Dub’s Take: The Island (2005)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


The best performance, in a film full of convincing performances, comes from Djimon Hounsou as Laurent, the morally-conflicted mercenary sent after our heroes Scarlett Johansson & Ewan McGregor. While it’s a character that easily could have been played by any generic macho movie touch guy on-reserve like Christos Vasilopoulos or Michael Jai White, Laurent – as played by Hounsou – has conviction, and commands attention. It’s probably the role I’ll remember him most for, even if he’s woefully sidelined in the third act – the film’s only real disappointment.

Anyone who wonders whether director Michael Bay (yes, THAT Michael Bay, love him or hate him) is capable of making something serious should look no further than “The Island”. Sure, Bay can’t resist himself in the handful of action scenes that are here – including a mid-movie showstopper that escalates from launching giant steel train wheels off a moving flat-deck, to hanging precariously off the edge of a giant logo at the top of a skyscraper – but they aren’t the film’s focus. Be that as it may, don’t think that because you aren’t getting the intensity level of “Transformers 4” that The Island isn’t consistently thrilling, because it is: Bay’s bombastic technique keeps the pacing kinetic for the 2 hour+ runtime.

The film’s secret standout is its script – co-written by TV showrunners Kurtzman & Orci – and the less said the better. Okay, so you might guess what’s going on before the cut-and-dry reveal by Steve Buscemi, and it isn’t necessarily the freshest story off the line, but the production finds new ways, right up until its climax, to raise the stakes – however predictable. It’s fun. It’s one of only a handful of films I’ve seen in theatres more than once by choice, and almost 20-years-later this most recent viewing was just as entertaining: my older, wiser mind was keen to catch all the tricks in the film’s first half to keep the viewer at arm’s length. Good Job!

4.5 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. Do you think such a high mark is justified? Can you not get passed Michael Bay’s involvement? Is he the guy Olivia Munn was referring to? Will we reach a point with A.I. when Ewan McGreggor’s forehead mole gets scrubbed from every film he made before 2008? Comment, why don’t ‘cha!

Dub’s Take: The Legend of Tarzan (2016)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


“Tarzan 2016” is a thing. What starts promisingly with Christoph Waltz & the great Djimon Hounsou squaring off is squashed once the title screen arrives, and conscious viewers notice the ‘registered trademark’ icon next to the logo. It still begs belief eight years post-release and reeks of corporate interference & franchise ensnarement. It’s mind-boggling thinking of what legal finagling forced such a decision – then you pause the movie on Netflix and it displays the logo on its idle screen without it. It isn’t even on the poster!

You can’t say the writers didn’t try to do something different: instead of another origin story, we open with an edified, middle-aged Tarzan, who retrogresses when he’s used as a pawn in the Congolese mineral trade. But then Waltz’s bad guy devolves into the one-dimensional schtick we’ve seen him do in every role since “Inglorious Basterds”, dragging Margot Robbie’s Jane from one set-piece to another while Alexander Skarsgård’s admittedly-shredded Tarzan is in hot pursuit. The action becomes the only point to the Sisyphysian push-and-pull, and the action scenes are a mish-mash of poor CGI & muted colours. While they’re thankfully not hyper-edited, anything in motion just looks like blobs – particularly the swinging-through-trees, which recall the ‘surfing’ from the 1999 Disney film.

The Casting Director got their budget’s worth, though. Acting is Tarzan 2016’s strongest quality, but was this caliber of work necessary here? Even Samuel L. Jackson had a chance to ham it up a bit, but he’s relatively low-key as the sidekick. There’s a five-second shot where Jackson lands on a tree branch and looks down, and he’s supposed to be hundreds of feet in the air but in reality it’s probably just a green screen beneath him, and it’s believable. I wish the cast’s effort had gone to a story with more follow-through: if not a “Birth of Tarzan” then maybe “Tarzan in Europe”.

2 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. Screenshots were author-obtained. Think I’m being too hard on Christoph? How about too easy on everyone else? Like yourself a good monkey movie? Planning to watch it before it’s “removed from Netflix”? Comment why don’t ‘cha!

the position of my said

A poem about driving somewhere specific very early in the morning.


mary-jane and acetaminophen:
that’s what i’m on
as i’m cruising one-hundred-and-ten
kilometers-an-hour
through an atmospheric storm…

yeeeEEEEEEE-HAAAAWWWWWWW!

i’m wearing year-old prescriptions i’ve hardly had on
to increase my vision like 8K VR
as if ’twere a simulator of Schrodinger’s Cat
and if i’m speaking unequivocally,
i can hardly see.
“where’s your position of safety now,
Mister Ex First-Aider?”

my radio is supposed to tell me what song is playing
but the signal is shit in the valley
as the RDS for the country station proudly declares
the Taylor Swift marathon is never-ending.
i suppose there’s a part of me who’s proud
he can’t differentiate between her works
like a true Swiftie could avow
though i still know what a Chalamet looks like
behind that bottle of Chanel number bleu,
interrupting a new episode of “Hot Bench” on the tube,
as much as i don’t want to,
and stand in observance of Lynch’s
over Villeneuve’s “Dune”;

Continue reading

Dub’s Take: Ferrari

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


Michael Mann films are divisive. They are Tarantino-esque, with sharp, heavily-stylized direction, punctuated by quick bursts of violence. But Mann isn’t a goofball like most of the characters in a Tarantino movie, and Mann’s films are often misrepresented as action movies. No Michael Mann film is wholly an action movie, and almost all take themselves far too seriously. Once again, with “Ferrari”, I was fooled by the advertising, which classifies the picture as a thrilling extravaganza.

What Ferrari the film actually is, is Mann finally embracing his dramatic side. If you go in knowing there’s maybe 15 total minutes of actual racing in its 2-hour+ runtime, you’ll enjoy it. In fact, none of its racing scenes are as exciting, empathy-inducing, or as well-framed as the ones in Neill Blomkamp’s “Gran Turismo”: barring two admittedly-spectacular crashes, I found Erik Messerschmidt’s camera is often too low to the ground in the close-ups with an over-reliance on wide shots – as the Oscar-winning cinematographer of “Mank”, he should have brought us within reach of those fast, pretty cars. There were also some abrupt transitions (the first dramatized race in the movie starts after a crash on the track that the viewer doesn’t see OR learn about until the other drivers are trying to pass it) that suggest the inevitable Director’s Cut is coming soon. While revisionism is part of Mann’s artistic method, I won’t need to see the movie again.

Great work by Adam Driver – I don’t usually seek his films out – and excellent pulsing orchestral soundtrack (in that Michael Mann way, just with actual instruments) by Daniel Pemberton. Mann should direct a straight romantic movie next without any tough fluff: he would probably be really successful at it.

4 out of 5

Poster sourced from imdb.com. Anyone interested in more of my ramblings on Michael Mann may enjoy this dissection of his first major film “Thief”. Don’t agree? Think the racing scenes were awesome? Big Mann fan? Sick of biopics? Comment why don’t ‘cha!