion of the story was predictable, the road to the end was full of surprises. The exploration of the father and son resolution was nice and added more depth to what was an easily predictable film. With great special effects and good performances, this film busted seven (7) untamed Earth blocks.

After Earth – 6/10 Busted Blocks: