Caffeinated Clint
Those milkshakes might bring all the boys to the yard – but what if, once they take a sip, they’re suddenly hit by the realization that the syrup that gives it its flavor has been used way too scarcely?
That’s how many will feel about Warner’s “Aquaman” – pretty on the outside and full to the brim but somewhat ordinary, lacking the bubble and taste of the better superhero films in recent years.
Sure, the trident works… it’s just a little blunt.
The story kicks off on the coastline of Maine, where a kindly local (Temuera Morrison) rescues a wounded woman (Nicole Kidman) from the shallow waters below the lighthouse. As she reveals, she’s from the sea – a citizen of the underwater city of Atlantis. Time passes, they fall in love, and ultimately, baby Arthur enters the picture.
After a soldier of weapon-blazing Atlantians come looking for her, Atlanna comes to the conclusion that her husband and child will be safer if she returns to her home. So that’s what she does. And as far as legend has it, she was sentenced to death upon arriving back. Fade to Black.
Years later, ‘half-breed’ Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa), still loving with his pop, is approached by a woman from the water, Mera (Amber Heard) who requests his presence in Atlantis. It’s there that he – the rightful King – will aid in the fight against the malevolent Orm (Patrick Wilson), also Arthur’s half-brother, who is determined to bring destruction to the people above.
Aquaman – a character that increased in popularity in the ‘50s and ‘60s, as a founding member of the Justice League – will one day be the King of Atlantis, that we know, but not before he accepts his heritage, hones his powers, and finds the spiky thing that allows him to rule.
Within the next couple of hours, Curry – with underwater-pal Mera, the King’s daughter, assisting – will evade all sorts of human and non-human threats, and likely, take on his turncoat sibling.
So, just quickly, is “Aquaman” better than “Justice League”? Yes – but that didn’t sit a very high benchmark, did it? (Even the last “Ghoulies” flick looks like Bertolucci next to it). Still, it is – this resembles an actual film, with an actual start, middle and end, as opposed to a random cushion of loose film negatives from weak comic-book fan-films enveloped together.
Is Jason Momoa good as the future King of the Sea ? Yes, he sure is – though he could’ve used some smarter, witter dialogue to dish out as he chased his throne. Still, he does get to do more than shout ‘My Man!’ twenty times, so that’s a win for his agent.
Does the ‘senator of scares’ James Wan (“Saw”, “Insidious”, “The Conjuring”) deliver as good as superhero film as he does horror films? The toilet-break I didn’t mind taking somewhere in the middle of the 2-hour 23-minute film might answer that.
Thing is, this isn’t a ‘James Wan Film’ and was never going to be.
After the commercial and critical failures of most (“Wonder Woman” an exception) of DC’s previous superhero films (particularly last year’s “Justice League”, which Momoa’s Aquaman featured in), anyone tackling “Aquaman” was going to have their work cut out for them – especially if they’re coming in hoping to put their own stamp or trademark-style on the picture. By-and-large, the filmmaker is to stick to a tried-and-true formula that was pre-prepared before they even took their seat at the table.
Based on comments made by most filmmakers who’ve directed a superhero movie over the past twenty years, the filmmaker isn’t necessarily being hired for their imaginative ideas, trademark directing style or refreshing vision – you’re a hired gun answering to a committee, a committee that’s already decided on the look and tone of a movie before a director is even hired. And as we saw with the “Justice League” debacle, too many cooks usually result in a kitchen that goes down in flames. That’s not exactly the case here, there’s only a few small spot fires on show, but hardly any of Wan’s strengths on screen.
Admittedly, anyone bringing this comic to the silver screen was always going to have to jump through some hard waves. The character of Aquaman, or Arthur Curry as he’s known on dry land, has long been designated the more ridiculous of the justice league bunch – what with his main super power being that he can talk to fish. But with the film, co-writer and director Wan takes the only workable approach – by playing up the ridiculous element of the character, and his world, and having his film mimic a fast-packed Japanese anime than serious superhero fare.
And while the approach works for the most part, it’s also that impetus to play up the silly, and trumpet the film’s visual oddities, that ultimately hurts the film. By focusing largely on the film’s outrageous special effects sequences, visual-stirring but lengthy underwater battle sequences and an assortment of CGI creatures (an octopus playing the drums, anyone?), Wan has lost what made his horror entries so great – a unique plot, interesting characters one could invest in, and enough compel to drive the story forward. Plus, there’s just so, so, so much of ‘it’ – after a while, all you see is a computer-generated orgy of tentacles flipping, flopping and smacking the sides of submarines and dancing around lasers. Scissors, editors, scissors!
The script, penned by David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick (“Orphan”) and Will Beall (“Gangster Squad”), plays more like blockbusters of a similar ilk – largely “Avatar”, “Thor” and “Tron Legacy” (of which this film’s plot, hidden fantastical world and even score closely resemble) than the fresher, more captivating comic book fare of late like “Spider-Man : Into the Spider-Verse” , “Logan”, even DC’s “Wonder Woman”.
If the “Fast & Furious” film he did, and now “Aquaman”, prove anything it’s that Wan is best suited to smaller, more original genre films – not super-sized studio blockbusters, especially not the ones where he’s essentially only being hired to point and shoot. At least then, he’ll likely get to do his thing.
Better than the uneven style-to-substance ratio is the cast – with Jason Momoa’s Aquaman a fun, bicep-tually charming and likeable hero. He doesn’t have a lot to work with, and we never quite get to know the guy as anything other than a cocky meathead, but he’s engaging to watch.
Amber Heard’s bust doesn’t fare as well, with her lack of acting chops so cumbersomely evident in several big moments, but she does, like her onscreen love interest, at least look the part.
Also fun to see Patrick Wilson, Willem Dafoe, Dolph Lundgren and Julie Andrews (who we don’t so much see, as we do hear) in very different roles than we’re used to seeing them – near all of them cast in the part you least expect to see them in.
Momoa may be the star but it’s Nicole Kidman and Temuera Morrison, playing Curry’s parents, in their own sweet bookend story, that stand out. Kidman, kicking all sorts of arse in a role that’s a radical departure for the thesp, and Morrison, playing the sort of protective and somber role he barely gets to play, are incredible together as the tragic lovers who’s coming together sets the events of the film in motion. Their performances, and their little story, is one of the film’s highlights.
“Aquaman” isn’t a bad movie, in fact it has a lot going on for it on a technical and creative level, and it’s not the mess “Justice League” was, but it sure would’ve been nice if they’d pulled back on all the battered fish and not let the writers flake off. Maybe the sequel – of which the customary end credits sequence sets up – won’t be so waterlogged.
