Chris Hemsworth Shines in "In the Heart of the Sea"; "Victor Frankenstein" is Odd but Fun
Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea" opens this weekend, hoping to snag the number one spot in the box office before the behemoth that is "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" opens next weekend. Is it just me, or has everyone else felt that the marketing for "In the Heart of the Sea" has lasted forever? For whatever reason, I feel like I've seen the trailers for this film for like a year now. When I realized it was opening this weekend my initial thought was "Finally!". At any rate, it's here and it's a movie that shouldn't be missed.
Famed author Herman Melville struggled to find success in his writings. When his epic Moby Dick was published, Melville solidified himself as one of the most prolific writers of our time. Director Ron Howard's intense film tells the story that inspired the grand tale. The movie actually follows young Herman Melville (Ben Whishaw) as he seeks out Tom Nickerson (Brendan Gleeson), the last known survivor of the Essex, a whaling ship that was sunk by an especially large, white whale. After some prodding, Tom decides to face his demons and spill the details of the harrowing story to the young writer. The movie then reveals the story of privileged Captain George Pollard (Benjamin Walker) and his overly-qualified first mate Owen Chase (Chris Hemsworth) as they embark on the Essex. The events that follow are soul-crushing, scary, and grand in scale. Nickerson, who was fourteen when he signed on to work on the crew of the Essex, struggles in his telling of the horror that ended up being his experience. It's a tale worthy of its fictional counterpart.
I'll be honest, the majesty of the ocean freaks me out. The idea that there's practically an entirely different world below the surface of the sea is breath-takingly scary. It blows my mind that men would risk their lives to hunt the world's largest animals in little, wooden dingys. To me it sounds stupid, but it plays well with the pathos of the story; the whole "man vs nature" thing. You can sense a tad bit of madness in Owen Chase, a lower class citizen who worked his way up to an officer's rank. Frustrated at the fact that in light of his own command he is to be the First Mate to a Captain whose rank was issued due to social status, Owen is desperate to complete the haul and make it back home safe. When the monstrous whale makes his debut, Owen becomes obsessed with the idea of killing it, mirroring the story of Ahab in Moby Dick. The "man vs nature" idea is ever present in this tale about survival.
From a technical standpoint, this movie was gorgeous. I was in awe whenever there were whales on screen. I'm sure there was footage of real whales taken, but the CGI was so well done you couldn't tell the difference. Ron Howard has this way of framing shots that I like to describe as "subtle epicness". Meaning the simple and extravagant combine into one in order to make a unique image. I was riveted in my seat just watching the whale have his way with the Essex and its crew. It was like a cinematic documentary in that the sequences were so realistically depicted. The whale didn't do drastically "Hollywood" type action, but reacted in a way that was believable, and that's what's so scary. Like, I kept thinking "This could really happen!" It's just beautifully crafted, with great writing, and fantastic acting, including some of the best work from Chris Hemsworth I've ever seen.
There's a lot out there in the way of movies, and with Star Wars debuting next week most films are going to take a hit for sure. "In the Heart of the Sea" is totally worth seeing and I suggest you do so. It was released in 3D as well as the standard format. I saw it in 2D, but I'm sure it would be amazing in 3D. At any rate, no matter the format, give it a shot. It's far more entertaining than one might think.
ALSO THIS WEEK:
The newest iteration of Mary Shelly's monster story has left an interesting aftertaste in the mouths of movie-goers all around. Of course I'm talking about "Victor Frankenstein". Written by Max Landis, who also wrote the story for "Chronicle" and "American Ultra", his version gives us a unique perspective on the story we all know. I've come to really enjoy Landis' work, although it's hard to say how much of his original writing makes it onto the big screen. He has a way of telling unique stories with equally unique perspectives. "Victor Frankenstein" gives us the classic tale as seen through the eyes of Igor, the mad doctor's assistant. Though every movie is not without fault, this film still entertains despite its oddity.
As I mentioned before, this story is told from Igor's perspective. We get to see a glimpse into his origins, being a circus freak due to his hunchback and Neanderthal mannerisms. Played really well by Daniel Radcliffe, Igor is freed from his circus life as he partakes in a redemptive friendship with the young medical student Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy). Through Igor the audience becomes an eyewitness to the emergence of how Frankenstein became the man - and the legend - we know today. The film is jarring, funny, dark, and yet silly at times. It's tough actually to nail down a specific tone to the overall film, but I was still entertained nonetheless.
Radcliffe and McAvoy play their parts wonderfully. You can tell they have great chemistry as they take on the mantles of some of literature's most prolific characters. Radcliffe brings a sense of ignorance and almost purity to Igor, something quite different than what we've seen in the past with that character. It works really well against McAvoy's maniacal and overbearing Victor. The two characters become more than just partners, brothers in a cause much greater than themselves. Across the board this movie was well acted. The story was a bit messy at times. My biggest qualm was the depiction of the monster. I don't think we'll ever get a Frankenstein film where the monster doesn't seem silly or over the top. The movie tries to take itself serious at some points (which is confusing, just pick a tone and run with it), and the monster is just silly.
This movie is a pretty straight-forward telling of the story we all know. The best parts of the film are when the story takes new ideas and runs with them. At the core of the story is the relationship between Igor and Victor. That's what you tend to care most about. We all know how this story goes, so shifting the focus on the characters rather than the plot points was smart. My favorite part of this film, and I won't spoil anything here so don't worry, is when Victor and Igor work on their "prototype" experiment. It's intriguing, gruesome, smart, and entertaining. I wanted more of that. It was like there were these few new things that just got thrown into the plot that were cool, but only served as eye candy to the rest of the story.
All in all it's a fun film. It's weird, and not really scary. It's marketed as a horror movie but serves more like a sci-fi than anything. The acting is great, the production was pretty good. The writing wasn't bad, though I'd like to know how much of Landis' original screenplay made the actually film. For what it's worth, it's a decent escape from the everyday drudgery. So, if that appeals to you than definitely check it out.
[images via
]
Comments
Post a Comment