Iron Man 2 (Jon Favreau, 2010)

Year 2008 is the year where 2 comic adaptation superhero movies dethroned X-Men 2 (Singer, 2003) as my favourites. One of them is the sequel to the reboot DC Comics Batman series, The Dark Knight (Nolan), the critical acclaimed and arguably the greatest superhero movie ever made to date. On the other hand, the lesser known Marvel Comics' Iron Man burst onto movie screens for the first time and won the heart even the most cynical fan. I, for one, from knowing nothing about Tony Stark, to collecting the metal armoured hero's merchandize products, I also delved into the comic's timeline history from other reading material, that is how the movie does to me. Also I think I am the minority who laud Iron Man over The Dark Knight. Neither the fact IM has a less epic feel (compare to TDK) does not diminish its status, nor a less threatening villain reduces my love for the movie.

So now Round 2, the often cited as the difficult middle part of any trilogy. Prior to watch Iron Man 2, I am anxious, I know it WILL NOT surpass the 1st movie's awesomeness, deep down in my heart I hope it will not embarrass and destroy the 1st movie legacy, that is how I lower my expectation. Like any 1st sequel bridging the trilogy, the protagonist always deal with bigger issues. Since Tony Stark revealed the real man behind the mask to the world, everyone wants a piece of the arc reactor powered armour suit. The pressure from US government, his rival business entrepreneur, Justin Hammer (played by Sam Rockwell) to its own gain, try to emulate the technology that help Tony to preserve the peace. That was not the only problem Tony is facing: the arc reactor planted in his chest plate that keep his heart beating ever since the near fatal injury, is slowly poison his body. Failure to find an alternative component affects him mentally as well.

Meanwhile, the romantic tension between Tony and his personal assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) continues. But sadly the ever present flirtation is best seen during the original movie. Remember in the past James Rhodes said to himself that he will wear the suit next time? Well, this is the time, he is the War Machine teaming up with Iron Man. Don Cheadle played the role of Rhodey this time, replacing Terrence Howard due to alleged contract dispute. I prefer Terrence's portrayal of Rhodey. He had a great chemistry with Robert Downey Jr. He can shows a straight face with doses of playfulness underneath. I am delighted by Mickey Rourke's performance as the villain, the development of the character, Ivan Vanko draws a parallel similarity to Tony Stark, but with opposite direction. They both have brilliant minded father, and inherited their knowledge. Only the contrast upbringing makes the difference.

Iron Man 2 did not improved from the 1st movie, I guess the director, Jon Favreau did not try to up the ante, I mean, ask yourself, how do you surpass the 5 stars rated Iron Man 1? You can't, *gasp* you can only stick with the Unofficial Rule of 2nd Part in a Trilogy as follows:

1) Bigger production budget
2) Larger casts

3) Bigger explosion (applicable, if any)
4) Expanding plotline
5) Darker tone
6) Main character faces bigger issues

Compare to its precedent, Iron Man 2 has less action, more talky scenes, I am all for that, but the middle act is sluggish, with direction-less feel to it. Too bad the drunken brawl scene was done comically, stick out like a sore thumb. The final battle is yet another machine vs machine, the only difference is the plural of it. Give me a more "organic" villiain in the next installment OK?

Like it or not, while we are waiting for final part of the Iron Man trilogy, you do not need a comic book geek to tell you that the appearance of Nick Fury, Agent Coulsen, the teaser of Captain America's Shield and Thor's Hammer are all part of the bigger Marvel Comics' universe. Plus the coming up full length features of Captain America and Thor, all these are and will be paving the path to the colossal The Avengers movie. By the way, can anyone tell me where was Stan Lee's cameo this time? Or do not tell me *another gasp* he did not make any appearance?

You may notice my comment for Iron Man 2 so far is less enthusiastic, yes i am slightly letdown by the latest outing, save for only the man himself, Robert Downey Jr. who once again shines as the womaniser billionaire, a heart of gold genius. His flamboyant body language, often carry a smirk on the face and never feel the need to hide his alter ego side. It may sound cliché, but Robert Downey Jr. is born to play high-handed Stark Industries CEO, he is the one who carries this movie steer it away to become another generic superhero movie.

1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

The Wolfman (Joe Johnston, 2010)

The Wolfman is the latest remakes of many Classic Universal Horror Monsters such Frankenstein, Mummy, Dracula. It is set in a gothic-feel Victorian era, Lawrence Talbot (a Latin Benicio Del Toro playing an Englishman), at the request of his brother's fiancée, Gwen, came home to look for his missing brother, Ben. He was found dead upon Lawrence's arrival with the body brutally mutilated by an unknown assailant. Lawrence tried to investigate until he was bitten by what appear to be the same culprit, the legendary werewolf who has terrorized this small settlement. He was rescued and miraculously recovered from the wound. By the next full moon, what have been suspected by the locals: Lawrence inevitably turn into a werewolf himself. At the same time, his feeling for Gwen is growing steadfast......

With Rick Baker, the make up maestro, one will think the design of the werewolf will be in safe hand. Well to be honest it's a kind of hit and miss situation here. While the transformation scene from man to beast was handled well, which anyway we are expect to see due to the advancement of the CGI technique, one can't help but notice the beast itself is too "human-like". Maybe it is just me, but i prefer the werewolf's snout more recognizable, like the one in An American Werewolf in London (Landis, 1981), where Rick Baker's make up won him an Oscar for the Best Special Effect category.

Stiff acting from A-List main cast cannot save The Wolfman as a howling, forgettable effort. Anthony Hopkins was the wolfman's estranged father but the wafer thin script did not flesh out the relationship between father and son. Hugo Weaving played a detective from Scotland Yard who was adamant to track down the whereabout of the beast. Emily Blunt provided the love interest as Ben's wife-to-be, but the romance part is hollow and too rush. It is perhaps the fault of Director Joe Johnston who should know he has a solid material in hand to build up the suspense, but no, instead we are served with lots of jumpy hallucination sequences using cheap scare tactic such as loud and sudden audio burst which kill the suspense mood. They even hired Gollum from Lord of the Rings to appear as cameo, no kidding. Hey, come to think of it, I think I also witnessed the fiery fighting between Wolverine and Sabretooth at the finale.

There are plenty of strong, bloody violence during those werewolf attacks. In fact the overdone gore implied the director's preference of making The Wolfman as by-the-numbers horror flick instead of say... a psychological horror thriller, at least they should have emphasize on the building up the suspense. The movie seems so eager to bring the first werewolf transformation to the audience and I wonder if the troubled production (allegedly due to creative differences), and a lot of the unused footages (end up on the editing room's floor), contributing to the poor pacing in the first half. Watch this movie only if you a real diehard werewolf fan while waiting for the aforementioned An American Werewolf in London remake.

1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

Legion (Scott Stewart, 2010)

How often is angel depicted as villain in movie? I can recall an androgynous Archangel Gabriel (by Tilda Swinton) in Constantine (Lawrence, 2005). This biblical related movie has a intriguing but flawed concept: Doomsday is imminent, because God the Almighty has lost faith in humanity, so He execute the annihilation of all mankind, (His intention is to "reboot" civilization again?). He sends His huge army of angels to do the deed with a specific target: To kill Charlie the waitress because she is bearing the baby who is apparently the saviour of humanity. She is trapped in a remote diner with a group of people. This is where the battle between angels and humans takes place at.

Two of the four Archangel are the main features here, Michael (played by the über-cool Paul Bettany), the rebellious cum merciful one and Gabriel (Kevin Durand) the one who ever so loyal to God. Michael defied God's command by protecting the pregnant Charlie from the onslaught zombie-like humans which possessed by angels. Legion echoed The Mist (Darabont, 2008), Dawn of the Dead (both original and its remake) where a group of people defending their fortress from the enemy.

If you can lap up God's method of wiping out mankind using angels instead of mass flood, then I suppose you will shake off the laughable image of Archangels Michael and Gabriel holding the firearm trying to shoot each other. Without revealing the twisted ending, this movie seems unintentionally ridicules God the Almighty as God the Indecisive.


In between the juicy action sequences, the dialogues spoken by the human characters are banally awful to say the least. I understand the idea of those chats is meant to provide the characters' background but clearly it backfired. Legion is a campy B-movie who hardly fulfils my so called guilty pleasure. Highlights such as the creepy old lady and the ice cream man are clever setpieces. As much as I fond of Paul Bettany, not even him able to salvage this sluggish end of the world kind of tale.


1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

Let the Right One In (Swedish) (Tomas Alfredson, 2008)

The legacy of vampirism are flourishing, continue to self-reinvent in big screen and TV all these years, Bram Stoker will be proud. This Swedish feature was adapted from the same name novel, Låt den rätte komma, literally translated as Let the Right One In. The author, John Ajvide Lindqvist was also hired for trimming the 480 pages bestseller into the script. The movie title is refer to famous vampire folklore, which a vampire cannot enter a residence unless being invited by the owner, or else the vampire will face the consequences as devastated as say, sprinkled with holy water or exposed to sunlight. I do not know whether the myth has been depicted in a movie before, but that key moment where a vampire breaking the said rule and what happen next is oddly heartwarming and powerful at the same time.


The setting is early 1980s, with the backdrop of cold landscape seemingly forever cover with snow in a small deserted suburban of Stockholm. Very often the calmly panning camerawork captured the serenity of under the roof. By using minimum editing, the gracefully waltzing camera movement soothe us with heaps of beautiful shots despite the occasional (mostly offscreen) grisly, bloodletting acts.


It is not a through and through horror movie. It is essentially a story about the relationship of two lonely souls. The pale looking blond boy, Oskar, has been bullied constantly by his peers, for reason I do not know, the introvert did not seems to fight back, he vented his frustation by himself, just like Robert De Niro did a "Are you talking to me?" monologue. They are destined to crosspath each other when Eli the little girl moved in to his next door. Eli said she is "more or less" 12 years old when Oskar asked her about her age. She also told Oskar to "hit back harder" on his bullies. From Morse Code-ing each other divided by party wall, they end up sharing their first kiss. Their relationship throughout the movie is ambiguity yet poignant. It is not an understatement to say the two young leads, Kåre Hedebrant (Oskar) and Lina Leandersson (Eli) gave a performance that will put most of the movie celebrities to shame.


By judging the superiority of this movie, the coming soon redundant american remake called Let Me In (helmed by Matt Reeves) will have a steep mountain to climb to match its undead sibling. To be able to survive from the embarrassing comparison with the original one will be a major triumph. Please take note that the subtitle is the heart and soul of the movie if you do not understand Swedish, please make sure the subtitle you are getting from Blu-ray or DVD are in English theatrical subtitle, such as Region 2 DVD from Momentum Pictures.

The ending keep me ponder whether it is tragic repeating cycles or happiness-in-the-making. To be honest, it work either way. Let the Right One In is a tale of adolescent friendship and love with vampire, it never hide the fact that the unspeakable horror seeps into the melancholic storyline, it is the testament to the masterpiece of moviemaking, much images from the movie stayed with me long after watching it. Flawless, unfathomable poignant, uncannily beautiful. Simply unmissable.



1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

Paranormal Activity (Oren Peli, 2007)

By now most of us have heard of what Paranormal Activity is all about. The much hyped up flick has become one of the cultural cinematic event of the year, thanks to the emphatic viral marketing and explosive word of mouth campaign. The essentially haunted house movie was wholly shot in amateur-ish home video style but minus the extreme shaky cam of Cloverfield (Matt Reeves, 2008). It tells the story of a young suburban couple, Katie (Micah Sloat) and Katie (Katie Featherston) moved in to a new house. Katie claimed she was by spirit since she was young. By using night vision ability video camera mounting on a tripod, the tech savvy Micah wanted to capture any supernatural incident while they are sleeping. Their pursuit begins to go out of hand as the invisible force makes its presence known to both of them.

This movie is similar vein to The Blair Witch Project (D.Myrick, E.Sánchez; 1999) in every possible way. However Paranormal Activity triumphs due to one important reason: The moment you have know the whole BWP shebang is nothing but a pseudo "found footage" celluloid, the scary-meter drops drastically. No, not this time, despite the fact without recognized actors and on a shoestring budget, the first time director/writer Oren Peli expertly orchestrate the unnerving atmosphere, turning the every day’s mundane stuffs such as door swinging, shadows, the sounds of footsteps, light switching on and off randomly that creep me out. The old school’s rule of fear for the unknown works well here.


Oren shuffled the plot between daytime mostly talkie sequences and night time terrorizing sequences, and the tension slowly built up as each night passed by. For me, it is a damn-if-it-does, damn-if-it-doesn't kind of situation during the nocturnal setpieces. Every time the video clip fast forwarding (clock indicated at bottom right) while one of the characters stood and stared motionless over the other character for an umpteenth period of time sent shiver down my spine. On the other scenario when the video clip was played at normal speed, I was dire to watch the screen as well, afraid of noticing any bit of movement. It just goes to show that you don't need gore and unnecessary violence to freak people out.


Unlike normal circumstances, you do not solely judge this kind of movie from the aspect of polished narrative structures and neat production design because it is meant to be an faux-improvised material. It is how much the impact from the movie provides that count. Paranormal Activity should soar to higher recognition if it was not letdown by the lead characters' repetitive monotonous dialogues during the daytime sequences. Having said that, it actually did serve a purpose being a boring but authentic homemade video.

1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

Avatar (James Cameron, 2009)

Oh Mr. James Cameron, where art thou? Your disappearance from the movie-dom seems like an eternity since you sink the big ship years ago. To make a comeback following up your most successful movie seems like a mountain to climb. I am aware all these years you are waiting for the technology to be "matured" enough; waiting for the movie studio to grow some guts to allow you to flex your muscles.

And here we are, the long awaited, 12 years in the making sci-fi epic. A movie that fully utilize the most groundbreaking technology so far, an entire new world was created using photo realistic CGI, blending actors with motion capture animation technology. One of the most expensive movies ever made to date, and certainly the most ambitious one even by James Cameron's standard.

Avatar is best described as Dances With Wolves (Costner, 1990) meet Pocahontas (Gabriel & Goldberg, 1995) in another world. It is year 2154, a large non-government corporation (akin to Aliens' Weyland-Yutani Corp.) are colonizing a moon called Pandora light years away from Earth. They wish to drive away the native inhabitants Na'vi, a blue skin, 10 feet humanoid away so that they can mine the invaluable mineral found on that moon, before they use Plan A (read: full scale war), they create an avatar to assimilate into their tribe, to study them; to educate them. This avatar is a hybrid DNA of human and Na'vi, to enable human participant to remotely control their avatar to explore the harsh and unknown territory of Pandora. The way of how all these Avatars work, just think of how Neo and co. plug into the simulated reality of The Matrix except here in Pandora, everything is real..... Well, you get the idea.

Jake Sulley (by Sam Worthington), a former Marine paralysed below the waist, came in to the Avatar Project replacing his twin deceased brother. Jake (his avatar with his consciousness) met a female Na'vi, a tribe's princess, Neytiri (by Zoe Saldaña with the help of motion-capture technique). Both of them did à la John Smith-Pocahontas by the time the Corporation execute Plan A, prompting Jake to make a tough decision on which side he is taking.

Avatar suffered from a rare James Cameron's missing trademark: Lack of a strong character(s) that I normally root for. For a movie clocked in at 2 hours 40 minutes, it is a cardinal sins committed by J.C. not to offer us any real depth in all major characters, not even Sigourney Weaver (who played Dr. Augustine as a leader of the Avatar Project and a mentor to Jake) is at her usual best. Do not even mention the one dimensional, stereotype chief villain. Only Zoe Saldaña’s Neytiri deserved some praises. Maybe I am too busy enjoying all the gorgeous visual stuffs.

The experience of watching this movie is similar to dating a beautiful face-surgical constructed, breast enhanced woman except she is an empty vessel once you are close to her. It is far from Cameron's best (Terminator 2 takes the crown, follow by Aliens (1986)), yet it has firmly become the beacon of future movie making because it raises the benchmark of 3D CGI in a movie format.

Avatar is a special effect-driven movie, truly a case of style over substance. Although almost 20 years on since I first watch his T2: Judgement Day (1991), I am still in awe at that superb crafted movie even after the umpteenth times of viewing. J.C. is always so great at crafting a solid story that enhances the visual effect even more, but he missed it this time with his own superficial script and the afore-mentioned lack of strong characters. Just like most eye candy movie, it is full marks for the looks but underneath is an aura-less chassis.


1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List

Orphan (Jaume Collet-Serra, 2009)

The theme of devilish behaviour under the disguise of innocent face children have been brilliantly executed in the past. This latest thriller is produced by Dark Castle Entertainment, which specialize in making horror movies such as House of Haunted Hill (Malone, 1999) and The Reaping (Hopkins, 2007). It focus on a young married couple, Kate (Vera Farmiga) and John Coleman (Stellan Sarsgaard). They are rebuilding their frail relationship after a series of setbacks. Such as very early on we find out Kate suffered from delivered stillborn baby recently and still haunted by it. Despite they have had two children, they decided to adopt another to ease the pain of losing their 3rd child.

Enter the matured looking 9 years old orphan, Esther, who is more than meet the eyes. From the movie trailer and poster we just know something is not quite right about Esther the orphan. But nothing prepares us for her wickedness, as she turn from a nice little girl to manipulative psychopath with a terrifying secret. That secret turns out to be a chilling sucker punch to say the least. I will not disclose the twist of course, you will be guessing about Esther’s origin, be it supernaturally or “realistically”. I would say the twist surrounding Esther's origin is plausible, at maybe 1 out of 50 million chances, yeah right!

It is absolutely essential for evil child character to be portrayed remarkably; else the movie loses its appeal. This is where Orphan shines the most. There is not one shred of doubt that the brightest star in Orphan is in the shape of 12 years old actress Isabelle Fuhrman. Her debut performance is convincing, matured and most of all, more terrifying than Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers roll into one.

This scary-fest add nothing groundbreaking to the horror/thriller genre (nowadays who does?). Despite some cliché-ridden bit and a little too cardboard-ish husband and wife characters for my liking, I managed to soak up the scary atmosphere at some vital moments. Orphan the movie certainly hits my primal fear, the thought of bringing home some evil adopted child.

1 star = Pathetic, SowYau feel ashamed of watching it
2 stars = Off the mark material, approach with caution
3 stars = Generally good, you should watch it if it's your favourite genre
4 stars = excellent, strongly recommended
5 stars = A classic status? only time will tell. But it is definitely in SowYau's Hall of Fame List