Hanna (2011)

When Hanna was released, the ad campaign for this movie made it seem a bit too familiar. It resembled a Bourne-style action thriller with the gimmick being that the protagonist was a little girl. Shame on me for falling for it.

On the surface, Hanna may seem like a movie you’ve seen. The main character is some kind of superior soldier and on the run from the government. It’s been done a million times, being the central plot of the Bourne films and even others less worth mentioning like Salt. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Hanna is more of a dark fairy tale than it is a spy thriller, and Joe Wright’s unique direction makes it into something both visually engaging and memorable.

The story follows a 16-year-old girl named Hanna (because it’s the title, so of course it’s her name), who lives with her father in the middle of a frozen nowhere. From him she learns many skills that seem unnecessary for a child to learn. She can hunt, fight, kill, and speak many different languages. Her nightly bedtime stories are passages from an encyclopedia. Eventually she yearns for more in life and her father tells her that to experience it would require that they activate a signal. She does. Enter the big bad wolf. The rest of the plot is about the two of them on the run from a mysterious government agency led by Marissa Wiegler, who will stop at nothing to see both Hanna and her father dead.

Eric Bana & Saoirse Ronan

This could have easily been a run-of-the-mill action movie, keeping most of the plot elements familiar while making one major thing different. Apparently, director Joe Wright (Pride & Prejudice, Atonement) had no interest in making that movie and went in an altogether different direction. He films Hanna in a visceral, almost erratic style that calls a significant amount of attention to itself without seeming self-indulgent. His style is quickly developing into one to watch out for. He includes many of the shots that have become almost a staple of his films, including the lengthy and complicated tracking shot. Accompanied by a unique score from The Chemical Brothers, there are moments in this that resemble the fast paced techno-beat running sequences of Run Lola Run, and others that play up the fantasy and twisted visual splendor of one of Grimm’s Fairy Tales (something that is referenced repeatedly throughout the film).

Saoirse Ronan (of Atonement fame) gives an incredible physical performance as Hanna, who communicates a lot through her expressions and abilities as opposed to simple dialogue. Hanna knows nothing of the world outside her cabin in the woods, and is forced to deal with killers and the modern world. Her only interaction has been with her father, so she reacts strangely to other people. Many scenes are just of her interacting with or watching other “normal” humans. Even though she wishes to be one of them, there is something about her that prevents a true sense of belonging. It makes her a compelling and somewhat tragic heroine.

The rest of the cast is equally entertaining, with Eric Bana as Erik Heller, her Father, and Tom Hollander as a scene stealing whistling henchmen of Wiegler, the central antagonist as played by Cate Blanchett. Her character is one that is particularly fascinating and difficult to comprehend. Her fascination and obsession with Hanna and her father places her as a strange skewed version of the wicked stepmother. She wants them both in a way that baffles her superiors and even the audience. Whatever she feels for them, it’s personal, and the why of it is left fairly open to debate.

Hanna is a rare surprise in this particular genre of film. The acting is great, the characters are interesting and unique, but most importantly, the style of the movie is utterly captivating and mesmerizing. That’s not usually the case in your standard action flick, but this can hardly be counted among those. Its part spy thriller, part Grimm’s fairy tale, and best of all it’s a great movie.

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman (2003)

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is the last of the animated Batman films that ties into the original animated series. From this point on, the Batman animated movies would no longer follow the same character designs nor would they feature the same production team or voice actors. Curt Geda directs, whose previous work was directing Return of the Joker, and it also credits Alan Burnett for the story and Paul Dini as a consultant. It’s sad that this was to be the final film, considering that the animated universe created for Batman was so rich and developed, but every good thing must come to an end.

The movie begins with a truck carrying a shipment of guns being attacked by a vigilante as it enters Gotham City, which should come as no surprise to anyone (least of all, the criminals). The crooks think its Batman, but soon realize that it’s a woman dressed in a similar fashion. Unlike the Dark Knight however, she seems to have no problems with killing her foes. Because of her moniker and costume choice, she’s immediately assumed to be one of Batman’s allies, much to his dismay. Because he doesn’t want to be associated with a reckless vigilante, he goes about uncovering her identity while tangling with crime lords like the Penguin and Rupert Thorne.

The story is well written and interesting, if a bit predictable. The mystery is finding out who the Batwoman is (as the title so subtly suggests), and it’s presented in a way that keeps you thinking and guessing. Three female leads are introduced as potential suspects, and each one is given a motive and a surprisingly fleshed out back-story. To keep it from being too easy, all of the women are given a different voice actor from Batwoman, who is voiced by Kyra Sedgwick. In the end, there’s actually a fun and surprising twist on the idea of a whodunit.

Her costume is a bit like the Batman Beyond suit.

The animation is consistent with the style of the animated series, specifically The New Batman Adventures. It’s very colorful, sleek, and stylized, complete with a red skyline over the city. The characters have very fluid and smooth animations, much like they did in Return of the Joker. Everything looks very polished and modern, which is an interesting mix with the retro design of the city and its locales. The Iceberg Lounge, the Penguin’s nightclub (complete with seals living in the fountain) is a particular highlight. The music and voice acting is, as always, very strong with this crew and most of the actors from the show reprise their roles. Batman is voiced by Kevin Conroy (and always should be as far as I’m concerned), Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. is Alfred, Bob Hastings is Gordon, Robert Costanzo is Harvey Bullock, and John Vernon is Rupert Thorne. There are some voice changes, such as Eli Marienthal taking over Robin, Hector Elizondo voicing Bane, and David Ogden Stiers voicing the Penguin instead of Paul Williams (the absence of Paul Williams is particularly noticeable and disappointing). The music, by Lolita Ritmanis, adds a jazzy theme for the Batwoman and incorporates it seamlessly with the classic themes from the series.

Despite the relatively small scale of the story, there’s some good action in this, with the grand finale being the most memorable. Even though he plays a relatively minor role in the scheme of the story, Bane provides Batman with a very epic battle aboard a burning cruise ship. The problem with this mystery being the plot isn’t that it’s a bad plot; it’s that it doesn’t feel like a story that needs a movie to be told. This would have been better suited to an episode or two. The stakes aren’t very high, even with the inclusion of a few of Batman’s super villains. It all comes down to stopping a shipment of guns the Penguin’s trying to sell. Its small scale as far as villainous schemes go, and doesn’t really present the danger or personal threat that a full length film should have. The story isn’t so much about Batman, Robin, or Batgirl (the latter is only in the movie for a few seconds), but instead entirely about this new character.

That said, Mystery of the Batwoman is still an entertaining Batman story that displays the quality that has become a staple of the entire animated Batman mythos. It doesn't match nor even reach for the heights that Return of the Joker and Mask of the Phantasm achieved, but for fans of the animated series, it’s not to be missed.

The Road to El Dorado (2000)

Do you remember when the DreamWorks Animation department made 2D cartoons? Probably not. It was a different time then. A new animated film didn’t necessarily mean it was going to be in 3D and made entirely from computers. Animated musicals were also more common. Oh well. 

Back in 1998, DreamWorks was responsible for The Prince of Egypt, an animated film adapting the story of Moses. It’s still a very good movie and received critical acclaim. The natural next step was to try and reproduce that success with a quality that would set them apart from Disney and their other competitors like Pixar. At the time, Disney’s animated movies hadn’t had the same impact, critically or commercially as before and in a lot of ways, this film is DreamWorks’ way of attempting to recreate the magic of the Disney megahits of the early ‘90s. They got name actors to play the leads, they hired Elton John (of The Lion King) to do the musical numbers, and they even included cute animal sidekicks (something that was thankfully missing from The Prince of Egypt). Even with all this, did they succeed? Or is The Road to El Dorado exactly where it belongs, with its only mention being a footnote in the DreamWorks animation filmography? 

The movie opens introducing us to the setting and heroes of the narrative. The setting is Seville, 1519. Hernán Cortés is just about to embark on his infamous voyage to the new world where many a native are awaiting slaughter. Then we see our heroes, two homosexual con artists named Tulio and Miguel (played by Kevin Kline and Kenneth Branagh, respectively). They swindle a map that will lead them to the fabled city of gold and are chased onto the ship of Cortés. Through some wacky shenanigans (that involve them getting flogged offscreen), they wind up on an unknown shore with the horse of Cortés. It’s pretty lucky for them that they landed in the exact spot they would need to be to follow the map (or “trail” as they say in the movie). Of course they find the city and, as if you couldn’t guess, are immediately seen as gods. 

Let’s begin with the animation and the look of the film. The characters are wonderfully expressive and often quite humorous, thought it benefits from the solid voice acting. Branagh and Kline bicker and make wise-cracks constantly, and for the most part they’re pretty funny. Aside from the character animations, the backgrounds and setting is very nice to look at. The jungles and the city of El Dorado are widely colorful, varied, and interesting, and a lot of the movies’ charm comes from the vibrant feel everything seems to have. It's presented in a way that's entirely exaggerated and fantastic, even including giant monster fish swimming around in the river. There’s some early use of computer animation (for the strangest things) in the environment, but it’s easy to forgive and hardly detracts from the otherwise vibrant style. 

Okay, they're not supposed to be gay, but they are so gay.

Where the movie gets sort of strange is in its handling of history and the odd presence of the very modern humor in the 16^th century. First off, the inhabitants of El Dorado are mostly based off other real South American cultures like the Mayans and the Incans. They play the same sports and the fashion and architectures are clearly similar. Forgetting that they all magically speak English (or Spanish, since the heroes are from Spain though one of them is clearly British), the city of gold’s culture feels artificial and dumbed down. For instance, with the idea of human sacrifices it’s all put entirely on the High Priest Tzekel-Kan (Armand Assante), as if he’s the only person who’s into that sort of thing. The ruler of the city, Chief Tannabok (Edward James Olmos), seems like he’s not interested at all in sacrifices, as do the rest of the inhabitants. It all feels like a forced effort to make it kid friendly, by placing the blame entirely on the villain and not the ancient customs of a culture. They keep everything on the surface, maintaining the lighthearted tone that the film is so desperate to keep. Characters don’t die, and Hernán Cortés (and everything that he inevitably represents to the cultures like this one) are pushed to the side and ignored. It’s almost as though this isn’t the right subject for a family film. Would things really have been so different if they set it in modern day? This could just have easily been an Indiana Jones-style adventure story. 

Tzekel-Kan is a prime example of the flat and uninspired characters that make up the bulk of the film’s cast.  He’s the mystical right hand to the king that’s been villainized in so many movies. In a fantasy, chances are if the King has an advisor, sorcerer, vizier, mystic, or friend with a goatee, then that character is evil. The evil of this particular character seems unnecessary to the plot and often out of place. His grand battle with the heroes comes almost entirely out of left field and escalates to a scale that does not belong in this story. The heroes themselves are a pair of quip machines more than they are defined characters, and that includes Chel (Rosie Perez), who is shoehorned in as the pointless love interest. 

Elton John and Tim Rice did the music for this movie and…let’s just say that it’s not quite the soundtrack for The Lion King. There’s only one song that the main characters actually sing, while the rest of them play over montages with Elton John himself singing. It’s not very memorable and I couldn’t hum the melody for a single one, even after having just watched it. 

While they tried to differentiate themselves from Disney with the humor skewing slightly more adult (there’s even an overtly sexual scene between Tulio and Chel), it clashes with the really basic characterizations and the inclusion of cutesy animal buddies as even more comic relief. While the movie certainly looks good, there’s just not enough there to make a lasting impression. Is it terrible? No. But it’s not particularly memorable.