Riddick: Plagiarising the Puerile

my rating: Nathan's rating:

Somewhere there's a 14-year-old boy missing his spiral-bound notebook.

He's a somewhat imaginative lad, and maybe someday he'll come up with a story that's quite clever and original. But so far his notebook - which fell into the hands of the producers of The Chronicles of Riddick - is full of derivative cliches that an adolescent might think are the makings of an epic... but lack any of the depth or characterisation needed to appeal to a thinking adult.

The script is loaded with "ideas" as shallow as their names: the "necromongers" who worship this "underverse", lead by "Lord Marshal", and the only one who can stand up to them is the last surviving "Furyan", who (for some reason) goes to the prison planet "Crematoria". Not that there's anything wrong with cool-sounding names ("Darth Vader", "Shadowfax", "Excalibur", and "Argonauts" are all evocative names), but they're not enough in themselves. Riddick himself is a non-character, and the deadpan quips that substitute for his dialog seem to invite a letter from Gov. Schwartzenegger's patent attorney.

And speaking of attorneys: Judi Dench needs to sue her agent, for whatever malpractise got her signed to do this film.

Nathan defended the movie, citing the special effects, and yes, it's clear that they spent all the money they'd budgeted for that, and got their money's worth. But again, that's just standard surface gloss... or in this case, a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The images flickering on the screen in front of me were enough to keep me awake in the darkened cinema. But that's rather damning praise, I think.