'Independence Day: Resurgence' Review

Independence Day Resurgence is the sequel to the classically beloved blockbuster, Independence Day, that picks up exactly twenty years later (like the time gap between the release of the films) with humanity seemingly prepared this time around, having integrated alien technology with their own. 

The aliens have returned, the spectacle is larger, and the stakes are higher, yet the film never convinced me of these stakes because it failed to invest me in the characters. Honestly, this film should have been titled Independence Day: A New Generation of Mediocrity as almost all elements of the film feel lackluster when compared to the original including very uninspired editing, cheeseball writing, forgettable performances, and dull characters for the most part. 

In regards to the editing, the film consistently takes the audience away from the action as soon as it gets going in order to depict side-quests involving various characters the audience could care less about (I refuse to call it plot since it does absolutely nothing to do with remotely servicing the story). Now I'm not expecting Oscar worthy story points given the downright enjoyable cheesiness of the original, but I don't feel it's unfair to expect charm reminiscent of the first. I realize it's extremely difficult to recapture the cinematic magic that captivated audiences several years ago, especially with such a large time gap between sequels but last year two rebootquels (sequels that are effectively reboots) Jurassic World and Star Wars: The Force Awakens proved it's possible.

While I didn't LOVE Jurassic World (I still prefer Jurassic Park), I did enjoy it and can't deny the nostalgia of Jurassic Park was captured incredibly well which Star Wars: The Force Awakens did even better when attempting to restore the magic of Star Wars. Independence Day Resurgence strives to be bigger than the original with larger alien ships, larger aliens, and even larger spectacle and there are many moments that call back to the first but it all felt empty.

The film is oddly simultaneously great and awful, so it falls into the realm of mediocre thanks to the terrible story decisions made. On this note, I feel it's only fair I commend the wonderful visual effects to be found in the film including lots of mindless destruction, an updated CGI look for the aliens that is undeniably awesome, and the human/alien blended technology, a cool concept that's unfortunately brushed over quickly through some rushed exposition.

Returning director Roland Emmerich delivers on destruction, sense of scale, and the visuals, but elsewhere the story becomes overcrowded and convoluted due to an overabundance of ongoing events and anticlimactic sendoffs to some returning characters. Will Smith's Captain Steven Hiller was killed off offscreen piloting a new alien-human hybrid F-22. That's just how shallow the attention is towards these returning characters. I won't spoil what happens to any of the other retiring cast, but it's general knowledge Will Smith isn't returning and his demise was revealed in promotional material, so I felt I could discuss his end here.

Another big issue I have with the film is its odd pacing that simultaneously rushes gathering these characters together while taking it's time for the aliens to actually attack Earth. ID4 cut straight to the chase by having the aliens looming over Earth with the government being unsure how to respond to the situation, building tension followed by grandiose destruction and cool sci-fi action while keeping everything tightly knit with only a few important characters as opposed to Independence Day: Resurgence's widespread net of characters.

Speaking of which, none of the characters are really fleshed out and I think I knew just about as much information about them as I did going into the film a huge problem on the part of the film's screenplay, composed of five writers including the duo from the original Roland Emmerich and Dean Deavlin and the addition of Nicolas Wright, James A. Woods, and James Vanderbilt, and any time that a script has five writers working on it is not a good sign although I'm sure there are exceptions to that rule. The dialogue is cheesy but not in a good way, like the original, as almost every supporting actor is forcibly trying to be the comedic relief, an unsuccessful effort to say the least. There's plenty of side-stories that are completely irrelevant to the ongoings as I discussed earlier, chief among them the adventures of Judd Hirsch's Julius Levinson amidst the alien destruction that's just annoying.

As for the performances, there are few saving graces to be found. Jeff Goldblum is back reprising the role of David Levinson, and definitely brings what we've come to expect from him with some cheeseball dialogue delivery that's without a doubt entertaining. I would love to see him sign on-board to return as Malcolm for Jurassic World 2. Goldblum's character arc feels a little hollow though as he isn't given much character growth or any drama for that matter. In fact, they completely ignore that he had a love interest in the original and never refer to Margaret Colin's Constance Spano... Instead inserting a new love interest in Charlotte Gainsbourg's Catherine Marceaux, a French alien linguist, that feels forced and is given little attention.

Elsewhere, Bill Pullman is back as a damaged Thomas J. Whitmore, a mere shadow of his former presidential self, but he does manage to recapture some of his character's charm towards the end of the film.

Brent Spiner returns as the wacky scientist Dr. Brackish Okun, who I presumed had died in the first but it turns out he was in a 20 year long coma. Spiner has the most humorous moments in the film as his comedic relief helps to bring a little life to the flick. Though, he has a love interest that comes out of left field and left me saying "Huh? Was that what I thought it was?" I don't feel his character was integral to the film, but it was one highlight.

Judd Hirsch reprises the role of Julius Levinson and as I said earlier has a side quest that was absolutely ridiculous and totally unnecessary, in fact I'm not even sure he should have returned.

Rounding out the returning cast, Vivica Fox returns for a solid 45 seconds of doing absolutely nothing. Just one of many annoyances I have with the cast, as Will Smith's absence is sorely missed.

In the newcomer camp we have Liam Hemsworth, Maika Monroe, Jessie T. Usher, Angelababy, and Travis Tope as Jake Morrison, Patricia Whitmore, Dylan Hiller, Rain Lao, and Charlie Miller, who are all pilots which makes them all blend together into a bland generic pool of characters. Few of these characters are given much depth behind them and there are attempts at romance, humor, and drama but it all falls flat as none of them exhibit much charisma or energy to energize the film but they sure do try.

One surprise to me was Deobia Oparei as African Warlord, Dikembe Umbutu, who had some really cool action scenes and made for a convincing courageous warrior, but again is a character that wasn't given very much depth. So if you can't tell from my roundup of the cast, the narrative is overstuffed with plenty of characters and so the film suffers.

In all honesty, the film is a two hour nine minute advertisement for Independence Day 3, provided that sequel is greenlit, that I would actually be interested in seeing given the direction heavily hinted at in the film. The film has some bright spots thanks to the grandiose destruction and a few charming performances, but none of that matters thanks to mundane editing, an uninspired screenplay, and a multitude of dull characters. In summary, I sadly can't recommend seeing this followup to ID4 as the sequel isn't any where near as great as the first.

Film Assessment: D

Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Hunger Games'

The Hunger Games is the first in the popular Hunger Games film franchise based off of novels of the same name. Given that The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2, the final film in the Hunger Games franchise, will be released next week I thought I'd go back and review it's predecessors. This week I'm reviewing The Hunger Games and next week will review The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and if I have time will go back and modify my review on The Hunger Games Mockingjay Part One after rewatching it because it was one of my older reviews that didn't go to in-depth and I will add a Film Assessment to that review. I would like to make it a habit that when I re-watch a film that I reviewed a while back before I added the Film Assessment rating, I will go back and at least add that to the review or possibly modify the score if the film doesn't hold up to repeated viewings. 

'The Hunger Games' Review

Gary Ross does a phenomenal job of weaving the cinematography, costuming, production design and visual effects all together to help visualize this dystopian future described in the young adult novel series. Ross and the design teams also do particularly well juxtaposing the different environments of the bleak, dismal District 12 with the lively, bustling Capitol which is a brilliant piece of social commentary. The Arena is also given it's own atmosphere and I like how the film helps place the audience in the character's eyes as once they enter the arena there is a genuine sense of confusion as it feels as though the audience is thrust into the games. However there is a huge blaring problem as soon as the Games begin there is an extensive overuse of shaky cam. I found this to be quite annoying and really distracting to the film and it's probably my largest issue with The Hunger Games. I'm unsure if the filmmakers were trying to create a sense of confusion but the shaky cam just didn't quite work for me. I believe shaky cam can some times help to elevate a film if used correctly but this is not the case as it's used in almost every scene shot in the arena and there are moments where I wonder if they even had  tripod on set while shooting this film. Despite the annoyance of the shaky cam, several of my favorite moments take place in the arena. I liked seeing the tributes utilize basic survival skills, and one scene between Rue and Katniss is just heartbreaking, I won't dive into spoiler territory though as it's a very impactful moment and I wouldn't want that scene to be ruined for anyone prior to viewing the film. The performances across the board aren't too impressive, but there are a few diamonds in the rough figuratively. The true star is Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss, the film's lead, and fits perfectly into the role of the tough yet humble heroine. A majority of the scenes that transferred perfectly from the page to the screen were the scenes that focused on Katniss. In particular, the scene in which Katniss volunteers as tribute to save her sister is very emotionally moving and perfectly encapsulated the moment as it registered in my mind whilst reading the book. Other scenes that featured Katniss that just felt cohesive to the film's narrative with Lawrence's performance and maintaining pinpoint accuracy to the way these events unraveled in the book ranged from the scene where Katniss is being evaluated by the and she chooses to fire an arrow into the viewing area to catch their attention showing just how courageous Katniss is to the simple moment when Katniss is being interviewed by Cesar Flickerman and twirls in her dress to have the skirt become engulfed in small flames that earns her the nickname "The girl on fire".
Josh Hutchinson plays Peeta, the other tribute from District 12 and doesn't really bring anything special to the role but is certainly serviceable as the nice sensitive guy who is one of Katniss' love interests, the other being Liam Hemsworth is very underused in the role of Gale with very little screen time but he also doesn't booster too much acting prowess. One actress I was very impressed with was Amanda Stenberg, the child actress who portrayed Rue, as her character has one of the most pivotal emotional core moments in the entire film and the young actress nails it really "hitting the audience in the feels". The main supporting cast consisting of Stanley Tucci as the flamboyant Cesar Flickerman, Elizabeth Banks as the pretentious Effie Trinket, Woody Harrelson as the laid-back mentor Haymitch, and Lenny Kravitz as Katniss' stylist Cinna. Each of which fit quite well in their respective roles and really bring out the exaggerated characteristics of their characters which helps keep the film more interesting in the dialogue heavy scenes. In regards to villains, Wes Bentley is a very sly and smooth as the Gamemaker, Seneca, who designs the Arena and manipulates the situations inside the Hunger Games and Donald Sutherland has a very malevolent presences as the autocratic ruler of Panem, President Snow. Both actors wear out their villainous roles like a glove adding to the bleak dystopian atmosphere when present. Having read all of the books I can say that the film is very faithful to the source material and has fantastic world building onscreen that helps to place the audience in this dystopian future and feel as though they are truly watching the events of the book occur. Overall, the film is quite entertaining with a stellar lead in Jennifer Lawrence, a solid supporting cast, an intriguing narrative and riveting action despite the annoyance of the shaky cam. In spite of all of these elements that are well crafted together I personally prefer the book. If you have yet to see The Hunger Games I strongly recommend you watch it, especially if you have any interest in the book series.

Film Assessment: C+