Film Review: "Brave" (***)

I realize that after a film as bad as "Cars 2", many were looking for Pixar's next to be a rousing and masterful return to form for the company that has put forth multiple genuine masterpieces in its relatively short lifespan. Apparently it's some great fault on the studio's part for not turning out another absolute masterpiece just two years after their last brilliant film. One can't comment positively on this film without mentioning the irritating barbs it's received over this past week. For one thing, you can't proclaim a studio's decline on the shortcomings of a single film. You can't even proclaim a director's, for that matter. People should remember pretty freshly that shortly after making "Hulk", Ang Lee went on to make something as great as "Brokeback Mountain".

"Cars 2" may be the "Hulk" in this situation, but saying "Brave" is the metaphorical equivalent to Lee's 2005 60s set romance could be an overstatement. It lands more favorably in relation to "Taking Woodstock", a film of Lee's where he wasn't attempting a masterpiece. He was doing something different. Similarly, "Brave" doesn't hit the same notes as has been known in Pixar's history, but it's not trying to. As a matter of fact, I can only think to applaud them for going so bravely outside their narrative and technical comfort zone to attempt something like this. It's not what you expected, but when has that ever been a bad thing?

Film Review: "Men in Black 3" (***)

Cannes is rolling out as we speak, and I'll be writing up my conclusion of the festival to come fresh tomorrow morning, but it turns out that my 2012 cinematic delight for this week came from as unexpected a place as could be guessed. Ten years after the previous film managed to be quite a disappointing diversion, you really couldn't be blamed for not believing there to be any spark left in "Men in Black"s brand. There's also quite a heavy chance that you came and left "Men in Black 3" with that sentiment in mind, and that's quite fine as well. For my part, I found it to be a zippy, if typically unhinged, delight.

Taking the central relationship into heavy consideration on this outing, the film inevitably opens with a hilariously camp-filled escape sequence in which Boris the Animal, our villain for this segment, breaks out of prison and sets off his master plan. 43 years back, Agent K shot off Boris' arm, foiled his plots, and sentenced him to prison. The simple solution? Time travel, as is always the best idea for fixing any given situation. Naturally it all goes off without a hitch, except that Agent J remembers K existed, and is set on heading back after Boris to stop the oncoming Armageddon that K originally avoided in the late 60s.

Film Review: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2" (**1/2)

Within minutes of returning home from seeing the eighth and final Harry Potter film, I started tweeting away my untarnished thoughts on the event. I only got out three slight jabs, as I realized how many people on the receiving end of them were probably massive fans of the books and the films. I was suspended in disbelief when all the positive reviews came flowing in, because it does seem curious for a film series that's garnered quite a bit of critical recoil in the past to suddenly get all this buzz. It goes to show how the weight of hype and expectation can forcibly change an experience. Oddly enough, it didn't change mine. How I saw the film the first time is how I'll always see it, and trying to deny that is foolhardy.

The proudest jab, and somehow compliment, that I laid out on Twitter early this morning was "I feel like 'Deathly Hallows: Part 2' is the perfect companion piece for 'Transformers: Dark of the Moon'." I meant that in the best respect to "Transformers" and the worst respect to "Potter". That's largely because both films are so completely obsessed with that final battle, where everything blows up and the ultimate stakes are at risk. After taking care of that final mission in Gringotts, which is surprisingly one of the more favorable parts of the film, they just rush on over to Hogwarts, and then everything goes off like clockwork,

By "clockwork", I mean unyielding and extremely flawed if you throw in the wrong cog. The thing with the Transformers comparison is that while both go into the final battle with urgency, we never get a sense of exactly what we have to lose in Potter. Yes, it's the final war of the wizarding world, and in fact the muggle world as well, but we never once get any sense of extreme danger. In fact, in David Yates' intention to move things along quickly, the battle feels way too small and glossed over. We barely even see the full extent of it. He instead decides to dwell too long on plot details that could've been given a little less time and devotion. Occasionally the film moves too rapidly, and then it just slows to a sluggish crawl.