Escape to the Movies: Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters

[sailor_960]

This movie's trailer didn't impress me in the slightest, and this review makes it even more likely that I won't see it so moving on.

On the subject of JJ Abrams directing the new Star Wars though? I don't know. It's too early to say anything but I feel like I should point something out if only for the sake of asking a question. Is it me or does Abrams have a knack for adapting his style of directing to different properties? We all make the lens flare jokes but were they really a big problem in any thing that Abrams has made outside of Star Trek? I ask because I never watched lost or Alias and I've seen neither Cloverfield nor Super 8. Were there lens flares in those as well? I assumed that it was a stylistic choice that he or the production team assumed would fit the film. They were wrong of course but that has always been my take on it. Also, I'm at least glad that Star Wars is in the hands of an industry guy who is a self-professed nerd.

On the whole though, I'm neither excited nor pessimistic about this development. Time will tell either way.

 

[BrotherRool]

Oh good. Another fucking Lens flare joke. It is like it was not played out in 2009....

I find it to be a fairly interesting just how easily and universally you can settle yourself with a negative stigma like that (and it's a completely justifiable criticism of the 2009 film which did take it to the point of absurdity), I was expecting some people to mention it, but it's amazing just how much that one aspect of a film which did middlingly in terms of critical praise has permeated the consciousness.

The knee jerk reaction to J.J. getting Star Wars which I though was totally unfair. You might not like that director but calling him lazy?! Star Trek had it's faults in pacing and structure but it was a pretty well made movie even if bad decisions were made.

My instinctive reaction is that JJ Abrams made a very shallow action film out of a franchise that rightly or wrongly praises itself on being intellectual and with that in mind, choosing him to direct the opponent franchise whose main struggle for the past three films has been good effects with weak plotting was an incredibly wrong move. But then, I guess Abrams isn't actually didn't write Star Trek and he's not going to write this one either. And Star Wars is a more suitable place for the over-the-top visuals (I'd say cliche but I'm not sure if it's the director who would be responsible for the death pits and platforms without handrails). So I guess you're right, maybe the backlash is a bit of a knee-jerk thing

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

I remember Brothers Grimm. I always thought it was a weird movie, i'm a huge fan of Terry Gilliams work but for the most part Brothers Grimm was really uninspired. Usually Gilliams movies are like Tim Burton movies if they were good. But Brothers Grimm was like a Tim Burton movie... period. Like Sleepy Hollow to be precise. Way below Gilliams usual quality.

So, yeah, Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters? Not gonna watch it. That whole "We're making edgy fantasy movies based on fairytales" has gotten really old by now and wasn't exactly interesting to begin with.

 

[Ashley Blalock]

I've got to admit a movie that sells witch hunters as the good guys makes me a little squeamish. Historically given all the innocent people brutally killed by witch hunters it has about the same effect as making the Inquisition or the Nazi SS heroes of a film. Some things are just tainted beyond the point of getting redeeming qualities to them.

Doesn't really help that the trailers gave me a feeling of a bad movie loaded with misogyny.

As to Star Wars, well it just makes me feel grateful that Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit were left in the hands of someone like Peter Jackson. Perhaps JJ Abrams can surprise me but so far I've just got a bad feeling he's not going to be able to capture that magic of the original series that Star Wars fans long for. Sure it will be a hit because it's got the Star War name on it, but Hollywood lately seems like it's into just cashing in on names instead of making something even better.

 

[BrotherRool]

I ask because I never watched lost or Alias and I've seen neither Cloverfield nor Super 8. Were there lens flares in those as well?

Spoiler: Super 8

Unfortunately it looks like.. yeah.

 

[anthony87]

So fighting witches is misogynist now?

 

[Deacon Cole]

Comparisons to Brothers Grimm lead me to give this one a pass. Brothers Grimm was anti-entertainment. It was so bad that watching it was like eating my own fecal matter.

 

[mrblakemiller]

1. Abrams used too much lens flare ONE TIME and got hammered for it right when the film came out. Remember all the other stuff he's done that didn't have too much lens flare? Cloverfield was great. It's like cutting Al Pacino's nuts off for starring in Cruising.

2. Which came first, actual witch hunts or stories about evil witches? Mhm. And no, I don't care that some people some time used this phrase to kill people who were innocent. If I had that as a qualifier, I wouldn't be able to play the same video games all the school shooters have, would I?

3. Why is it still offensive for a man to punch a villian in the face if she's a woman? If you ask me, it's sexist in its exceptionalism. A man or woman punching a male villian in the face is just a hero punching a villian in the face, but women don't get to be "villians," they have to be "female villains." They're still an exception to the rule, still illegitimate in that role. I say thee nay. Kinda funny that this criticism happens one or two days after the Army starts talking about lifting the ban on women in forward combat positions.

But yeah, any main character getting hurt and nursed back to health twice by two different characters sounds like too much for a 90-minute film.

 

[Harker067]

I couldn't believe the news myself. Regardless of who directs the next star wars movie i'm sure it will be a hit at the box office so why not take on a good director who makes quality films? I understand why people like Abrams but their is no denying that his films are shallow and the lense flairs are annoying.

Good review as usual Bob, i had a feeling that this film would just be ripping off the brothers grim.

The thing is, Star Wars is pretty shallow. There isn't any deeper meaning to any of it, it's a well told story that has good action, well written likable characters and a decent ending. It doesn't have anything to say beyond that.

Abrams is a talented director, he can do an ensemble pretty well and some of his action sequences are actually pretty amazing. It's his troupe of writers who suck, writing terrible movies that he directs. Star Wars won't have this issue as his writing troupe is nowhere to be found. And you better be damn sure that Disney, Lucasarts and the story team at Pixar are not gonna let this go through with a shitty script.


Abrams has a very small chance of screwing this one up, I mean, he's already made a pretty good Star Wars film in 2009.

I agree with this sentiment. As long as there's a good writer Abrams should have little trouble being better then the last (first? stupid numbering) three star wars movies (I,II,III).

 

[Diddy_Mao]

Oh, did Abrams use a lens flare a few times in Star Trek?
Glad someone pointed that out.


As I've said before I think Abrams is the safest bet Disney could have hoped for. Sure I would have rather seen Snyder or Del Toro get the job because I think they have directorial styles that would have been fun and interesting to see in the Star Wars universe.

Fun and interesting being something that's been sorely lacking from the series for a while now.

Abrams on the other hand has a versatile style that can adapt better to an existing franchise without creating too much stylistic whiplash.


As for the movie on hand.

I'm honestly surprised that there haven't been more parallels to Van Helsing since it seems to me that they were kinda cut from the same "this is stupid but let's do it anyway" cloth.

 

[Sylveria]

Bob dislikes a movie AND is getting on his soap box about misogyny that can only be seen by people who are projecting so hard they've got a light shining from their head?

We'll I know what I'm going to see this weekend.

Here's the difference between real witch hunts and fantasy witch hunts.. real witches were women who were being persecuted for even being able to do math.. fantasy witches cast spells, curse towns and people, fly, turn in to monsters, summon demons, and kill people. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE.

Tell me Bob, is every single instance of a woman being the "bad person" misogynous now? Cause I have family working at a women's prison and I wan't to make sure she knows that every woman there never did anything wrong, they are just victims of a misogynistic society - even the ones that murdered their entire family in cold blood. I've also played a number of games where there's a sorceress or a witch or a female demon or some crazy ***** on a power trip trying to destroy the world, are all those misogynistic? I'd ask if stuff where there's a female lead is okay, but I know it isn't since, after all, even if a woman is the hero, she's probably showing a bit of skin or through the virtue of simply having boobs is being exploited by being in a video game.

FFS this "everything is misogynistic" bull is getting out of control.

And your "I hate everything about the new star-trek" fan-rage is getting old and is incredibly ironic on the heels of your big "I'm sick of hearing these complaints" Intermissions. But, being the massive hypocrite you are, its okay to complain about stuff you don't like, but not stuff other people don't that you do or are indifferent to.

 

[shadowmagus]

Wow Bob. I've watched some pretty crappy and pretentious reviews out of you, but this one you must have worked at.

First off, JJ Abrams. I'm not sure how I feel about it, and I think despite everything it still has potential. Remember, the first Star Wars movies were good because Lucas' wife at the time was a half decent writer, not Lucas himself.

Two, the whole witch hunt thing is just stupid. These are evil people, casting black magic with the intent to do bad things. If these people actually existed, you damn right people would have killed them. Its fiction Bob, it has no basis in reality whatsoever. Take off the white knight armor and relax.

 

[TheSchaef]

Oh, look, MovieBob bagging on Star Trek 09 again. I guess that's one way to draw in comments when reviewing a completely forgettable Van Helsing knockoff.

Happy to credit the Hansel director for his work on Dead Snow, but tossing out the fact that Abrams brought Mission: Impossible back from the brink of eternal ridicule. It is my unprofessional opinion that the selection of Brad Bird to direct the fourth was insurance against losing that momentum.

We get it. You don't like Star Trek as space fantasy rather than science fiction. If anything, that makes him ideal to direct Star Wars, which is ENTIRELY a space fantasy. How do lightsabers work? We don't know! How does the Force work? EFF Midichlorians, we don't know! What powers the hyperdrives on the spaceships? It's bigger on the inside! Space fantasy!

You're talking about a saga wherein the biggest plot twist ever was that the big bad was actually the father of the hero, and where the only character in the prequels who was interesting to watch was the most evil guy in the universe!

In fact, didn't your review of Star Wars accuse Abrams of possible looking to recast Star Trek AS (among other things) Star Wars?

Abrams in, George out, possible original cast cameos... I'm really not seeing the downside so far.

edit. And if a women kills a man? It is not misandry. It just show her as a strong independent women.

I think you just reviewed Enough [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0278435/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1] in less than 25 words.

 

[Erttheking]

It really baffles me what with everything that happened in the new Star Trek (which I liked) for some reason people only give a damn about the freaking lens flare.

And the only vibe I get from that complaint Moviebob is that you should always make the villain a white man to avoid unfortunate implications. Screw that.

 

[Lvl 64 Klutz]

Man, people weren't really listening to Bob when he said that his thoughts about the misogynist tones about the movie were just an interesting thought and nothing more. It's not like he was calling for a boycott of the movie or anything, folks.

Also, I totally forgot just how much of a Starbucks hipster JJ Abrams looks like.

 

[TheSchaef]

It probably got lost in the one-third of the entire review spent elaborating on the interesting-thought-and-nothing-more.

 

[Sylveria]

edit. And if a women kills a man? It is not misandry. It just show her as a strong independent women.

I think you just reviewed Enough [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0278435/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1] in less than 25 words.

Didn't she get raped in that movie or something? It's misogynistic to, even if she gets her revenge, everything is misogynistic if a bad thing happens to a woman. Even if a woman just gets gently nudged during a foot-chase, the movie is misogynistic. Heck if the movie even has women in it, it's misogynistic.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

J.J. Abrams: okay, so his lens-flare porn is irritating, but he's a decent director, otherwise. Colour me cautiously interested.

Teh Movie: yeah. Pretty much what its trailers promised. A brainless, fluffy Medieval Steampunk action piece because... fuck it, it's January, we're all either stuck with the flu, a cold or staring down the barrel of the Holidays' credit bills. It's not like anyone has two brain cells to spare on anything clever, right about now.

Oh, Jeremy Renner. You were awesome in "Dahmer". I miss your character pieces.