This entry was posted on October 26, 2011 at 4:41 AM and is filed under the ugly . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The CGI on this looks incredibly synthetic. Expected better from Tarsem. But this is even otherwise par for the course for Hollywood on many of these fantasy films and/or period pieces. The movies look like video games. Or what would be ‘great’ for a video game looks less than this for a movie. Now in fairness they are going in for the graphic novel look in some ways but it just doesn’t come off as well as it did on something like 300.
It feels like we’re in the waning years of the swords and sandals epic. A combination of Troy and Alexander effectively put the genre on ice for the better part of a decade, only to be resurrected by the vibrant and stylized bloodfest that was 300. Nobody has really come close to nailing the formula since, with the abysmal Clash of the Titans remake the only studio tentpole in that general vicinity. Yet here we are, another challenger about to enter the ring, and with a decidedly more visual flair than its recent contemporary. Does it have what it takes to sit at Zeus’s table?
Immortals Review
By Ryan Hamelin
Movie Grade: A-
Immortals is basically everything I wanted Clash of the Titans to be that it wasn’t. A lot of that comes from the director, as Tarsem has a lot more clout in the independent circuit than Leterrier ever could, giving his “vision” a lot more weight. He’s not the kind of guy you hire to direct something and then try to piece together a different cut later on. The shots are so precise, the storytelling so specific, that it’s a marvel to behold the finished product, a large-scale swords and sandals epic with a singular focus and good character fundamentals. Given the amount of control he had, there are a handful of rough patches, as well as some unintentional laughter sprinkled throughout, but the majority of the movie works so well, it’s easy to forgive its less refined ideas…..
mmortals is a classically structured, visually wonderful bit of Greek fantasy. Even the post-converted 3D was awe inspiring from time to time, though it certainly would’ve been better had the movie been shot in the format to start. The film feels big, but more artfully than realistically, letting big landscapes play as painted backdrops instead of truly believable settings. It’s got just about everything you could want out of a movie buried in it somewhere, and all I heard as I left the screening was variations on “That was awesome” and “I’ll see that again.” At a tight 98 minutes, it also doesn’t overstay its welcome, giving you enough to be satisfied but not getting slow or self-indulgent in the process. I’ve got to admit, I really wasn’t expecting to enjoy the film at all, but it thoroughly impressed. Now I’m curious to see what Tarsem does with his Snow White project, especially when given this kind of budget to work with.
November 10, 2011
Movie Review | ‘Immortals’
It’s Dark, Twisted and Unexplainable
By PAUL BRUNICK
Sing to me, O Muse, of gods and men, of timeless legends and forgettable retreads. Speak of “Immortals,” and answer in all seriousness: did you even read that awful script?
As Greece teeters on the edge of financial collapse, the producers of “300” seem eager to dropkick the country into a cultural abyss. Their latest sword-and-sandals spectacular, “Immortals,” plunders the canon of ancient myths like a barbarian horde piling up spoils as the temple burns. This jumbled epic of absurd coincidences and logical gaps can barely track its internal mythology. Such nonsense defies synopsis. Suffice it to say that there are muscly he-men (Henry Cavill), distressed damsels (Freida Pinto), evil despots (Mickey Rourke) and vengeful gods (John Hurt).
“Immortals” is the latest disaster of post-conversion 3-D, a projected spectacle so dark it is literally hard to see. This is an ugly, burlap sack of a film, stitched with jagged seams and overstuffed with computer-generated chintz, gold-lamé leotards and fetishistic headgear.
The choreography of flying viscera and cartoonish blood splattering is only occasionally inventive. The adolescent violence would be boringly unobjectionable, but its overtones of sexual sadism are crude and creepy. “A man’s seed can be his most brutal weapon,” says Mr. Rourke, as the monstrous King Hyperion, in what is definitely the film’s grossest line, though not its most ridiculous.
The queasy combo of childish fantasy and adult desire has become a signature of the self-described “visionary” director Tarsem Singh, whose debut film, “The Cell,” looked like a sex dungeon designed by the bubble-gum-pop artist Lisa Frank. His garish color palette continues to fascinate and repulse.
Saw the movie today. Didn’t like F.P. at all…she has this annoying tendency to keep her mouth open in most of the scenes which gives her the “duh” looks (immortals/planet of apes) and zero acting chops or personality with fake british accent…there are much better looking/acting actors in Indian subcontinent than F.P. but she is one lucky girl. If I was Tarshem, I would have cast better actors. Maybe JRM (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) instead of Cavill, who is way better actor for this particular role and would have fitted better imo.
July 23, 2011 at 8:42 PM
older post:
http://satyamshot.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/tarsem-singhs-immortals/
July 23, 2011 at 8:42 PM
Expected better from Tarsem.. this looks very poor..
July 23, 2011 at 9:38 PM
300 Redux with prettier shots thrown in. Incidentally, Theseus is playing the new Superman in Nolan’s reboot.
July 24, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Zack Snyder’s Superman
July 24, 2011 at 12:44 AM
Nolan’s producing it, he hired Snyder to direct. I frankly like to think of it as Nolan’s reboot given Snyder’s track record!
October 26, 2011 at 11:27 AM
The CGI on this looks incredibly synthetic. Expected better from Tarsem. But this is even otherwise par for the course for Hollywood on many of these fantasy films and/or period pieces. The movies look like video games. Or what would be ‘great’ for a video game looks less than this for a movie. Now in fairness they are going in for the graphic novel look in some ways but it just doesn’t come off as well as it did on something like 300.
October 27, 2011 at 11:35 AM
It feels like we’re in the waning years of the swords and sandals epic. A combination of Troy and Alexander effectively put the genre on ice for the better part of a decade, only to be resurrected by the vibrant and stylized bloodfest that was 300. Nobody has really come close to nailing the formula since, with the abysmal Clash of the Titans remake the only studio tentpole in that general vicinity. Yet here we are, another challenger about to enter the ring, and with a decidedly more visual flair than its recent contemporary. Does it have what it takes to sit at Zeus’s table?
Immortals Review
By Ryan Hamelin
Movie Grade: A-
Immortals is basically everything I wanted Clash of the Titans to be that it wasn’t. A lot of that comes from the director, as Tarsem has a lot more clout in the independent circuit than Leterrier ever could, giving his “vision” a lot more weight. He’s not the kind of guy you hire to direct something and then try to piece together a different cut later on. The shots are so precise, the storytelling so specific, that it’s a marvel to behold the finished product, a large-scale swords and sandals epic with a singular focus and good character fundamentals. Given the amount of control he had, there are a handful of rough patches, as well as some unintentional laughter sprinkled throughout, but the majority of the movie works so well, it’s easy to forgive its less refined ideas…..
mmortals is a classically structured, visually wonderful bit of Greek fantasy. Even the post-converted 3D was awe inspiring from time to time, though it certainly would’ve been better had the movie been shot in the format to start. The film feels big, but more artfully than realistically, letting big landscapes play as painted backdrops instead of truly believable settings. It’s got just about everything you could want out of a movie buried in it somewhere, and all I heard as I left the screening was variations on “That was awesome” and “I’ll see that again.” At a tight 98 minutes, it also doesn’t overstay its welcome, giving you enough to be satisfied but not getting slow or self-indulgent in the process. I’ve got to admit, I really wasn’t expecting to enjoy the film at all, but it thoroughly impressed. Now I’m curious to see what Tarsem does with his Snow White project, especially when given this kind of budget to work with.
November 11, 2011 at 7:42 AM
NY Times:
November 10, 2011
Movie Review | ‘Immortals’
It’s Dark, Twisted and Unexplainable
By PAUL BRUNICK
Sing to me, O Muse, of gods and men, of timeless legends and forgettable retreads. Speak of “Immortals,” and answer in all seriousness: did you even read that awful script?
As Greece teeters on the edge of financial collapse, the producers of “300” seem eager to dropkick the country into a cultural abyss. Their latest sword-and-sandals spectacular, “Immortals,” plunders the canon of ancient myths like a barbarian horde piling up spoils as the temple burns. This jumbled epic of absurd coincidences and logical gaps can barely track its internal mythology. Such nonsense defies synopsis. Suffice it to say that there are muscly he-men (Henry Cavill), distressed damsels (Freida Pinto), evil despots (Mickey Rourke) and vengeful gods (John Hurt).
“Immortals” is the latest disaster of post-conversion 3-D, a projected spectacle so dark it is literally hard to see. This is an ugly, burlap sack of a film, stitched with jagged seams and overstuffed with computer-generated chintz, gold-lamé leotards and fetishistic headgear.
The choreography of flying viscera and cartoonish blood splattering is only occasionally inventive. The adolescent violence would be boringly unobjectionable, but its overtones of sexual sadism are crude and creepy. “A man’s seed can be his most brutal weapon,” says Mr. Rourke, as the monstrous King Hyperion, in what is definitely the film’s grossest line, though not its most ridiculous.
The queasy combo of childish fantasy and adult desire has become a signature of the self-described “visionary” director Tarsem Singh, whose debut film, “The Cell,” looked like a sex dungeon designed by the bubble-gum-pop artist Lisa Frank. His garish color palette continues to fascinate and repulse.
To coin a tagline: This — is — stupid.
November 14, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Saw the movie today. Didn’t like F.P. at all…she has this annoying tendency to keep her mouth open in most of the scenes which gives her the “duh” looks (immortals/planet of apes) and zero acting chops or personality with fake british accent…there are much better looking/acting actors in Indian subcontinent than F.P. but she is one lucky girl. If I was Tarshem, I would have cast better actors. Maybe JRM (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) instead of Cavill, who is way better actor for this particular role and would have fitted better imo.