I was a big fan of the original Hellboy, and considered it a shame that it never quite got the success and attention it deserved. So, I was very happy to hear that a sequel was finally in the works - at a different studio no less (the original was a Sony film, with this sequel from Universal). In between the first Hellboy and this sequel, director Guillermo del Toro found huge success with Pan’s Labyrinth (a film I kinda liked, but didn’t think was all too great). So as I saw the first trailers for Hellboy 2, I definitely noticed some design influence from Pan’s Labyrinth. Of course, since making this movie, del Toro has made a bigger name for himself as the director of the upcoming Hobbit films. After having seen Hellboy 2, I must admit to not liking it as much as the first. Almost all the elements were entertaining enough, but not quite up to the level from the first film. The only exception I’d make to that statement is the visual effects, which were a bit hit-or-miss in the first, but gorgeous in this sequel.

Writing: The story for this sequel kinda holds together, but it’s a bit unfocused and forced. Worse still, much of it is a bit too genre standard in nature. It all just seems to be there to bounce from set piece to set piece. The character interactions are either a bit too contradictory, or a bit too convenient. And the ultimate big moment of the ending is a bit too obvious. And we also have characters that make little sense to have included in the plot, like that of Johann Krauss. For all his setup as a nemesis, they never pay that off in any real way, then suddenly he’s a good buddy? I don’t know, the writing in this one wasn’t horrible or anything, but it was very definitely the weakest point of the film.

Production: There’s little to complain about here. If there’s any weakness in the production, it’s almost a feeling of them trying just a bit too hard in sequences where less would have been more. It had that “sequel that must top the original” feel to it. Fewer action scenes and more character scenes would have been welcome. But the action is well staged with good practical and visual effects work. Cinematography is solid all around, with no real weaknesses to mention. Were I to have directed the Hellboy films, though, it would have been in 2.35 aspect ratio. But hey, if I were a director, I think everything I shot would be in 2.35.

Cast: The best strength of this sequel is the return of the great cast. Well, with the exception of the insanely lame off-handed mention of Rupert Evans’ character of Agent Myers absense. Ron Perlman is fantastic as Hellboy, of course. He’s not quite as playful as in the first, taking the role in a more aggressive direction, but he still works magnificently. Selma Blair, a favorite actress of mine, is excellent returning as Liz Sherman. Doug Jones makes an excellent return as Abe Sapien. And Jeffrey Tambor does his usual (and always fun) bumbling performance. Heck, even the great John Hurt gets to put in a small appearance in a flashback. Joining them in this sequel are Luke Goss and Anna Walton, who are very well cast as the brother-sister set of twins that are the new friend/foe quandry for the plot. All in all, not a problem to be found in the casting department.

Music: I was most saddened to find out that composer Marco Beltrami wasn’t returning for this sequel. Danny Elfman took over scoring duties for this one. His score is just like the movie itself, entertaining enough, but not up to the standards of the first film. It’s a playful and energetic score, with some nice moments here and there, but it’s missing the heart and soul of Beltrami’s original masterpiece. I flat out love Beltrami’s original, particularly Hellboy & Liz’s theme, and it was a sad thing that not only weren’t any of the original themes used, but there weren’t any particularly solid thematic elements to Elfman’s sequel score. His is certainly entertaining, but not a masterpiece.

So it’s a bit sad that I didn’t enjoy this entry quite as much. Am I sad they made it? No. It’s a fun enough follow-up. Do I wish it were better? Absolutely. Though after such a horrible super-hero movie as Hancock, I was happy to enjoy this one. But hey, in two more days, I’ll be seeing The Dark Knight - a genre movie which by almost all accounts so far is spectacular.

It’s funny how some movies can get away with the ridiculous, almost by the simple act of embracing said insanity. From physical insanity like curving bullets to mythological insanity like the “Loom Of Fate” (a truly brilliant piece of make-believe), it’s hard to not be amused.

Writing: Having not read the graphic novel material this is based on, I can’t comment on adaptation qualities. I’ve read other places that the original authors of it were pleased with the adaptation. There’s no denying that it has many story qualities one would find in such source material, and the movie makes such textures and story elements work for itself. The backstory for “The Fraternity” is equal parts genre-standard “skulls” material and audaciously original goofiness. Ultimately, the story pays itself off well in the end. One thing’s for sure, it doesn’t back down on the violence and language.

Production: Director Timur Bekmambetov has a proven track record of being able to direct surprisingly elegant and striking action scenes in his bold Night Watch and its sequels. While the action scenes are spaced a bit apart in this movie, when they kick off, they really kick off. While not all the bits in these sequences come off as realistic, they certainly come off as impressive. From the playful visual effects to the slick editing and unrestrained performances, it all has an odd vibe that works. Sound design is particularly striking. And the cinematography is spot-on.

Cast: The unusual casting of James McAvoy works very well. He brings something akin to Edward Norton’s performance in Fight Club to the film. In fact, there’s a number of moments in the movie that made me think of Fight Club. And while the casting of Morgan Freeman isn’t completely normal for this kind of film, it’s hardly unprecedented (see his great performances in films like Lucky Number Slevin and Hard Rain for example). Freeman definitely brings that stately calm to the role, as well as that slight edge of danger. Terence Stamp is a bit wasted in his brief role. But when it comes to style and action, the real star of this film is Angelina Jolie. It hardly comes as a surprise to see how easily she handles a role like this. I’m sure the film makers had to think for about one billionth of a nanosecond about who would be the easiest casting choice for her role. This is an “Angelina Jolie kind of role,” so why not just cast her in it, confident in your end result. It kind of helps offset the genre-first casting of McAvoy in the lead.

Music: Speaking of unexpected moves, picking Danny Elfman to score this film isn’t exactly a wild notion or anything, it’s just a bit unexpected. One would fully expect one of Hans Zimmer’s stable of composers to take on a film like this, or perhaps the current trend of picking Tyler Bates. Elfman brings a very cool range of styles to the score, fusing it with cool action cues and elegant orchestral and thematic style. It’s one of the highlights of the film, easily. Add to the fact that even does the vocal performances on the main song he wrote (”The Little Things”) that’s used in a couple places in the film (and shares some thematic bits with the rest of the score). One of Elfman’s best scores in recent years.

• What the……? How could you, Mr. Guillermo del Toro??? You make a sequel to Hellboy and DON’T get Marco Beltrami back for the music score? That’s downright criminal. His score to the first film was a masterpiece. Danny Elfman’s no slouch of a composer, but I find it impossible to believe that he’ll match Beltrami’s work from the first.
• As you will have noticed, I got my Iron Man review posted after seeing it this evening. I’ve still got a handful of other partially completed reviews, both recent and from earlier this year, to get posted, as well as the number of other pending reviews I haven’t started yet. I swear I’ll finally get caught up. I refuse to let a number of them slip by permanently like I did last year. They may be late, but they’ll show up (hopefully before they’ve at least hit their video release).
• The Descent 2 has been picked up. I consider the first to be a contender for my all-time favorite horror film. I have to admit that the setup for this sequel sound very lame, but I’ll be happy to give it a chance.
• Microsoft has release a new overhauled version of their Photo Info tool, named Pro Photo Tools.
• Here’s a column by John C. Dvorak about the failures of Vista. It’s a column I definitely agree with. I’d have other things to add, most of which are nit-picks. I’m one of those people who tells of personal dislikes for Vista and having fallen back to using XP (I type this on my machine that had Vista on it for about a month or two last year, and has been happily back on XP ever since).
• Time Warner continues to struggle, thanks to AOL, as usual. When is Time Warner finally gonna manage to shake that AOL monkey off their back?
• Seriously, how stupid can some people be?
• 4 kittens and a box. What more does one need?
• Paramount has details of their rejoining to the Blu-Ray market.
• Hebrew Press 1932: Hitler Makes A Good Impression. Good grief.
• And here’s the rarest of postings coming from me. This one is sports related. And it’s awesome.

Described by critics as something akin to CSI: Riyadh as an action movie, this film is definitely engaging, if a bit flawed.

Writing: The juxtaposition of the environment of Saudi Arabia is one of the only things that gives this plot a fresh spin. If not for the change in setting, and the politics that surrounds it, the plot is little more than a team of FBI agents out to catch the bad guy(s). That’s not entirely a criticism, because it’s kind of an interesting thing to see a standard plot thrown for a loop by nothing more than the setting. Character development is kind of on-the-nose, but it works. Ultimately, this movie is about performance and production more than it is about writing. I will compliment the movie for being probably the only movie in recent years having anything to do with international relations that doesn’t portray the USA as villains or soldiers out to slaughter innocent civilians. In fact, I’m adding on a point for that fact alone to make up for the one I’m subtracting for what I’ll rant about below.

Production: Almost everything about this production is fantastic. However, I stress the word “almost.” I’m going to come down extremely hard on one thing, and I’m going to be a little bit unfair to this individual film in doing so. What I’m going to slam is the cinematography. I’m sick to $#*@!%^ death of the handheld “docu” feel that has been the fad in recent years. Once Ridley Scott showed everyone how to do it with Black Hawk Down (and he did it with masterful precision), everyone and their uncle has decided that it is how they have to shoot their film. However, in perhaps a misguided effort to top the last guy who did it, they employ camera operators suffering from the final stages of Parkinsons disease. Seriously, could they just hold the camera even slightly steady for one billionth of a second? Pretty please. While this film isn’t nearly as bad as The Bourne Supremacy, it’s severely annoying and distracting. I subtracted at least a full point out of ten from my enjoyment of this film for this fact alone. Then again, for something to be worse at the hand held crap than The Bourne Supremacy, somebody would have to tie the camera to the back of a car and drag it around for the whole film. I don’t mind the occasional hand held sequence in films, if it doesn’t feel like the camera crew are 100% incompetent at their jobs, and if it isn’t constant from one scene to the next. This movie, sadly, breaks both of those rules. I think this movie gets worst cinematography of the year from me so far. I must pay special compliment to the opening title sequence, though. It’s a very well constructed history of the Saudi Arabian kingdom with their discovery of oil and relations with the United States that followed. It’s produced with slick style and actually tells the nearly 100 year historical story very well. Oh, and I definitely enjoyed all the location filming and well staged action sequences. Well, as best as I could see them through the horrible camera work, anyway.

Cast: You know, I would enjoy this movie for no other reason than to see Jennifer Garner back in action. Amusingly, she’s probably got more experience in action sequences than the rest of the cast combined. Her years on Alias were more than adequate preparation for her role in this movie. She gets a couple excellent action scenes to take part in, and more than holds her own. Jamie Foxx does an OK job with the overly-confident and somewhat one note character. Chris Cooper fits his role like a glove. But then again, he’s been in enough political/espionage thrillers to be able to do this stuff blindfolded. Interestingly, he doesn’t usually end up as part of the action material in most of said films, but he does get a pretty good amount of action material in this one. Jason Bateman does what he does best - witty sarcasm. He comes through with some nice scenes of dramatic performance, too. Supporting performances are good, including the likes of Richard Jenkins and Frances Fisher. Jeremy Piven is cast in a somewhat obvious move for a self-centered ambassador, doing his usual great job at riffing his way through dialog and situations. Definitely an amusing side character to the story.

Music: Danny Elfman’s score gets the job done pretty well. The guitar stuff is a bit thick for my liking, but his electronic overtones and action cues are quite good. The scoring of the opening title sequence is particularly well done.