|
October 13, 2008
Today`s movie review is on the movie: "Alan Quartermain and the Temple of Skulls".
First let me say I was hesitant in viewing this
movie. There were no big names actors, and after recently seeing "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" I was a bit
reluctant to watch this movie. I should have adhered to my reluctance,
a s
this film was inadequate at best. During the opening scene, I was mildly
intrigued as I tried to understand exactly what was happening. Sure
enough the action sequence ended up where I thought it might - two
people bickering over a map.
The story then shifts to the
introduction of the main character - Alan Quartermain. This Alan
Quartermain reminded of retired lion trainer that was in need of some
rest. The action scenes henceforth were predictable and unrealistic.
The other two characters, Sir Henry and Lady something could have been
any two characters. There was little need to understand who they were,
or what they were doing. The antagonist of the movie was played by a
large indescribable movie type character. His constant grimacing and
lack of intelligence would make him an easily conquered villain. How he
ended up ahead of the adventurous team is a mystery in its own.
Needless to say, this movie is not
recommended, the acting is mediocre, and the plot/story line
uninteresting. This movie could have been simply called, "A man and two
strangers search for gold". This title would have at least warned
people not to view the movie. So, rather than continue my incessant
complaining, I thought I might detail some of my recommended changes.
Fair warning, if you intend to view the movie, stop now, as I will
discuss certain aspects of the movie that may ruin it for you (doubtful,
as most of the scenes are easily guessed as to the outcome).
1.
Alan Quartermain's character needs rougher edges, and stronger
persona. This is the main character, clearly he is down on his luck,
but if his legend is that popular, he must represent a strong figure in
the movie. If he is down on his luck, and broke, then why does he have
a live-in housekeeper, on a ranch? Additionally why does he travel 2
hours by train to a desolate town to exchange the map for a mere
$10,000? Any man down on his luck would take the money, and run - rather
than toss it back and hope the villain is satisfied with his act of
kindness.
2.
The Villian - This character starts out strong, all of about 10
seconds, and then you realize he is really not that villainous. The
villain stops the train by placing his vehicle in front of a moving
train, and while attempting to apprehend Quartermain, he misses the fact
that they have jumped off the moving train in an open field - with
little cover. If the villain is that easily confused, then how can he
possible plan their next route?
3.
Sir Henry and Lady something - These characters develop no depth,
and clearly not a requirement of the plot. Sure, Henry's brother is
gone missing, but any person could have played that part. There is
little need to have the two upper class socialites involved on the trek,
unless daintiness is somehow worked into some subliminal messages. In
the face of death, as they watch/hear a native lose his skull, there are
no screams, no shrieks of fear, and wait - no blood. How is that
possible?
Ok, I think I have spent enough time on this
movie. Hopefully the next one will be better. I am thinking about
watching "1408" starring John Cusack and Samuel Jackson.
Joe |
