"THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" (2008) Review

 

"THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" (2008) Review

Set in present day South Boston and Ancient China, "THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" is a martial-arts/fantasy film that was directed by Rob Minkoff. The movie also co-starred two of the most famous names in the martial-arts genre – Jackie Chan and Jet Li. The movie is basically about a South Boston teenage fan of Hong Kong kung fu films, who is transported back in time to Ancient China via a magical staff. There, he must undertake a quest to free the fabled warrior Sun Wukong aka "The Monkey King".

In a nutshell, "THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" is an entertaining action film with strong fantasy and comedy elements. Our two martial arts stars portray Lu Yan – the Drunken Immortal (Jackie Chan) and The Silent Monk (Jet Li), who help Boston teenager Jason Williams (Michael Angarano) free Sun Wukong (also Jet Li) from the clutches of an evil immortal called the Jade Warlord (Collin Chou).

"THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" is not perfect. To be frank, I only have two complaints about the movie. One, the editing by Eric Strand seemed rather choppy. There were moments when the movie lacked a smooth segue from one scene to another. And two, I found the backstory for Jason’s character rather clichéd. It seemed straight out of the rulebook for typical teen angst films that started with 1979’s "MY BODYGUARD". You know what I am referring to - shy geeky adolescent who is terrorized by the local bully, has profound experiences before successfully confronting bully in the last reel. Come to think of it, I saw something similar in the 2007 fantasy-comedy, "STARDUST".

Despite the above-mentioned flaws, "THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" is an entertaining movie. Jackie Chan and Jet Li proved that despite their different styles and approaches to the martial arts genre, they could generate screen chemistry together. Michael Angarano is perfectly disarming and funny as the Boston teen who finds himself in an unfamiliar world. Portraying his potential love interest is Liu Yi Fei as Golden Sparrow, a young female orphan who seeks vengeance against the main villain. Speaking of villains, both Collin Chou (the Jade Warlord) and Li Bingbing (Ni-Chang, the White-Haired Assassin) provided a solid villainous challenge to the four heroes.

On the surface, "THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" provides solid entertainment and martial arts action. However, I must commend on two matters. One, I really enjoyed the superb fight sequence between the two martial arts stars – Chan and Li. Whatever expectation I had about their fight, the two stars and fight choreographer Yuen Woo-ping more than fulfilled it. I have not enjoyed such a fight scene since Jet Li’s fight with Donnie Yen in "HERO" or the two Michelle Yeoh/Zhang Yi fight sequences in the 2000 Oscar winning film, "CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON". I would also like to point out the film’s cinematography shot by Peter Pau. The various landscapes of Ancient China, whether the characters are in the tropics, the forests, the desert or in the mountain regions, are exquisite.

In short, "THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM" is an entertaining film filled with solid action, drama, comedy, and great cinematography. As long as you are not expecting another "CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON" or "HOUSE OF THE FLYING DAGGERS", you will not be disappointed.

"CHARMED" RETROSPECT: (1.16) "Which Prue Is It Anyway?"

 

"CHARMED" RETROSPECT: (1.16) "Which Prue Is It Anyway?"

Most fans of "CHARMED" seemed to harbor the opinion that the series’ early seasons are much better than episodes that aired during the series’ last four years. After viewing Season One’s (1.16) "Which Prue Is It Anyway?", I can easily see how they managed to form that opinion. Mind you, I believe that this particular episode was not exactly the best of Season One. But it certainly seemed like a masterpiece in compare to most of the episodes from Seasons Four to Eight.

Penned by Javier Grillo-Marxuach, the episode began with Phoebe experiencing a premonition of Prue being stabbed to death by a man with a large sword. The Halliwell sisters discovered that their new enemy is a mortal named Gabriel Statler, a Lord of War. The sword renders Gabriel invulnerable to all mortal weapons and steals power and aggression from those he kills with it. Gabriel is after Prue because one of the family’s ancestors, a Warren witch named Brianna had bested him during the Crimean War back in the 1850s. To become fully empowered again, he needs the power of a first-born witch. Prue is specifically targeted, because he also wants revenge against the Warren family. To protect herself, Prue used a spell to multiply her strength by three. Instead, the spell created two clones of Prue. Hence . . . the title.

As much as I enjoyed "Which Prue Is It Anyway?", I had problems with it. One, I found the humor behind Prue and Piper’s discovery of Phoebe’s martial arts lessons tacky and slightly racist toward those of Asian descent. The episode also featured a bad moment for Phoebe to showcase her new martial arts skills – which only featured kicking and nothing else. During the sisters’ final encounter with Gabriel, Piper froze him so that Prue could kill him with his sword. Unfortunately, Phoebe chose that moment to kick Gabriel, causing Piper’s freeze upon Gabriel to end. Bad timing . . . eh? I am certain that Grillo-Marxuach had deliberately written the scene to unfold as it did. I just found it rather contrived.

Another problem I had turned out to be Gabriel’s motive for hunting Prue. As I had stated earlier, Gabriel wanted revenge against the Warren family line because one of the sisters’ ancestors – a great-great-something aunt named Briana – had managed to get the best of Gabriel during the Crimean War. The Warren family had been in America since the late 17th century. What was Briana Warren doing on the Crimea pennisula (which was under the Russian Empire in 1854-56) during that period in the first place? Also, Gabriel went after Prue, because the latter was the oldest sister . . . and the most powerful. Frankly, I found Gabriel’s reasoning rather limited. He could have acquired a lot more power if he had hunted all three sisters . . . one at a time.

But my main problem with "Which Prue Is It Anyway?" centered around the main villain, Gabriel Statler. Mind you, Alex McArthur portrayed the character with great relish. The problem with Gabriel rested upon his characterization as a Lord of War and his motivation for going after Prue. According to the episode, Gabriel and his sister Helena were members of the Lords of War, a clan of supernatural warriors dedicated to war. The Lords of War were also mortals who had started most of Earth’s wars throughout history. Why? Who knows? But this description of the Lords of War illustrated a major irritation for me – humans’ tendency to use fantasy or science-fiction as an excuse to distance ourselves from our flaws or fuck-ups. In the case of "Which Prue Is It Anyway?", humanity’s responsibility for its penchant for aggression is blamed on supernatural beings. Even worse, Grillo-Marxuach had never explained why the Lords of War even bothered to start wars. Perhaps the audience was simply expected to believe that Gabriel and his kind want to start chaos because they were evil. This seemed like storytelling for eight year-olds and I never bought it.

Despite its flaws, "Which Prue Is It Anyway?" turned out to be a pretty damn good story. One of the consequences that resulted from Gabriel’s witch hunt resulted in the creation of the two Prue clones. This situation provided comedic gold for the episode. As stated earlier, Prue had cast a spell to triple her power and ended up inadvertently creating two clones of herself – a perky Prue (Pink Sweater) who possessed an overbearing manner masked by a cheerful demeanor; and a sensuous Prue (Blue Sweater) with an intense penchant for male attention. Both Prue clones provided some hilarious moments – especially with Pink Prue. But the two clones also provided moments of poignancy when the real Prue was forced to feel the pain that each clone experienced while being stabbed by Gabriel’s sword. The expression in Andy Trudeau’s eyes spoke a thousand words when the good police inspector discovered Pink Prue’s body in the city morgue.

I certainly found no fault in the performances featured in this episode. Holly Marie Combs and Alyssa Milano gave solid and humorous support as their characters (Piper and Phoebe Halliwell) dealt with Prue’s alter egos. Ted King (a great favorite of mine) did an excellent job of conveying Andy’s grief over the death of Pink Prue and his suspicions that something was amiss with the Halliwells later in the episode. It was nice to see Bernie Kopell ("GET SMART" and "THE LOVE BOAT") as the city morgue’s sarcastic coroner. Both Alex McArthur and Shannon Sturges gave first-class performances as the evil Statler siblings – Gabriel and Helena. I also have to give them kudos for hinting an incestuous relationship between brother and sister without being too obvious. Apparently, they had failed to be a little more subtle for even Blue Prue managed to pick up on their incestuous vibe:

"And Gabriel has this weird binding passion for Helena. So, if we grab her we can use her as leverage. A sword for his sister."

I also have to compliment McArthur for his exuberant portrayal of Gabriel. I may have found the character’s background as a Lord of War rather puerile, but I cannot help but admire the energy that McArthur infused into the role.

One could not discuss "Which Prue Is It Anyway?" without mentioning the woman of the hour – Shannen Doherty. Watching her in action reminded me of how much "CHARMED" had benefitted from the actress’ presence during the series’ first three seasons. I would not call Doherty’s performance in this episode as her masterpiece, but I would certainly view it as one of her better performances during her three-year stint on "CHARMED". In "Which Prue Is It Anyway?", Doherty managed to portray three facets of Prue Halliwell. Not only did she portray Prue in all her complicated glory, she also had the opportunity to portray extreme aspects of Prue’s personality. In Doherty’s portrayal of Pink Prue, she revealed the domineering and perfectionist traits of the oldest Charmed One that must have been the bane Piper and Phoebe’s lives . . . and irritated Original Prue to no end. Doherty also got the chance to reveal Pink Prue’s traits with a humorous perkiness rarely shown in Original Prue. With Blue Prue, Doherty allowed her character’s sensuality to be unleashed with comic results at Quake – the restaurant where Piper worked during Season One. Considering how Doherty managed to nab these different nuances of Prue, it was not surprising to learn that she had earned two Saturn Awards for her portrayal of Prue.

I am almost inclined to rate "Which Prue Is It Anyway?" as one of Season One’s best episodes. But due to the episode’s limited approach to Gabriel Statler’s villainous goals and the unsatisfying and one-dimensional description of his background as a Lord of War, I cannot give it that much credit. However, writer Javier Grillo-Marxuach did pen a well-paced episode filled with humor and pathos. The first-rate cast did his script justice with a solid cast that included an exuberant performance by guest star Alex McArthur and exceptional work by star Shannen Doherty.

R.I.P. Shannen Doherty (1971-2024)

"ANGEL" RETROSPECTIVE: (1.08)"I Will Remember You"

 

Below is a look into (1.08) "I Will Remember You", a Season One episode from "ANGEL" (1999-2004):

"ANGEL" RETROSPECTIVE: (1.08)"I Will Remember You"

One of the most popular episodes to air on "ANGEL" is the eighth episode of Season One called (1.08) "I Will Remember You". This particular episode served as a follow-up to the Season Four "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER" episode called (4.08) “Pangs” in which Angel, the vampire with a soul, had paid a surreptitious visit to Sunnydale in order to protect his former love, vampire slayer Buffy Summers, from a malignant spirit during the Thanksgiving holidays.

After Buffy had learned of Angel’s visit to Sunnydale, she pays a visit of her own to Angel’s detective office in Los Angeles. There, she confronts him about his surreptitious assistance back in Sunnydale. They are attacked by a Mohra demon. When Angel kills the demon, he is restored to mortality by its powerful blood. After The Oracles - a link to The Powers That Be - confirms that Angel is human again, Angel and Buffy spend a blissful night together. Unfortunately, Doyle receives a vision that the Mohra demon has regenerated itself. Instead of recruiting Buffy, Angel leaves her to kill the demon for good. In the ensuing battle, Angel discovers the consequences of having only human strength. Buffy must come to his rescue and slay the demon herself. Angel returns to The Oracles, who that if he remains human, Buffy will face the minions of darkness alone and die much sooner. They agree to turn back time, so that Angel, accepting the entire cost of the bargain, can kill the Mohra before its blood makes him human. They also inform him that Buffy’s memories of their day together will erase once time is turned back.

I might as well be frank. I really dislike this episode. I almost hate it. Honestly. And although I am not a fan of the Buffy/Angel relationship, the one thing I truly dislike about this episode is the paternalistic manner in which Angel treats Buffy, once he agrees to the Oracles’ bargain. One, I suspect that Angel could not deal having human strength. It still amazes me that many fans have castigated Riley Finn for being unable to deal with Buffy being stronger than him; and yet in this particular episode, Angel seemed to be suffering from the same problem. Then he does something even worse by making that deal with the Powers to resume being a vampire . . . after being told that Buffy would have no memories of their day together. As far as I am concerned, he committed psychic rape via the Oracles and the Powers to Be. Even worse, he only told Buffy about his decision . . . seconds before she lost her memories.

Some fans have used Buffy’s alleged desire for a "knight in shinning armor" as an excuse for Angel’s behavior. Many of these fans still view Buffy as that 16-18 year-old featured in the first three seasons of "BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER". And apparently, so does Angel. I really do not see how this desire of Buffy is supposed to condone or excuse Angel's decision to becoming a vampire again at the expense of Buffy’s memories. Others point out that the Oracles had informed Angel that order to prevent circumstances from repeating exactly, he alone will remember all they have shared. Let me see if I understand this. Angel could not tell Buffy that he had erased her memories of their day together, in case the circumstances of that day repeat themselves. Yet, Angel went ahead and informed Buffy that she would lose her memories seconds before she lost them? If Angel wanted to avoid a repetition of that day repeating, he could have told Buffy what had happened . . . and add that they could not stay together, in case the circumstances of that day would be repeated. But Angel did not bother. In fact, he remained silent. Personally, I found his actions appalling.

To me, Angel was a selfish and controlling bastard who could not handle the lack of vampire strength needed to deal with the supernatural beings he had fought, in the first place. Without that strength, he could not be a hero. One, he was stupid enough to go after the Mohra demon when he lacked the strength to fight it. He could have easily allowed Buffy to do so in the first place. And when he found himself forced to depend upon Buffy’s strength to take down the demon, he turned to the Oracles to get his strength back. And all of this happened before he learned of the details surrounding his return as a vampire. I suspect that deep down, his act of sacrifice was nothing more than bullshit. I have always suspected that Angel was nothing more than a control freak, who got his kicks making decisions for others . . . without their consent. If he had really cared about Buffy, he would have never agreed to the spell in the first place. Or . . . he could have told her what happened after the spell went into effect, just as I had pointed out in a previous paragraph. Or he could have told her what he was considering, before he allowed the Powers to Be remove her memories and turn back time. But he did not, because he simply viewed Buffy as a child who had to be controlled . . . by him. And considering that Buffy ended up dead a year-and-a-half later (with Angel not around), it seemed that Angel had given up being a human for nothing.

"I Will Remember You" strikes me as a good example of why I have never been a fan of the Buffy/Angel romance. It has always seemed like an unequal relationship that was never able to develop into an equal one. This episode also reminded me that many seemed to prefer a fictional romance that featured between an infatuated adolescent female and lovesick older man obsessed with her youth and his need to be controlling. To me, the relationship was nothing but a patriarchal wet dream . . . at least for Angel and certain fans. And his actions in both the "BUFFY" episode, "Pangs" and this one seemed to confirm this.

"HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS" (2007) Book Review

 

"HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS" (2007) Book Review

I usually do not post book reviews, but a great deal has been made about this last installment of J.K. Rowling’s "HARRY POTTER" series that I thought I might as well say something. I have only been a die-hard fan of the series since the release of the third movie, ”PRISONER OF AZKABAN” in 2004. I had also seen the first two movies in the theaters. I had enjoyed both, but it was the third film that had induced me to read the novels. Between ”AZKABAN” and the books, I became a die-hard fan. But this is not about the other stories. This is about the last . . . ”THE DEATHLY HALLOWS”


I am going to make this short. As much as I have enjoyed the series, I have come to the realization that I like the last five novels – starting with ”AZKABAN” more than I do the first two. I guess I find it easier to relate the increasingly ambiguous nature of the story. And if there is one thing I can say about ”THE DEATHLY HALLOWS” is that it is one hell of an ambiguous novel. In it, Harry Potter and his two friends – Ron Weasley and Hermoine Granger – truly start on their road to adulthood. And this, I believe, is the major strength of this novel.

By the time I came to the middle of the novel, I realized that for the first time in the series, most of its setting would take place away from Hogswarts. A part of me felt slightly disappointed that Harry, Ron and Hermoine did not reach the school until the last several chapters of the novel. On the other hand, I feel that this was the correct thing for Rowling to do. For me, ”THE DEATHLY HALLOWS” definitely seemed like a ”coming of age” story for our three protagonists. It was a maturity that they strongly needed in order to face the main villain, Lord Voldemort (aka Tom Riddle) and his Death Eaters. Looking back on the story, I do not think that Harry, Ron and Hermoine would have acquired their maturity and backbone if the story had mainly been set at Hogswarts. I think it was a very good move on Rowling’s part.

And our three heroes truly did grow. Hermoine learned to face her feelings for Ron and overcome that narrow-minded superiority that originally made her dismiss the legend of the Deathly Hallows. Ron learned to overcome his insecurity about his abilities as a wizard, his views on non-human magical creatures like house elves . . . and face his feelings for Hermoine. And Harry learned to overcome his tendency to play lone wolf and realize that people are not always what they seemed to be. The truths about Sirius’ treatment of Kreacher, Dumbledore’s past and his desires for powers, Snape’s feelings for Lily Potter and his true role in the war against Voldemort were powerful lessons for Harry. And I guess one could say they were powerful lessons for Ron and Hermoine, as well.

Of course, the deaths of Fred Weasley, Colin Creevy, Remus Lupin, Nymphadora Tonks and others were painful. But it were the deaths of Dobby and Severus Snape that really moved me to tears. And the trio’s painful adventures throughout the British Isles seemed like another version of Homer’s “ODYSSEY” that probably lifted this last installment almost to an epic quality. I only have three complaints about ”THE DEATHLY HALLOWS”:

a) Aside from Horace Slughorn, none of the Slytherins had participated in the battle. It annoyed me that Rowling went through all of that trouble to allow Harry not to judge others for superficial reasons . . . and yet, she insisted upon maintaining the clichés about the Slytherins that they could not be trusted;

b) I wish that Harry had revealed to the others – especially the other Death Eaters that Voldemort was a half-blood;

c) The final battle at Hogswarts seemed like one chapter too long at times. But what can one expect when it was interrupted twice – first by Snape’s death and past memories and later by Harry’s ghostly encounter with Dumbledore?

But ”THE DEATHLY HALLOWS” also had some great moments. Here are my favorites:

a) Bill and Fleur’s wedding was a hilarious family affair for the Weasleys, until Kingsley Shacklebolt’s patronus warned them of the encoming Death Eaters;

b) Harry, Ron and Hermoine’s adventures in London – including their break-in of the Ministry of Magic;

c) Ron’s return and Hermoine’s reaction;

d) The trio’s adventures at the Malfoy Manor and their reunion with Dobby, Ollivander, Dean Thomas and Luna Lovegood;

e) The trio’s escape from Gringotts on a blind dragon;

f) Harry and Hermoine’s creepy visit to Godric’s Hollow;

g) The trio’s visit to the Lovegood home;

h) The trio’s encounter with Albeforth Dumbledore;

i) The trio’s return to Hogswarts;

j) Ron and Hermoine’s first kiss;

k) Ginny’s birthday kiss to Harry;

l) The chapter on Snape’s memories of Lily Evans Potter and Albus Dumbledore – which in my opinion was my favorite in the entire novel.

I wonder if J.K. Rowling will write any other books, now that she has finished her opus on the boy wizard, Harry Potter. If she does, I hope that they will be as excellent as the seven novels that have entertained the public for the last decade. But if her next book or books are not as good, I will not hold it against her. After all, she did create Harry Potter for all of us to enjoy for years to come – in both the novels and the movies.

"THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE" (2010) Review

  

"THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE" (2010) Review

One of the movies that struggled at the box office during the summer of 2010 was Disney’s 2010 live-action adaptation of its 1940 animated classic, "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE". Directed by Jon Turteltaub, the movie starred Nicholas Cage and Jay Baruchel.

"THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE" is a fantasy-adventure about a long-living sorcerer named Balthazar Blake who is fighting against the forces of evil and his arch-nemesis Maxim Horvath in modern-day Manhattan. During this fight against evil, Balthazar searched for the person who will inherit the magical abilities of the powerful wizard, Merlin. This person turns out to be Dave Stutler, a physics student at New York University, whom Balthazar takes on as a reluctant protégé.

Did I have any problems with "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE"? Well, I had a few. Although some of the movie's scenes managed to capture shots of Manhattan in the daytime, most of the scenes were filmed at night. Manhattan makes a vibrant and colorful setting. I found it frustrating that I got to see most of it in night scenes, when it was not really necessary. The special effect of the flying gargoyle from the Chrysler Building really did nothing for me. And the movie criminally – in my opinion – underused actors and actresses such as Omar Benson Miller, who portrayed Dave’s roommate; Monica Bellucci, who played Balthazar’s fellow sorceress and secret love, Veronica; and Alice Kriege, who portrayed the evil Morgana le Fey from the King Arthur legend.

Despite all of this, I managed to enjoy "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE", much to my surprise. More than I thought I would. There were no cheesy lines. And there was plenty of sharp humor. Thanks to the screenplay written by Doug Miro, Carlo Bernard and Matt Lopez, the movie also proved to be a solid adventure story about how Dave Stutler who learned to achieve his full potential and a good deal of self-respect. Dave’s mentor, Balthazar, also learned a good deal about patience and overcoming one’s past regrets. With a great deal of humor, the pair not only taught valuable lessons to each other; but also formed a solid pair to take out Horvath, who had hoped to raise the evil Morgana le Fey, and stop them both from destroying the world.

Despite too many nighttime scenes, I must admit that I found Bojan Bazelli’s photography to be colorful and impressive. I also found the special effects supervised by John Fraizer very impressive – especially during the Chinatown sequence and the scene featuring Dave’s use of Tesla coils.

And despite the film’s failure to utilize performers such as Omar Benson Miller, Monica Bellucci and Alice Kriege; the "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE" could boast a very entertaining cast. Nicholas Cage was perfectly cast as the intense and sometimes impatient sorcerer, Balthazar Blake. And he had excellent chemistry with the deliciously wry and sardonic Jay Baruchel, who portrayed physics student-turned sorcerer, Dave Stutler. Alfred Molina seemed to be in his element as the sarcastic and villainous sorcerer, Maxim Horvath. He also managed to produce a surprisingly effective screen chemistry with Toby Kebbell, who portrayed the young and self-absorbed celebrity magician, Drake Stone. And although I did not find Teresa Palmer’s portrayal of Dave’s lost interest, Becky Barners, particularly memorable; I must admit that she managed to prevent her character from becoming bland.

Looking back at "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE", I cannot help but wonder if producer Jerry Bruckheimer had refrained from allotting a bigger budget to the movie. I think it had the potential to be a major crowd pleaser but failed to do so with too many night scenes and an unwillingness to utilize the entire cast. But the movie still had some dazzling special effects, a solid adventure story and a talented cast in Nicholas Cage, Jay Baruchel and Alfred Molina. In the end, "THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE" proved to be a pretty good movie.

"THE SORCERER’S APPRENTICE" (2010) Photo Gallery

Below are images from Disney's 2010 action-fantasy film, "THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE". Directed by Jon Turteltaub, the movie starred Jay Baruchel and Nicholas Cage:

"THE SORCERER'S APPRENTICE" (2010) Photo Gallery