Trailer: "Dark Shadows"

Despite being in a state of completion for quite some time, Tim Burton's Dark Shadows, an adaptation of the famous cult TV series has been kept, well, in the shadows. Until recently, only a handful of production still have emerged, with nary a poster or trailer in sight until last night. It might seem like a bad sign, considering that the film opens just under two months from now (May 11th), but to an extent it makes sense. May marks the high-gear kickoff to summer blockbuster season, and May 2012 looks pretty stacked with big, more widely appealing films, namely Marvel's The Avengers. So, in a sense, Warner Bros. is playing it smart by aiming for a short, powerful burst of marketing right before the film's release, so they don't end up spending a bunch of money on a film that, on paper, shouldn't provide much financial competition against the likes of Marvel's super-hero orgy.

Thankfully, the trailer actually seems pretty promising, though I do have a handful of reservations. I've never seen any of the show, so I can't judge whether or not Burton's darkly farcical tone clashes with the show or not. Still, said darkly farcical tone is right up Burton's alley, and Dark Shadows looks like an opportunity for the director to make something in the vein of Beetlejuice, which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. I'm not sure most of the jokes are supposed to be gutbustingly funny, but I thoroughly enjoyed the laughs that the trailer showcased, particularly the bits with Eva Green, who looks like she's having an absolute blast as the film's villain. And, as per any Burton film, the production values look marvelous, and the generally higher amount of on-location and/or studio set-photography is a welcome change of pace after the nauseating CGI mess that was Alice in Wonderland.

All the same, there are a few shots in here that feature a sort of cheap, weightless-looking VFX look that contrasts with how nicely filled out and tangible the other sets come off. I'm hoping that these scenes are only a brief portion of the film's runtime, and that they're merely vestiges of Burton's work on Alice, because the man really does know how to work with his creative departments to create wonderfully textured worlds.

As for the cast, apart from Green and Helena Bonham Carter, I am a little worried about some of the other players, including, unfortunately, Johnny Depp. Burton and Depp have a great history together, but lately they've been slipping, to the point where I think it might be time for Burton to find another male muse (Bonham Carter is more than welcome to stay as his female muse, however). I'm also a little nervous about Michelle Pfeiffer, because her role seems a little too straightforward and stiff. The above-mentioned actors are all gifted at stylized performances, and it's unsettling that some might be getting past their prime and doing the same old thing (Depp), or not being properly utilized (Pfeiffer).

Finally, there's the plot. Frankly, I'm not expecting anything revolutionary, though I'm sure there will be fun in seeing Depp's Barnabas try to figure out the world of the 70s. What worries me more is whether the genre trappings and tone will elevate the "save the family business!" story line, or whether said story line will drag down the genre elements. I'm crossing my fingers for the former. Either way, though, I'll still be there first in line on May 11th, since it's been too long since Burton's last film, Sweeney Todd (now that this trailer is out, I'm going to start pretending that Alice never happened). And if this doesn't work, I suppose there's always Frankenweenie later this year.

Trailer Grade: B

Review: "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"

It was hard not to feel nervous about the fourth Pirates of the Caribbean film. With the completion of the original trilogy, a fourth installment seemed like too obvious of a cash-grab. And perhaps that's all On Stranger Tides deserves to be remembered for. Even so, I have to question the intensity of some of the criticisms leveled at the series' latest, now directed by Rob Marshall (taking over for Gore Verbinski). Is On Stranger Tides a good movie? Probably not. Is it a cash-grab? Absolutely. Does it deserve to be labeled a fountain of maggots? Perhaps that's going too far.

Taking place an indeterminate amount of years after At World's End, this latest (now standalone) adventure traces Jack Sparrow's (Johnny Depp) quest for the fabled Fountain of Youth. While roped into the quest somewhat against his will, Jack must contend with the ferocious Blackbeard (Ian McShane), his daughter Angelica (Penelope Cruz), the Spanish navy, and Captain Barbosa (Geoffrey Rush), who has since joined England's navy. There's also something in there regarding mermaids and their tears. Plot-wise, it's all over the place, hopping between mild character interaction, exposition, and action set-pieces, some of which are entertaining, others of which are just there. The Spaniards, in particular, are used to ill-effect. The film's climax, a jumble of swords and guns, halts when they arrive, do what they please, and then simply depart for the film to resume.

As Capt. Jack and everyone else make their way for the Fountain, there are a handful of minor laughs, and the occasionally amusing bit of stunt work. Special effects and stunts are, at the very least, the one area where On Stranger Tides is closest in spirit to The Curse of the Black Pearl, with a greater emphasis on more grounded locales, rather than massive amounts of computer generation (for both sets and foes). Gone are the fishy crew of Davy Jones, in are flesh-and-blood sailors and pirates. Mermaids are here too, probably the film's flashiest special effect, but they're handled with surprisingly little fuss. Amidst all of this, I couldn't help but miss original director Gore Verbinski. Whatever the flaws of Dead Man's Chest and At World's End, Verbinski does have a knack for creating memorable scenes, often with a fantastic sense of pop surrealism. Marshall's work here lacks any of that. He merely puts the script on screen, with nothing new. It's merely Verbinski, minus the style and giddy enthusiasm.

Yet for all of these changes that harken back to the original, too often the magic, much like the rum, is gone. The odd moment or two works, such as a sequence where Jack tries to seduce Angelica with a candle-lit dinner. But by now the Jack Sparrow character, the biggest reason to see any of these movies, has been taken as far as it can go. Depp still has fun with the role, but I couldn't help but get the feeling that even he is running out of quirks to give his iconic character. Rush, Cruz, and McShane are all perfectly fine in their roles as well, but again, there's just no need for any of this. On Stranger Tides, silly as it is, does allow you to get caught up in its world, but that's mostly based on any goodwill built up from the first three films. It isn't a franchise-killing train wreck, but it has nothing that makes it a must see, either for the casual movie-goer or a die-hard Pirates fan.

This is particularly troubling because, even as a cash-grab, On Stranger Tides didn't have to be so tepid. If the Fast and Furious franchise can suddenly earn positive reviews on its fifth go-round, why shouldn't a franchise with more memorable characters be able to do so on its fourth? On Stranger Tides should have been a true re-invigoration for the series, whether or not it spawns any sequels. Instead, it's merely a mildly amusing diversion that shows how far the series has fallen from the wholly delightful original.

Grade: C

"Rango" - REVIEW

It may be (gorgeously) animated and feature a cast of anthropomorphic animals, but one thing is certain about Rango: this is not a kids movie. The latest film from Gore Verbinski (the first three Pirates of the Caribbean films) represents a major comeback for the director, who was rushed and saddled with messy scripts for Pirates 2 and 3. His latest, written by John Logan (The Aviator, Sweeney Todd) is a spectacular and spectacularly odd ode to the great westerns of Leone and Peckinpah that relishes their cliches with a knowing wink.

Our hero is Rango (Johnny Depp), although he doesn't officially have a name for at least the first 20 minutes of the film. A lizard stuck in a tank, he spends his time putting on plays with the assorted toys. And right from the get go, Verbinski and Logan let you know that they're not out to please the kiddie crowd. Filled with nervous, rapid dialogue that makes references all over the place, the opening scene is surprisingly existential (Rango repeatedly asks "who am I?" throughout the story). Once a bump in the road (actually an armadillo) sends Rango's tank out of the back of his owner's car, set to "Ave Maria," you know you're in good (albeit eccentric) hands.

From there, Rango gradually becomes acquainted with the desert animals in the town of Dirt, all while a Greek (er, Mexican) choir of birds in Mariachi garb sing of his impending doom. The town is pressed for water, which has been drying up, and is the key to the town's survival. Many of the story elements are nothing new to those who have seen an old western (the importance of water is used in many, especially Once Upon a Time in the West).

However, in creating an animal-centric world, Rango gets to truly shine. The dusty wooden structures are remarkably detailed. In fact, the visuals are possibly THE key to Rango's success, and that's not a bad thing. In addition to the stunning animation, the film boasts master cinematographer Roger Deakins as a "visual consultant" (as do How to Train Your Dragon and WALL-E), and his presence shows. Animated films may not have actual "cameras" or "lighting," but Rango packs all the visual wallop of a master class in lighting and shot composition. As a script, the film is certainly funny, although not always as funny as it thinks it is. The visual design, however, is so remarkable in how it weaves animals into standard scenes of Western film making, and sights such as the town populace riding at sunset on the backs of roadrunners left a huge, silly grin on my face.

Helping it along is the fabulous voice work from the cast, which along with Depp includes Isla Fisher, Ned Beatty, Abigail Breslin, and Bill Nighy. Not all characters are fully utilized (Breslin, and especially Ray Winstone), but the film's flashes of eccentric wit and visual flair manage to make up for it. Best of all is a massive chase sequence involving desert rodents on bats that rivals the flight sequences of How to Train Your Dragon for thrills; if only live-action chase and action sequences could be as well constructed, edited, and staged.

Yet after such a long ride of older teen and adult-oriented humor and style, Rango manages to mess up a little in the final stages of the plot. After such fantastic, pander-free storytelling, I was longing for an epic showdown at the finale. Unfortunately, what we get instead is something much more kid-friendly, as well as slightly protracted. The film's final moments salvage it, and it's constantly aided by Hans Zimmer's excellent, Morricone-infused score and of course the visuals. But after so much delightful (and never superfluous) weirdness, you'll likely yearn for something more, well, adult, considering how much Verbinski and co. managed to get away with (including 2 prostate jokes). It's likely to go over younger kids' heads completely. For those looking for a remarkable and unique (in spite of the cliches) take on the Western, however, it's a winner.

Grade: B/B+

"Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" trailer

As much as I want to be excited for this, the trailer only makes the feeling of this being a cash-grab more transparent. Penelope Cruz looks fun enough, and it's always good to see Geoffrey Rush and Johnny Depp back together, but the overall feeling is that the franchise has become a little stale and tired. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong when the film arrives on May 20th, but for now, consider me disappointed.

"The Tourist" - REVIEW

When Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck's (The Lives of Others) latest project was given an earlier release date, and bumped up from March 2011 to December of 2010, it was taken as a good sign. Though there are exceptions, March isn't generally thought of as a great month for box-office intake, and considering that the film boasted the first ever pairing of Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie, the move seemed like a smart bet. But having seen the film, the studios behind it should have gone with their original release date. With lowered expectations, the film wouldn't be at as much risk. But by throwing it out in the holiday/awards season for everyone to see, the studio now gets to watch its film stand as one of the true misfires of the year.

Despite the pedigree of its director, the trailers only indicated that the film was meant to be zippy, twisty, popcorn fun. After all, when you've got Depp and Jolie together, you're probably aiming to turn a nice profit, and you want them in something accessible. And even though I spend a lot of time obsessing over awards season, I have nothing against "popcorn" movies in the slightest. That is, unless they simply flat-out suck, and unfortunately, that's the case with The Tourist.

From its opening scenes, where we follow Elise (Jolie) as she evades police forces on her way from Paris to Venice, the main word that comes to mind is "flat." Not even for an instant does The Tourist generate an ounce of suspense or fun. And even though the opening is forgivable, as the movie progresses, it only gets worse. When Jolie and Depp meet for the first time (on a train), they barely generate sparks. Rather, they sputter amusingly for a few minutes and then die out completely. So lacking is their chemistry that the film descends into boredom and worse, tedium. When Elise kisses Frank (Depp, obviously), it feels more like a story-telling obligation, rather than a genuine moment of romantic intrigue. They talk about their pasts; he's a math teacher from Wisconsin (Michigan? ah, who cares), she's the girl-friend of a man who's gone missing (and has also stolen nearly $1 billion from a London mobster). And like that kiss, these conversations also feel like obligations. Donnersmarck has talked extensively of his influences, namely 2005's Anthony Zimmer, along with classics like Charade. Yet for all of his talk, Donnersmarck and screenwriters Christopher McQuarry (The Usual Suspects) and Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) deliver very little.

And that's what's most disappointing about The Tourist: its total lack of ambition. For a movie that runs 1 hr 40 min, it feels as though a rather large segment has gone missing. The film's plot adds very little when it introduces an unexpected (yet still weak) twist about an hour in, and there's next to nothing of value in terms of plot points and details. If you're expecting a caper with the level of mischief of Ocean's 11, you're going to be sorely disappointed; the stakes are almost never raised, and when they are, it's minimal. Adding to the disappointment are the flat action scenes, and the indistinguishable goons that the gangster Shaw sets upon Elise and Frank. And, not to be outdone, the film also throws in a police force (headed by Paul Bettany) filled to the brim with incompetence. It's not as bad as the idiots in Unstoppable, but it's close. The only good thing is that it provides an opportunity for Alessio Boni (from the fantastic The Best of Youth) to show up, even if all he does is look stern. Worst of all, without spoiling anything, is the use of Rufus Sewell's mysterious, name-less character. When his role in the proceedings is finally explained, you'll be left dumbfounded at just how lazy the script becomes. Clearly McQuarry or Fellowes simply wanted to end the damn thing, and they do it horrendously.

As far as our leading man and lady are concerned, there's little to praise or harp on. Depp fares better and brings his trademark quirks and awkwardness to Frank, ensuring that a handful of lines produce a mild chuckle. Jolie looks gorgeous (albeit a bit gaunt) through the whole thing, but her only direction seems to have been "be glamorous and mysterious and...that's it." Everyone else plays their one-note roles with relatively little energy, and neither the lush Venice vistas nor the energetic score by James Newton Howard ever pick up the slack. As a thriller, a romance, and a star-vehicle, The Tourist fails on just about every level. Look for it to do decent-to-strong business opening weekend (although Voyage of the Dawn Treader could crush it), and then drop off the face of the earth shortly afterward. It's not worth the time or the money, or even a rental. It's not the worst movie of the year, but it's certainly not a good one, or even a remotely satisfying one. You'd be better off simply going to Venice and hoping that you'll randomly spot either Jolie or Depp there on vacation; it's likely to satisfy you more than this film ever will.

Grade: C-

Trailer for "The Tourist"

All in all, this looks like surprisingly standard normal-guy/girl-gets-roped-into-espionage/criminal-hijinks, (we already saw this with Knight and Day, albeit with the genders flipped). They're obviously banking more on the star power, which is something of a big deal considering that these two mega-stars have never worked together, let alone in co-lead roles. It could be lush, exotic (it's hard to mess up the visuals when the setting is Venice), and hugely entertaining, but I think we can scratch this off of the list of potential Oscar contenders, even with its director's pedigree (The Lives of Others).

First look at "The Tourist"

The first official trailer will hit tomorrow (exclusively on Yahoo! for the first two hours before it is sent to other sites). Originally slated for 2011, Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck's follow-up to The Lives of Others is certainly much more commercially friendly with Jolie and Depp headlining, but the 10 second clip, repeated OVER and OVER again for your viewing pleasure, doesn't do much to excite me. Granted, it's only 10 measly seconds, but Depp seems a little too close to Capt. Jack for my liking with that "aaaaaaaghgotta go!" bit. Maybe it will all seem less jarring in the full trailer, but considering the star power involved, I'd hate for one of the two leads to be a let down. Ah well, let's suspend trailer judgement until we actually see the trailer in question.

On tour with Angie and Johnny

The first (official) still from Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck's The Tourist has emerged, and aside from the lack of visible equipment, it looks just like any previous stills. The film, Donnersmarck's first since his Oscar-winner The Lives of Others (2006), centers on Frank (Depp), a tourist in Italy trying to "mend a broken heart," who crosses paths with a mysterious woman named Elise, played by Jolie (source: IMDb). The film is slated for an early 2011 release, which isn't the best sign, and it feels like the filming process on this has taken quite a long time. That said, Donnersmarck is no slouch, not to mention the fact that he's working from a screenplay by Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) and Chris McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects), which only adds to the appeal. Depp and Jolie are two of the world's biggest stars, so it should be interesting to see how they play off of each other as romantic (?) leads.

"Tree of Life" NOT a Cannes certainty; "The Rum Diary" and "Expendables" are

Oh Terrence Malick...just...why...

No, it's not 100% out; People lists it as a "possible shoo-in," but after sooooo much back-and-forth, it's not boding well.