I bought a film magazine to see the Oscar coverture and I saw a preview of a mexican animated film called "Sabel redemption". Mexican animation has being, well, terrible all this years (Magos y Gigantes?! Una pelicula de huevos?! YEAH RIGHT!) But this one..seems interesting. Maybe it will be a dissapointment too but there are 3 things that catch my eye:

First, the story, is about a vampire that lives many centuries fighting a werewolf..who said "underworld"?! =P

Second, the animation, seems very well done and of good quality. Also, it seems more mature and less kidish (thanks God!)

And 3d, they want to distribute them in 2 difficult markets: Europe and Japan. very ambitious if you ask me.

Anyway, I'll keep skeptic until I finally see it. Meanwhile check the trailer to see what I mean:

[url=http://www.ithrax.com/sabel/]http://www.ithrax.com/sabel/

Disapointing.

That's the best I could describe 2006 about movies. Many big expectations were actually very short and most of the industry (Hollywood) generated more crap than any other film industry (yes even Mexico). Normally I like to make a "good movies" list and a "bad movies" one but this year didn't gave for that much so I rather make a list of the movies I SAW this 2006 and make a comment about them. You may differ, yes, but is because of people like you that they make this kind of crap. I'll leave the last 3 spots for the best movies of the year or at least the ones I liked the most.

Let's start with the BIGEST disapointing EVER:

Superman Returns by Bryan Singer



For a movie with more than 10 years in the making, this "return" was so goddamn lame that it makes the Tim burton/Dan Gilroy script more fun and interesting (and man, it was a very WEIRD script). Yes I know that in my past review I said the contrary..but now after a second viewing..damn it was boring!

Singer's movie was boring, anthiclimatic, slow and apathetic. All the publicity about "superman returns and the earth isn't very happy and learn to live with out him" was a big lie. The only person in the movie that acted that way was Lana lan..er, Louis lane and you didn't care a damn! Routh's perfromance was way to wooden and it had a lot of references to the Donner's movie that it make you feel stealed. It could have being more cheaper to rent the 1978 original movie than seeing this fan boy love letter of film.

It had a beautiful cinematography, music and some perfromances (like Spacey's Lex Luthor) were OK. But the movie was a big big dissapointing..maybe McG and Abrahams script was much better than this sleep pill.

Shame on you Singer for this boredom and for...

X3: The last stand by Bret Rattner



Why? because you created such a great franchise and let it die miserabily by the big 6-year old man Ratner! Yes yes, the movie was everything but Superman returns was: lots of action, lots of characters, lots of FX..actually LOTS OF EVERYTHING! This movie was such a mess of characters, storylines and resolutions that never ended to mature in itself!

Phoenix story? wasted. Cure story? wasted! Angel? wasted! Beast? wasted! Wolverine? TOO MUCH! Halle berry? WAAAAAAY TOO MUCH!

Xmen was cool, X2 was awesome, X3 was kiddish and stupid. What the hell were you thinking Mr. Rush Hour?!

The DaVinci Code by Ron Howard



I had the luck of reading the novel before watching the movie so I couldn't get brainwashed by the stupid christians that thought that the movie was about to destroy their precious Matrix.

Dan Brown's story was very cool..for a fiction novel. Yes, many of the theories are knows but are nothing new. But of course, christians doesn't read anything but their precious bible so they read something like this and get scared.

The movie, knowing that christians reject violence but except the one they make, decided to be "politically correct" and make a family-friendly adaptation. It follows the plot very faiirly but all of the attacks of the novel were censured or modified. Chickens!

The performances ranged from excellent (Ian Mckelen and Alfred Molina), fair (Audrey Tatou and Paul Bettany), predictable (Tom Hanks) and mediocre (Jean Reno). Howard is a good director and here he wasn't the exception.

So, yeah I got dissapointed that Howard and Co. get scared by The Matrix and it minions and created a hollow adaptation..but heck, what did you expected?

The Departed by Martin Scorsese



Remakes and Scorsese sounds like a match made in Hell but "Cape Fear" showed that you can make a fair remake without destroying the source material.

The departed is a nice, crafted movie but in an age of remake abuse, this feels like a joke from a master like him. The cast, the direction as well as the cinematography.

Of course, most of the credit came from the cinema of Hong Kong that makes such masterpieces that is obvious that Hollywood and their people make envious and of course they use the only good thing they had: cute mega stars and big distributions.

Nice movie and is good that scorsese had an economic hit after many failures..too bad that it came from a remake.

Babel by Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu



AGI is a good director, but he's terribly overrated and Babel firms that statement. Is not a bad movie but is not a great one and yet people acted like this one the best movie of all times.

The script is ok, except that it fails to connects the stories in a coherent way that it actually makes it feel very forced and illogical. You never seen a logical reason to see the stories connected and it could have being worked better with only 2 or 3 of them (the japanese and mexican ones seems too forced and unecesary).

Is good that a mexican director had that kind of recognition..but he's not the best. Don't give it the crtedit he doesn't deserve.

Cars by John Lasseter



Drinking game: drink a beer everytime..

..the main character is arrogant and selfish
..the main character meets a strong and intelligent girl with lots of dreams
..there's a sidekick that speaks funny (drink two if it's foreign)
..there's a cute kid in the movie
..there are two characters that are cute and one hates the other because one is older than the other
..the main character learns that life is more than prizes and fame
..the main character and the strong and intelligent girl falls in love
..the main character wins!
..there are gender role jokes
..there are far jokes

Do this game while watching Cars and you will get too drunk by the end of it thay you may end in the hospital.

This stupid piece of crap makes animation gets its name mushed in the mud and it also made me lost my faith in Pixar..and Ratatouwhatever doesn't seems to change that.

Ice Age 2: The Meltdown by Carlos whatever



Read the Cars review but change Pixar by Blue Sky..so yeah it is a piece of shit.

V for Vendetta by The Wachowsky bros..what? they didnt'?..oh well who cares...



I can't say that much except that I actually ahd "fun" with this flick. They have told me that they did too much changes from the comic book but I didn't read them so I can't tell. I don't think is a master piece (the ending was so-so) but it was fun too watch. Too much bullet time, though.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead man's chest by..well who cares it was produced by Jerry Bruckheimer anyway..



I wasn't dissapointed by this movie for the only reason that I got exactly what I was expecting: a nice, entertaining blockbuster with lots of laughs, action, thrills, good perfromances, nice FX, cool music and an interesting cliffhanger.

Yes it still had a lot of "greatest hits" stuff but at least it was fun and interesting. I actually think that the first movie wasn't for a second part but at least they didn't spoiled it.

Johnny depp, of course, stealed the movie with his great performance. Too cartoony sometimes but it was OK. Orlando Bloom was nice but needs to improve.

So, I liked it. Buy it? meh I dunno...maybe if it's too cheap (less than 10 dls) I'll buy it..or at least rent it again.

Lady in the water by M. Night Shyamalan



Is so sad to see that people gets biased against a director or artist and they are just waiting to get a movie of them released to destroy it even if they didn't saw it.

Many of the people that saw Lady in the water labeled as a stupid movie and so many other illogical labels that make me feel angry beacuse is that kind of people that has the fault the studios produce a lot of unimaginative garbage this days. Is good that there are artists like Shyamalan and Del Toro that dares to break the rules and let their imagination get free without the lame and boring standards that hollywood and audiences like to see.

Lady in the water is a beautiful tale about the sad reality that surrounds us, a reality where people doesn't dream anymore and prefer to watch American Idol or the next big stuff by the Hilton's that a beautiful story that makes us dream and think about our future as persons and humans beings. Definitely one of the most beautiful movies of the year along...

El laberinto del Fauno by Guillermo Del Toro



Without a doubt the best movie of the year. There are many few movies that blends fantasy and period stories with such a perfection and this one feels like a big breath of fresh air in an industry plagued of remakes and politicaly correct adaptations and kids flicks.

Labyrinth feels like a film lover dream come true. The perfrormnces and the direction are the best of the year without a doubt and the ending is, along Lady in the water, as one of the best I have ever seen in many years.

So, is good that after a year of fiascos, 2 movies make me feel like not everything is lost and that there's still creativity and passion in filmmakers.

Let's hope this 2007 gets way much better.

Too bad that Rotten Tomatoes doesn't had this movie in their data base..but still..

So, I saw this movie. What is it? It's a french sci-fi/fantasy animated film directed by Philipe Lecrec.

The movie tells the story of two races: the Pyros, lovers of the sun and the Hydros, lovers of the water. They are in a war and they both hate each other.

But one Pyro, Skan, mets an Hydro, Kallisto and they fall in love and it looks like a prophecy tells about a forbidden love that will bring peace to both races.

The animations is very good, made in a traditional way. The story is good and is very entertaining.

Then what happen? Well, there's still some issues that could have being fixed. We have the typicall free spiriti dud that serves sometimes as a comic relief. We all know that the main protagonists will fall in love, but yet, their love story is so compressed that you can't "feel" it. That's the big problem. The movie lasts only 80 minutes! and it should have need more time. This was a story for a 2 hour movie. It takes a little too much to start and when it does it goes very quickly :/

Still, the direction is not bad at all. It is entertaining and it can be enjoyed by both kids and adults. This is not Disney nor (thanks God!) Shrek. This is a more serious movie with an european sci-fi flavor, which is nothing bad at all (if you liked The 5th element or Final Fantasy XII then you know what I mean).

Anyway, I recommend it. Specially in a year full of Clones of Shrek and clones of the clones of Shrek. And with an OVERUSE of CGI. Is refreshing to see a movie that still uses the benefits of 2D animation and tell a nice, fun story at both.

If you see it, give it a try

7/10 stars

This article talks about how there are TOO MUCH CGI animated crap,er films out there:

[url=http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117948018?categoryid=13&cs=1&s=h&p=0]http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117948018?categoryid=13&cs=1&s=h&p=0

I am not surprised. Hollywood execs, who doesn't know a bit of filmmaking but only about merchandising, see a movie and think what makes it a hit: story? Nope. Character development? Nope. They always look at the superflous things. When the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter movies were released they didn't saw good written and directed movies. They only saw fantasy-movies-based-in-books-and-with-lots-of-FX. The result is that every year they are trying to find the next fantasy-movie-based-in-books-and-with-lots-of-FX but always fail. Only Narnia had success but because it was tehnically alone. Now we had movies versions of His dark materials, spiderwicks and gods know what else.

The same with this movies. Since Toy story, they have being trying to produce more and more CGI crap every year. The worst is that since Shrek- a horribly overrated movie appaeared and won an Oscar (wtf?!)- all the movies are the same, specially the ones from Dreamworks.

So far all the animated movies that came to teathers are snappy comedies with fart jokes and cool CGI's. Bah.

But those movies had mediocre runnings and some of them baddly criticized and with low box office entries.

Great. I really feel good about it.

I didn't saw those movies and honestly I don't think I will. I won't support that crap manufactured by hollywood execs that only cares about selling happy meals.

Also, I am upset that the traditional animation was left alone only to make the next cool CGI crap. Many movies could have being made with traditional animation and maybe had better results..but with such corny scripts I don't think so.

Which lends me to the next point:Shrek 2, Valiant, Madagascar, Over the hedge, Cars, Banyard, The Polar express, Robots, the ant bully and the upcoming Happy feet all had something in common:mediocre screenplays. Traditional animation it's beautiful but cruel. If a movie it's bad the animation only remark that badness. If the movie it's good, the animation just remarks it too.

But CGI it's distracting. People go to the movies and when they see a CGI they think "wow. it looks cool. I wonder how they made that" the result? they overlook the bad scripts, bad dialogues, bad storylines and bad characters developments. Although the "spell" have bing broken, and maybe for good...

But who cares, right? It sells toys. It sells hamburgers. You buy the DVD. Your brat will watch it over and over again. And you amaze with the CGI cartoons.

"Thanks" a lot

In 1987 appeared the last (for the time being) Superman movie: Superman 4:the quest for peace. Honestly, when I saw that movie I was a 10 year old kiddo that found it great and thought it was the best. Why of course: silly action sequences, bad dialogues, stupid villains...seemed riipped from a Superfriends cartoon! And yup I loved Superfriends.

But times change. I grew up, entered high school, had pimples and founded Superfriends one of the most stupid cartoons I have ever seen in my whole life. Thus, I found S4 and S3 and even S2 very stupid and silly. Well, yeah also S1 was it wasn't as worst are the others. Funny thing, I never considered a Supes fan. I didn't hated but neither loved it. My favorites were Batman and Spiderman and eventually Xmen.

Then in 2002 I saw Smallville and since then I became, not a fan, but very interested in the Superman mytho. Saw the movies and yup, 2,3 and 4 were silly but the first one it's very cool. And knowing that they were making a new Superman movie got me interested...althought that was since he "died".

[center]
[/center]

Flashback to 1993:the death of superman. My dad said "but they killed him before!". I thought he was wrong but yup, he was killed in the 60's. Anyway, the 90's version was a big worldwide event and everybody being fan or not of the supèrhero was on awe. 2 years later, they announce that they are going to make a movie based on that comic...and it was about to be directed by TIM BURTON!!! For a Tim burton fan like me, I was very excited! But we all know what happened. It never happened and Bryan Synger made a version that became succesful.

But it took a long way to come:

Warner Bros. approach Kevin Smith (clerks, dogma) to write a screenplay for the "next superman movie" based on the "Death of superman" idea. He was very excited..until Jon Peters, the producer give him some weird guidelines: No red and blue suit (?), no flying (????), there must be a giant spider (o_O), brainiac must had a "gay robot" assistant (wtf?!) and lex luthor must had an "evil dog" like chewbacca (oh for the love of..!).

Kevin smith, made a nice but to fan-boy script that the executives loved. They even had their superman: Nicolas Cage! Everybody was against the idea. Mr. Cage, of course, was very happy.

[center]
[/center]

Then they need a director: Tim burton, who read the script and said that he liked it. But when he signed, stabbed on the back to mr. smith and decided to drop out his script and instead write another one. Burton hired Wesley Strick, who had written the shooting script for Burton's Batman Returns five years earlier, to write a new draft. In Strick's script, Brainiac and Lex Luthor merge into a single entity dubbed "Luthiac." Thematically, Burton and Strick worked to underscore Superman's alienation by virtue of the fact that Superman (Kal-El) is an alien.

Burton's superman was too weird and bizarre. Superman didn't fly but "vanished in a black blur dash" and he was a hero because he wanted to be loved. Or in other words: Pure Tim Burton. Just like Batman Returns wasn't a Batman movie but a Tim Burton one. Hey, I love Tim Burton. He's a wonderful filmmaker and a geniuos...but Superman it's an icon and making such changes it's, well, TOO risky!

Anyway, everything was ready to shoot but the failure of Sphere and Batman and Robin give Warner Bros. a change of heart. The movie was cancelled. Both Burton and Cage lost their pacience and quiited the project, returning superman to the movie limbo. Until in 2001 they decided to resurrect the franchise (along Batman) and after many failed attempts, they gave green light to Bryan Singer. The rest it's history. There are more issues but check the links for more info .

[center]
[/center]

Still, sometimes I think what would happened if the Burton/Cage version was made and released:

It could have being a box-office success, nonetheless. But maybe it should have received mixed (mostly bad) reviews and, like Batman Returns and Planet of the apes, misunderstood by the audience. Tim Burton has a very twisted view on reality and it's an iconoclast. Everything the character isn't.

The movie was scheduled for a summer of 1999 release. Maybe on 2002/2003 we have saw a sequel (more probably, not directed by Tim burton) and maybe on this year or the next a 3d one. Also, they could gave Batman Triumphant a green light and Batman Begins was never released.

Funny how things are connected even if they doesn't seem to, huh? ^_^

And of course, no smallville, no career for Tom welling and no career for Brandon Routh.

I love Tim Burton, but maybe it was for the best that "Superman lives" was never created. Singer it's a director more focused on character and script development, something a superhero movie needs (just give a look to Xmen 1 and 2 and Batman Begins). Aesthetic it's nice but script comes first.

If you don't believe me, give a look to Catwoman, Batman and Robin and then we talk

More info here.