This film would never get made today. At least not with intents this transparent. It serves to glorify Elvis Presley and his embodiment. But back in 1964, these types of B-movies were just accepted. Nowadays teen cinema consists of a post-apocalyptic love triangle. Much more realistic. Not quite as blatant.
Elvis plays Lucky, a race car driver who's in Las Vegas to compete in the Vegas Grand Prix. He needs a new engine but is strapped for cash due to contrived reasons. He falls for Rusty (Ann-Margret) who seems to be abruptly against his racing ways.
This movie is all over the place. About halfway through it becomes disjointed, making it obvious what its purpose is. For a pointless, plotless story, it's way too convoluted.
For an 84 minute film, it takes its sweet time, attempting to thin itself out to cover the short runtime. But then, once it realizes it's home free, the story progresses ridiculously fast and things never get resolved.
Elvis and Ann-Margret have undeniable chemistry, but their depth is almost non-existent. Lucky's motivations are unclear, and Rusty goes from a likable, independent worker woman at the beginning of the film to an incompetent bimbo by the end.
The songs and dance numbers are impressively catchy, but that's all this movie is. The few glamorous Las Vegas shots are nice, but there aren't nearly enough in a movie with the city's name in the title. It almost seems like a blown opportunity to make a cool story about gambling or mobsters. Instead, it's about racing--something few of us think of when talking about Vegas.
It's a dated movie, but that's perhaps the best thing this film has to offer. There are some cool shots of the Vegas of yesteryear. There's one in particular showing the front of the Flamingo as it used to be--alone, with nothing on either side. Contrastingly, we get a shot of Fremont Street in all its garish glory--busy and crowded, sans the 1,500 foot canopy movie screen overhead. While watching this, my fiancée turns to me and says, "You used to be able to drive down Fremont Street???" My, how things have changed.
Twizard Rating: 57
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is based on the 1964 television series of the same name. In the film version, Henry Cavill plays Napoleon Solo--a former thief who now works for the CIA. He must save Gaby Teller (Alicia Vikander) from KGB operative, Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer). After reporting to his supervisor, Solo discovers that he must work together WITH Kuryakin in order to steal plans for a nuclear weapon designed by Teller's father for the Nazis.
Despite such intriguing background stories for both Solo and Kuryakin, none of that is shown--only told. The film is intended to act as an origin story, but we only get the latter portion of the origin--the arguably more pedestrian one.
But the part that's shown isn't boring by nature. The plot is really creative with a few twists thrown in. However, the dialogue attempts to explain things in a slick "Guy Ritchie" manner, but instead comes off as more confusing than it needs to be.
At times, it's hard to follow and difficult to understand who everyone is, but if you can figure it out, it's an entertaining film.
The comedy is kept subtle in an Ocean's Eleven kind of way, and Solo and Kuryakin's relationship is fun to watch develop. But besides that, there isn't much depth to it either.
The set pieces are nice to look at. We're really immersed into the era--something that is on the list of director, Guy Ritchie's "pros" list.
Throw in a couple of highly creative action sequences -- the only ones in the movie -- and you get a fairly entertaining couple of hours. But other than that, and a pretty good plot, nothing truly sets it apart from the rest of the movies you'll see this summer--the film's true downfall. And in a year filled with a more-than-usual helping of spy movies, this one is going to end up coming in around 4th or 5th on the list.
Twizard Rating: 74
The future. That's all this movie is about. How we see the future, anyway. Whether it's right or wrong (usually wrong), we have some sort of an idea. In the 1960s our culture saw the future as nothing that we could ever imagine. Everything was right with the world and we had flying cars--always flying cars. Now, we see the future as much more grim. The polar icecaps melt and the air isn't breathable. We are obsessed with dystopian images. I mean, look at our movies and literature nowadays. But what Tomorrowland wants us to know is that if we believe it, it will more or less happen.
This film is very smart--smarter than most of its audience will be able to tell. It seems pretty black and white, but it's not.
In intertwines two people (George Clooney and Britt Robertson) from two opposing generation's stories and juxtaposes them. Clooney plays adult Frank, but for most of the first quarter of the movie we see Frank as a boy at the 1964 World's Fair in New York. Then we meet modern-day Casey (Robertson), who is a teenage girl obsessed with space and full of hope.
We get fantastic visuals of this mysterious place called "Tomorrowland"--which I won't spoil for anyone. And we finally get a refreshing look at the future from The Jetsons or Back to the Future that we haven't seen in film in awhile.
The first half of the movie plays out as more of a mystery--a really really fun one. We're always feeling like we're playing catch-up.
While many critics thought that the ending was a disappointment, I would have to disagree. Sure we're left with more of a message than a wowing twist, but it's a message that is worth a lot of weight.
There's nothing really bad I can say about Tomorrowland. The narrative may be a bit uneven, but I think it's necessary to convey that story at hand.
Maybe I was just so enamored by the breathtaking visuals, or maybe I was giddy about the refreshingly non-formulaic sci-fi adventure, but either way, those aren't bad qualities for a movie to have.
Twizard Rating: 96
