8. 2012 (November 13)
Plot: Never before has a date in history been so significant to so many cultures, so many religions, scientists, and governments. 2012 is an epic adventure about a global cataclysm that brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.
Quick thoughts: Based on the trailer, there doesn't seem to be anything here that we haven't already seen before from Roland Emmerich (The Day After Tomorrow). However, if at the time there aren't any other viable options out there, this seems like the perfect type of movie to simply shut off your brains and just watch everything get turned into rubble.
7. Capitalism: A Love Story (September 23)
Plot: Capitalism: A Love Story will explore the root causes of the global economic meltdown and take a comical look at the corporate and political shenanigans that culminated in what Moore has described as "the biggest robbery in the history of this country" – the massive transfer of U.S. taxpayer money to private financial institutions. On this, the 20-year anniversary of his masterpiece Roger & Me, Moore returns to the issue that began his career: the disastrous impact that corporate dominance and out-of-control profit motives have on the lives of Americans and citizens of the world. But this time the culprit is much bigger than General Motors, and the crime scene far wider than Flint, Michigan.
Quick thoughts: Yes, we may not always agree with his politics, but there's no denying that he knows how to make engaging films. Given the relevancy of this topic, I think a lot of people are going to be interested in seeing it. Also economics seem to be Moore's bread and butter, so I'll be very curious to see what he has to say this time around.
6. The Road (October 16)
Plot: Academy Award nominee Viggo Mortensen, Academy Award winners Robert Duvall and Charlize Theron, Guy Pearce and 12-year-old Kodi Smit McPhee star in the big-screen adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's best-selling, Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, The Road – the story of a man (Mortensen) and his young son (Smit-McPhee) traveling through a desperate, post-apocalyptic world.
Quick thoughts: This one has a great cast and great source material that seem to make it likely to be prominent during awards season. However, this was supposed to come out last year and postponements are usually never a good sign in terms of quality. For now, I'm going to remain hopeful, but if it doesn't I can say I told you so.
5. The Box (November 6)
Plot: What if someone gave you a box containing a button that, if pushed, would bring you a million dollars...but simultaneously take the life of someone you don't know? Would you do it? And what would be the consequences? The year is 1976. Norma Lewis is a teacher at a private high school and her husband, Arthur, is an engineer working at NASA. They are, by all accounts, an average couple living a normal life in the suburbs with their young son...until a mysterious man with a horribly disfigured face appears on their doorstep and presents Norma with a life-altering proposition: the box. With only 24 hours to make their choice, Norma and Arthur face an impossible moral dilemma. What they don't realize is that no matter what they decide, terrifying consequences will have already been set in motion. They soon discover that the ramifications of this decision are beyond their control and extend far beyond their own fortune and fate.
Quick thoughts: Man, I really hope that this one turns out to be good. I'm fascinated by the plot and the trailer made me all the more interested. However, I've been burned before and this is just the type of movie that could easily turn out to be well-intentioned garbage. The fact that they've scheduled it for November instead of Sept. or Oct. makes me think the studio has high hopes for it as well.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
NMR: Off the Depp end
After watching Johnny Depp in Public Enemies, I decided to catch a couple of his older films that I had never seen before.
Donnie Brasco: This felt like one of the most authentic mobster movies I have ever seen. You have great performances from both Depp and Al Pacino, although that's not that surprising. About the only flaw is that the film loses a bit of drama near the end given that you know the fate of Depp's character already given that the person his character is based on is still alive. However, that shouldn't really detract you from seeing this well made film if you haven't done so already. Rating: ****
From Hell: I don't know if I was just in the wrong mood when I saw this or what, but I did not care for it at all. Even though I find the Jack the Ripper case interesting, I did not buy anything about this story. While the person the film claims is the killer is complete fiction, I knew right away who it was going to be. I found the film to be filled with cliches. You also have a (typical) lousy performance from Heather Graham. As for Depp, while a fine performance, it's definitely not one of his better ones. Rating: **
Donnie Brasco: This felt like one of the most authentic mobster movies I have ever seen. You have great performances from both Depp and Al Pacino, although that's not that surprising. About the only flaw is that the film loses a bit of drama near the end given that you know the fate of Depp's character already given that the person his character is based on is still alive. However, that shouldn't really detract you from seeing this well made film if you haven't done so already. Rating: ****
From Hell: I don't know if I was just in the wrong mood when I saw this or what, but I did not care for it at all. Even though I find the Jack the Ripper case interesting, I did not buy anything about this story. While the person the film claims is the killer is complete fiction, I knew right away who it was going to be. I found the film to be filled with cliches. You also have a (typical) lousy performance from Heather Graham. As for Depp, while a fine performance, it's definitely not one of his better ones. Rating: **
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Fall Movie Preview (12-9)
12. The Men Who Stare At Goats (November 6)
Plot: Based on true events described in Jon Ronson's 2004 book of the same title, The Men Who Stare at Goats involves a down-on-his-luck reporter (McGregor) who gets more than he bargains for when he meets a special forces agent (Clooney) who reveals the existence of a secret, psychic military unit whose goal is to use paranormal powers to end war as we know it.
Quick thoughts: The plot for this movie sounds so bizarre, I can't help but be intriqued by it. Throw in the fact that the movie has a very strong cast with George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey and now I'm really interested. I have yet to see any footage from this, so I could be way off and this will be terrible. I will give the film credit for this, though, their title certainly isn't misleading as seen by the one promotional photo released for this film:
11. Whip It (October 9)
Plot: Whip It, the directorial debut of Drew Barrymore, stars Ellen Page (Juno) as Bliss, a rebellious Texas teen who throws in her small town beauty pageant crown for the rowdy world of roller derby. Marcia Gay Harden (Mystic River, Pollock) plays Bliss' disapproving mother, while Kristen Wiig (Saturday Night Live) and Juliette Lewis (Old School) play roller-derby stars. Also starring Eve, Jimmy Fallon, and Daniel Stern.
Quick thoughts: I saw the trailer and the movie looks like it could be a lot of fun. It would be tough not to be given the funny people involved in the film. I am concerned that the film may not look as good as it could be given the inexperience of Barrymore behind the camera. This has a chance of being real good as long as they don't go overboard with the female empowerment message.
10. Toy Story/Toy Story 2 in 3-D (October 2)
Plot: Do I really need to tell you what these movies are about?
Quick thoughts: Well there's certainly no mystery about the quality of these movies. I don't necessarily see the added appeal of 3-D, but if you do like it, then how can you pass up the chance to see these modern classics visually updated? If nothing else, you're likely to get the first full trailer for Toy Story 3 when you watch them.
9. Couples Retreat (October 9)
Plot: Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, Jon Favreau, Malin Akerman, Kristin Davis, Kristen Bell and Faizon Love star in Universal Pictures' upcoming comedy Couples Retreat. Based on an original idea of Vaughn's, the comedy follows four Midwestern couples who embark on a journey to a tropical island resort. While one of the couples is there to work on their marriage, the other three set out to jet ski, spa and enjoy some fun in the sun. They soon discover that participation in the resort’s couples therapy is not optional. Suddenly, their group-rate vacation comes at a price. What follows is a hilarious look at real world problems faced by all couples. The film also stars Kali Hawk and Jean Reno.
Quick thoughts: As you may have seen in my comments when I posted the trailer for this film, I really don't know what to make of this. The cast and premise seem strong yet there was very little that I laughed at in the trailer. I'm hoping it's a case of them saving the good stuff for the actual film because I would find it hard to believe that with that much talent this film won't be funny.
Plot: Based on true events described in Jon Ronson's 2004 book of the same title, The Men Who Stare at Goats involves a down-on-his-luck reporter (McGregor) who gets more than he bargains for when he meets a special forces agent (Clooney) who reveals the existence of a secret, psychic military unit whose goal is to use paranormal powers to end war as we know it.
Quick thoughts: The plot for this movie sounds so bizarre, I can't help but be intriqued by it. Throw in the fact that the movie has a very strong cast with George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey and now I'm really interested. I have yet to see any footage from this, so I could be way off and this will be terrible. I will give the film credit for this, though, their title certainly isn't misleading as seen by the one promotional photo released for this film:
11. Whip It (October 9)
Plot: Whip It, the directorial debut of Drew Barrymore, stars Ellen Page (Juno) as Bliss, a rebellious Texas teen who throws in her small town beauty pageant crown for the rowdy world of roller derby. Marcia Gay Harden (Mystic River, Pollock) plays Bliss' disapproving mother, while Kristen Wiig (Saturday Night Live) and Juliette Lewis (Old School) play roller-derby stars. Also starring Eve, Jimmy Fallon, and Daniel Stern.
Quick thoughts: I saw the trailer and the movie looks like it could be a lot of fun. It would be tough not to be given the funny people involved in the film. I am concerned that the film may not look as good as it could be given the inexperience of Barrymore behind the camera. This has a chance of being real good as long as they don't go overboard with the female empowerment message.
10. Toy Story/Toy Story 2 in 3-D (October 2)
Plot: Do I really need to tell you what these movies are about?
Quick thoughts: Well there's certainly no mystery about the quality of these movies. I don't necessarily see the added appeal of 3-D, but if you do like it, then how can you pass up the chance to see these modern classics visually updated? If nothing else, you're likely to get the first full trailer for Toy Story 3 when you watch them.
9. Couples Retreat (October 9)
Plot: Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, Jon Favreau, Malin Akerman, Kristin Davis, Kristen Bell and Faizon Love star in Universal Pictures' upcoming comedy Couples Retreat. Based on an original idea of Vaughn's, the comedy follows four Midwestern couples who embark on a journey to a tropical island resort. While one of the couples is there to work on their marriage, the other three set out to jet ski, spa and enjoy some fun in the sun. They soon discover that participation in the resort’s couples therapy is not optional. Suddenly, their group-rate vacation comes at a price. What follows is a hilarious look at real world problems faced by all couples. The film also stars Kali Hawk and Jean Reno.
Quick thoughts: As you may have seen in my comments when I posted the trailer for this film, I really don't know what to make of this. The cast and premise seem strong yet there was very little that I laughed at in the trailer. I'm hoping it's a case of them saving the good stuff for the actual film because I would find it hard to believe that with that much talent this film won't be funny.
Will Heroes truly gain 'Redemption'?
I know many of you have soured on Heroes over the past couple of seasons, but I still hold out hope that they can get out of their creative tailspin. For those of you that are like me and still have an interest in the show, I've posted below a promo video for the upcoming season entitled 'Redemption'. Watching the video, it once again seems like they have a strong foundational storyline to work with. The big question, however, is whether or not they can remain focused and tell the story properly. We'll find out the answer to that on Sept. 21st when the show returns.
BTW, I've added all of the return dates for your (i.e. my) favorite shows this fall. Scroll down for the information and plan your calendars and DVRs accordingly.
BTW, I've added all of the return dates for your (i.e. my) favorite shows this fall. Scroll down for the information and plan your calendars and DVRs accordingly.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Fall movie preview (16-13)
16. Whiteout (September 11)
Plot: Based on the graphic novel by Greg Rucka and Steve Lieber, published by Oni Press. Carrie Stetko, the lone U.S. Marshal assigned to Antarctica, is investigating the continent's first murder, which draws her into a shocking mystery. Now, with only three days until winter, Carrie must solve the crime before Antarctica is plunged into darkness and she is stranded with the killer.
Quick thoughts: This may very well end up being more cheesy than clever. However, since I don't go for most of the lame horror flicks (I'm looking at you Saw franchise), this may fit the bill of providing some decent scares as we near Halloween.
15. The Invention of Lying (September 25)
Plot: From Ricky Gervais, star of the original BBC series The Office and HBO's Extras, comes the new romantic comedy The Invention of Lying, which takes place in an alternate reality where lying--even the concept of a lie--does not exist. Everyone--from politicians to advertisers to the man and woman on the street--speaks the truth and nothing but the truth with no thought of the consequences. But when a down-on-his-luck loser named Mark suddenly develops the ability to lie, he finds that dishonesty has its rewards. In a world where every word is assumed to be the absolute truth, Mark easily lies his way to fame and fortune. But lies have a way of spreading, and Mark begins to realize that things are getting a little out of control when some of his tallest tales are being taken as, well, gospel. With the entire world now hanging on his every word, there is only one thing Mark has not been able to lie his way into: the heart of the woman he loves.
Quick thoughts: I wasn't completely sold on Gervais' last U.S. film, Ghost Town, but there's no denying that he can be extremely funny if you enjoy his style of comedy. The plot for this film seems original and more suited to his strengths. I doubt it'll be a huge hit, but consider me mildly intriqued.
14. Surrogates (September 25)
Plot: FBI agents (Bruce Willis and Radha Mitchell) investigate the mysterious murder of a college student linked to the man who helped create a high-tech surrogate phenomenon that allows people to purchase unflawed robotic versions of themselves—fit, good looking remotely controlled machines that ultimately assume their life roles—enabling people to experience life vicariously from the comfort and safety of their own homes. The murder spawns a quest for answers: in a world of masks, who's real and who can you trust?
Quick thoughts: Reading the plot, it seems like there are a lot of elements borrowed from other recent sci-fi films. Here's hoping this is a case of them taking the best parts and making a good film as opposed to rehashing concepts we've too many times already. Bruce Willis is usually solid, so his presence helps. And if nothing else, I'm sure I'll get a few laughs based on the various wigs I saw him wearing in this film from the trailer.
13. Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (September 18)
Plot: Inspired by the beloved children's book, the film focuses on a town where food falls from the sky like rain. Bill Hader, star of Saturday Night Live, will voice Flint Lockwood, a young inventor who dreams of creating something that will improve everyone's life. Anna Faris, star of the comedy hit The House Bunny, takes on the role of Sam Sparks, a weathergirl covering the phenomenon who hides her intelligence behind a perky exterior. James Caan plays Tim Lockwood, Flint's technophobic father. Andy Samberg plays Brent, the town bully who has plagued Flint since childhood. Bruce Campbell plays Mayor Shelbourne, who figures out that Flint's invention can put the town, and more importantly himself, on the map and Mr. T plays the by-the-rules town cop Earl Devereaux.
Quick thoughts: Out of all the computer animated films coming out this season (and believe me there are plenty), this one appealed to me the most. I never read the children's book that this is based on, but it sounds like a fun, crazy story. I also like the voice cast they assembled here. It seems like they chose people with good animation voices as opposed to just casting big name stars to draw crowds in. I'm unlikely to see an animated film in theaters, but if I do, it'll be this one.
Plot: Based on the graphic novel by Greg Rucka and Steve Lieber, published by Oni Press. Carrie Stetko, the lone U.S. Marshal assigned to Antarctica, is investigating the continent's first murder, which draws her into a shocking mystery. Now, with only three days until winter, Carrie must solve the crime before Antarctica is plunged into darkness and she is stranded with the killer.
Quick thoughts: This may very well end up being more cheesy than clever. However, since I don't go for most of the lame horror flicks (I'm looking at you Saw franchise), this may fit the bill of providing some decent scares as we near Halloween.
15. The Invention of Lying (September 25)
Plot: From Ricky Gervais, star of the original BBC series The Office and HBO's Extras, comes the new romantic comedy The Invention of Lying, which takes place in an alternate reality where lying--even the concept of a lie--does not exist. Everyone--from politicians to advertisers to the man and woman on the street--speaks the truth and nothing but the truth with no thought of the consequences. But when a down-on-his-luck loser named Mark suddenly develops the ability to lie, he finds that dishonesty has its rewards. In a world where every word is assumed to be the absolute truth, Mark easily lies his way to fame and fortune. But lies have a way of spreading, and Mark begins to realize that things are getting a little out of control when some of his tallest tales are being taken as, well, gospel. With the entire world now hanging on his every word, there is only one thing Mark has not been able to lie his way into: the heart of the woman he loves.
Quick thoughts: I wasn't completely sold on Gervais' last U.S. film, Ghost Town, but there's no denying that he can be extremely funny if you enjoy his style of comedy. The plot for this film seems original and more suited to his strengths. I doubt it'll be a huge hit, but consider me mildly intriqued.
14. Surrogates (September 25)
Plot: FBI agents (Bruce Willis and Radha Mitchell) investigate the mysterious murder of a college student linked to the man who helped create a high-tech surrogate phenomenon that allows people to purchase unflawed robotic versions of themselves—fit, good looking remotely controlled machines that ultimately assume their life roles—enabling people to experience life vicariously from the comfort and safety of their own homes. The murder spawns a quest for answers: in a world of masks, who's real and who can you trust?
Quick thoughts: Reading the plot, it seems like there are a lot of elements borrowed from other recent sci-fi films. Here's hoping this is a case of them taking the best parts and making a good film as opposed to rehashing concepts we've too many times already. Bruce Willis is usually solid, so his presence helps. And if nothing else, I'm sure I'll get a few laughs based on the various wigs I saw him wearing in this film from the trailer.
13. Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (September 18)
Plot: Inspired by the beloved children's book, the film focuses on a town where food falls from the sky like rain. Bill Hader, star of Saturday Night Live, will voice Flint Lockwood, a young inventor who dreams of creating something that will improve everyone's life. Anna Faris, star of the comedy hit The House Bunny, takes on the role of Sam Sparks, a weathergirl covering the phenomenon who hides her intelligence behind a perky exterior. James Caan plays Tim Lockwood, Flint's technophobic father. Andy Samberg plays Brent, the town bully who has plagued Flint since childhood. Bruce Campbell plays Mayor Shelbourne, who figures out that Flint's invention can put the town, and more importantly himself, on the map and Mr. T plays the by-the-rules town cop Earl Devereaux.
Quick thoughts: Out of all the computer animated films coming out this season (and believe me there are plenty), this one appealed to me the most. I never read the children's book that this is based on, but it sounds like a fun, crazy story. I also like the voice cast they assembled here. It seems like they chose people with good animation voices as opposed to just casting big name stars to draw crowds in. I'm unlikely to see an animated film in theaters, but if I do, it'll be this one.
Warning...rant
So I went to Best Buy today to pick up the 12th season of the Simpsons on DVD, which just came out today. As is per usual with the most recent sets, there are two types of packaging for the sets. One is the normal box and the other is the box plus a plastic mask of whichever character is featured on this box art (this time Comic Book Guy). Well I have no use for some plastic mask, so I just got the regular box. I take it up to the counter and they charge me full price instead of the sale price listed in their ad. I question the clerk about this and after a lot of dumb looks and discussions with co-workers, they bring up a copy with the mask on and that one rings up for the sale price. After I pay, I ask if she'll just give me the regular box instead and she says that I have to take the one they scanned. I tell her that I'm just going to throw the plastic mask away, but that doesn't change her mind.
So long story short, both FOX and Best Buy should be chastized for their lack of eco-awareness. FOX shouldn't even be wasting the plastic in the first place by making those pointless masks (especially since the container that holds the DVDs is cheap and poorly designed). As for Best Buy, all they're doing is encouraging the wastefulness of the plastic since I can't see who in their right mind would have a need for the mask. I'm not a big "green" person, but this just seems stupid on their end of things. All it would take is some common sense and a few simple changes to curb this problem and stop this pointless use of plastic. /End rant
So long story short, both FOX and Best Buy should be chastized for their lack of eco-awareness. FOX shouldn't even be wasting the plastic in the first place by making those pointless masks (especially since the container that holds the DVDs is cheap and poorly designed). As for Best Buy, all they're doing is encouraging the wastefulness of the plastic since I can't see who in their right mind would have a need for the mask. I'm not a big "green" person, but this just seems stupid on their end of things. All it would take is some common sense and a few simple changes to curb this problem and stop this pointless use of plastic. /End rant
Monday, August 17, 2009
Fall Movie Preview (20-17)
20. Avatar (Dec. 18)
Plot: Avatar is the story of an ex-Marine who finds himself thrust into hostilities on an alien planet filled with exotic life forms. As an Avatar, a human mind in an alien body, he finds himself torn between two worlds, in a desperate fight for his own survival and that of the indigenous people. More than ten years in the making, Avatar marks Cameron's return to feature directing since helming 1997's Titanic, the highest grossing film of all time and winner of eleven Oscars® including Best Picture. WETA Digital, renowned for its work in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and King Kong, will incorporate new intuitive CGI technologies to transform the environments and characters into photorealistic 3D imagery that will transport the audience into the alien world rich with imaginative vistas, creatures and characters.
Quick thoughts: This movie managed to get on my top 30 of '09, but frankly I'm actually losing interest in this movie instead of gaining as the months go on. The sci-fi genre is not a favorite of mine, nor do I really care about the whole 3D craze. Really the main selling point here is James Cameron's return to filmmaking. I'm sure this will be a bigger deal for others than it is for me.
19. Invictus (December 11)
Plot: The film tells the inspiring true story of how Nelson Mandela joined forces with the captain of South Africa's rugby team to help unite their country. Newly elected President Mandela knows his nation remains racially and economically divided in the wake of apartheid. Believing he can bring his people together through the universal language of sport, Mandela rallies South Africa's underdog rugby team as they make an unlikely run to the 1995 World Cup Championship match.
Quick thoughts: Similar to Avatar, this has a lot of pedigree but not exactly a story I'm all that interested in. However, given that it stars Morgan Freeman as Mandela and has Matt Damon co-starring, that just might be enough quality acting to lure me in. With Clint Eastwood directing this, look for Invictus to be big come awards season.
18. Up in the Air (December TBA)
Plot: From Jason Reitman, the Oscar® nominated director of Juno, comes a comedy called Up in the Air starring Oscar® winner George Clooney as Ryan Bingham, a corporate hatchet man who loves his life on the road but is forced to fight for his job when his company downsizes its travel budget. He is required to spend more time at home just as he is on the cusp of a goal he's worked toward for years: reaching five million frequent flyer miles and just after he's met the frequent-traveler woman of his dreams.
Quick thoughts: This seems like a unique and different concept and Jason Reitman has certainly established a lot of goodwill with Juno and Thank You For Smoking. However, I'm hesitant to put this one any higher up on the list until I see an actual trailer for the movie.
17. Disney's A Christmas Carol (November 6)
Plot: Disney's A Christmas Carol, a multi-sensory thrill ride re-envisioned by Academy Award®-winning filmmaker Robert Zemeckis, captures the fantastical essence of the classic Dickens tale in a groundbreaking 3-D motion picture event. Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) begins the Christmas holiday with his usual miserly contempt, barking at his faithful clerk (Gary Oldman) and his cheery nephew (Colin Firth). But when the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come take him on an eye-opening journey revealing truths Old Scrooge is reluctant to face, he must open his heart to undo years of ill will before it's too late.
Quick thoughts: If you haven't seen the trailer yet, this has a similar look to The Polar Express, which may or may not be a selling point for people. Let's face it, there's nothing new about the story, so the hope is that the new visual presentation combined with Jim Carrey's multi-voiced performance will make this something worth seeing during the holiday season.
Plot: Avatar is the story of an ex-Marine who finds himself thrust into hostilities on an alien planet filled with exotic life forms. As an Avatar, a human mind in an alien body, he finds himself torn between two worlds, in a desperate fight for his own survival and that of the indigenous people. More than ten years in the making, Avatar marks Cameron's return to feature directing since helming 1997's Titanic, the highest grossing film of all time and winner of eleven Oscars® including Best Picture. WETA Digital, renowned for its work in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and King Kong, will incorporate new intuitive CGI technologies to transform the environments and characters into photorealistic 3D imagery that will transport the audience into the alien world rich with imaginative vistas, creatures and characters.
Quick thoughts: This movie managed to get on my top 30 of '09, but frankly I'm actually losing interest in this movie instead of gaining as the months go on. The sci-fi genre is not a favorite of mine, nor do I really care about the whole 3D craze. Really the main selling point here is James Cameron's return to filmmaking. I'm sure this will be a bigger deal for others than it is for me.
19. Invictus (December 11)
Plot: The film tells the inspiring true story of how Nelson Mandela joined forces with the captain of South Africa's rugby team to help unite their country. Newly elected President Mandela knows his nation remains racially and economically divided in the wake of apartheid. Believing he can bring his people together through the universal language of sport, Mandela rallies South Africa's underdog rugby team as they make an unlikely run to the 1995 World Cup Championship match.
Quick thoughts: Similar to Avatar, this has a lot of pedigree but not exactly a story I'm all that interested in. However, given that it stars Morgan Freeman as Mandela and has Matt Damon co-starring, that just might be enough quality acting to lure me in. With Clint Eastwood directing this, look for Invictus to be big come awards season.
18. Up in the Air (December TBA)
Plot: From Jason Reitman, the Oscar® nominated director of Juno, comes a comedy called Up in the Air starring Oscar® winner George Clooney as Ryan Bingham, a corporate hatchet man who loves his life on the road but is forced to fight for his job when his company downsizes its travel budget. He is required to spend more time at home just as he is on the cusp of a goal he's worked toward for years: reaching five million frequent flyer miles and just after he's met the frequent-traveler woman of his dreams.
Quick thoughts: This seems like a unique and different concept and Jason Reitman has certainly established a lot of goodwill with Juno and Thank You For Smoking. However, I'm hesitant to put this one any higher up on the list until I see an actual trailer for the movie.
17. Disney's A Christmas Carol (November 6)
Plot: Disney's A Christmas Carol, a multi-sensory thrill ride re-envisioned by Academy Award®-winning filmmaker Robert Zemeckis, captures the fantastical essence of the classic Dickens tale in a groundbreaking 3-D motion picture event. Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) begins the Christmas holiday with his usual miserly contempt, barking at his faithful clerk (Gary Oldman) and his cheery nephew (Colin Firth). But when the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come take him on an eye-opening journey revealing truths Old Scrooge is reluctant to face, he must open his heart to undo years of ill will before it's too late.
Quick thoughts: If you haven't seen the trailer yet, this has a similar look to The Polar Express, which may or may not be a selling point for people. Let's face it, there's nothing new about the story, so the hope is that the new visual presentation combined with Jim Carrey's multi-voiced performance will make this something worth seeing during the holiday season.
Potbellies? More like hot bellies!
Looks like all that drinking and lack of excerise has finally paid off. I'm now considered trendy according to the New York Times.
It's Hip to Be Round
It's Hip to Be Round
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Scenes from a fall
Summer sure went by fast and you know what that means - cooler temperatures and fall movies. Gone are the noisy, visual effects laden blockbusters and in come the adult fare and awards bait. Over the next week I'm going to preview the top 20 films to look forward to for the remainder of the year. This post, however, will only briefly list the honorable mentions; those films which will likely be big but I really have no interest in seeing them.
All About Steve - September 4th
9 - September 9th
Zombieland - October 9th
Where the Wild Things Are - October 16th
Amelia - October 23rd
Saw VI - October 23rd
The Fantastic Mr. Fox - November 13th
Planet 51 - November 20th
Brothers - December 4th
The Lovely Bones - December 11th
It's Complicated - December 25th
If any of these titles sound good to you, you're on your own to find out more about them.
All About Steve - September 4th
9 - September 9th
Zombieland - October 9th
Where the Wild Things Are - October 16th
Amelia - October 23rd
Saw VI - October 23rd
The Fantastic Mr. Fox - November 13th
Planet 51 - November 20th
Brothers - December 4th
The Lovely Bones - December 11th
It's Complicated - December 25th
If any of these titles sound good to you, you're on your own to find out more about them.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
NMR: Cult comedies
Quick note, this is actually the first time I have seen either of these movies.
Clerks: This certainly had its moments, but overall I wasn't wowed by it. Having said that, I can see why this was an iconic movie for its generation. Even though it's a movie about store clerks, which would seem like a universal plot, the film is very much rooted in the 90s. I think that had a lot to do with why I wasn't able to connect with it better. It's impressive what Kevin Smith was able to do on a shoestring budget, but I doubt I'll probably ever watch this one again. Rating: ***
The Big Lebowski: Similar to Clerks, I can see why this appealed to a certain population, but it just didn't do much for me. For this one, I kept wanting to like it more than I was. I really liked all of the characters as they were quirky and interesting and being played by guys giving good performances. Really it was the story here that didn't win me over. I felt let down by the resolution of the whole thing and found all the fantasy sequences to be detracting to the film. I'm sure if I was a stoner, I might have more fun watching this, but since I'm not, this too will be a one and done viewing for me. Rating: ***
Clerks: This certainly had its moments, but overall I wasn't wowed by it. Having said that, I can see why this was an iconic movie for its generation. Even though it's a movie about store clerks, which would seem like a universal plot, the film is very much rooted in the 90s. I think that had a lot to do with why I wasn't able to connect with it better. It's impressive what Kevin Smith was able to do on a shoestring budget, but I doubt I'll probably ever watch this one again. Rating: ***
The Big Lebowski: Similar to Clerks, I can see why this appealed to a certain population, but it just didn't do much for me. For this one, I kept wanting to like it more than I was. I really liked all of the characters as they were quirky and interesting and being played by guys giving good performances. Really it was the story here that didn't win me over. I felt let down by the resolution of the whole thing and found all the fantasy sequences to be detracting to the film. I'm sure if I was a stoner, I might have more fun watching this, but since I'm not, this too will be a one and done viewing for me. Rating: ***
Friday, August 14, 2009
Depp but not deep
This review should catch me up, at least in terms of in theater reviews. There are still some lingering Netflix reviews I'll need to take care off.
Public Enemies had all the makings for an instant classic. You have a rich cast with Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Marion Cotillard. You have an imaginative and established director with Michael Mann. And to top it off, it's a gangster flick; a genre that has developed several great films in recent years. Watching this however, you couldn't help but feel something was still missing.
But before I get ahead of myself, let me appropriate give credit where it is due. First off, Michael Mann delivers one of the most beautiful films I have seen in long time. I don't know if the picture quality is better at Dayton theaters than the ones in Raleigh or if Michael Mann is just that good of a director. Regardless, everything pops off the screen with beauty and clarity. Everything looks authentic and realistic. Art direction is not something I typically notice or care about, but it was a definite asset of this film.
However, while the film is nice to look at, the real draw here is Depp. Once again, this guy gives a performance that is rich and draws you in. You're not looking at Depp, you're looking at the person he's portraying. He shows both the reckless and calculating sides of famed gangster John Dillinger. He does just enough to make the character fun without going so far as to glorify the man. It's performances like these that continue to solidify Depp as one of the greatest actors of his generation.
Depp also has good chemistry with Cotillard, who plays his love interest, Billie. Their relationship is an interesting one as they both seem to realize its destined for failure given the danger of his profession, yet go through with it anyways. Bale is the one who's the odd man out here. Playing FBI agent, Melvin Purvis, Bale isn't really given that much to do here and only has one decent scene with Depp. However, the film really isn't about Purvis and I think Bale was brought on as an extra selling point for the film. In reality, the role probably didn't need to go to that large of a star. Then again, there were some other odd casting choices seen here. Like Leelee Sobieski showing up in the last twenty minutes of the film and barely having any lines. It seems like they could have either found more for her to do or hire someone less famous for such a thankless role.
That Sobieski cameo seems reflective of the main problem that plagues this film; it doesn't seem like a whole lot of thought was put into creating this film. The story, as a whole, doesn't seem to have a point. I found myself engaged in every scene, but also wondering what significance it had on the larger picture. The film depicts a wide range of events in Dillinger's life without really saying anything about the man. Without any symbolism or meaning behind the actions being displayed, the film failed to have a lasting impression on me. In the moment, I found myself really enjoying the film, but also found myself quickly forgetting about it shortly after it was over.
It's a shame the source material isn't better here. People like Depp and Mann are such consumate professionals that they're able to produce quality work out of anything. It's quite apparent that their fine skills are once again on display here. It is thanks to their efforts that the film rises above mediocre and becomes something fairly decent.
I'm recommending the film based on the strength of their work. Depp and Mann deserve some recognition during awards season, but I worry now that the weak story may cause most people to overlook their work. For the average viewer, Public Enemies is best suited as a rental since the film lacks that level of significance to make it worthy of seeking out in the theaters. You may not need to rush out and see this film, but Depp and Mann make it one that you ultimately can't refuse. Grade: B+
Public Enemies had all the makings for an instant classic. You have a rich cast with Johnny Depp, Christian Bale and Marion Cotillard. You have an imaginative and established director with Michael Mann. And to top it off, it's a gangster flick; a genre that has developed several great films in recent years. Watching this however, you couldn't help but feel something was still missing.
But before I get ahead of myself, let me appropriate give credit where it is due. First off, Michael Mann delivers one of the most beautiful films I have seen in long time. I don't know if the picture quality is better at Dayton theaters than the ones in Raleigh or if Michael Mann is just that good of a director. Regardless, everything pops off the screen with beauty and clarity. Everything looks authentic and realistic. Art direction is not something I typically notice or care about, but it was a definite asset of this film.
However, while the film is nice to look at, the real draw here is Depp. Once again, this guy gives a performance that is rich and draws you in. You're not looking at Depp, you're looking at the person he's portraying. He shows both the reckless and calculating sides of famed gangster John Dillinger. He does just enough to make the character fun without going so far as to glorify the man. It's performances like these that continue to solidify Depp as one of the greatest actors of his generation.
Depp also has good chemistry with Cotillard, who plays his love interest, Billie. Their relationship is an interesting one as they both seem to realize its destined for failure given the danger of his profession, yet go through with it anyways. Bale is the one who's the odd man out here. Playing FBI agent, Melvin Purvis, Bale isn't really given that much to do here and only has one decent scene with Depp. However, the film really isn't about Purvis and I think Bale was brought on as an extra selling point for the film. In reality, the role probably didn't need to go to that large of a star. Then again, there were some other odd casting choices seen here. Like Leelee Sobieski showing up in the last twenty minutes of the film and barely having any lines. It seems like they could have either found more for her to do or hire someone less famous for such a thankless role.
That Sobieski cameo seems reflective of the main problem that plagues this film; it doesn't seem like a whole lot of thought was put into creating this film. The story, as a whole, doesn't seem to have a point. I found myself engaged in every scene, but also wondering what significance it had on the larger picture. The film depicts a wide range of events in Dillinger's life without really saying anything about the man. Without any symbolism or meaning behind the actions being displayed, the film failed to have a lasting impression on me. In the moment, I found myself really enjoying the film, but also found myself quickly forgetting about it shortly after it was over.
It's a shame the source material isn't better here. People like Depp and Mann are such consumate professionals that they're able to produce quality work out of anything. It's quite apparent that their fine skills are once again on display here. It is thanks to their efforts that the film rises above mediocre and becomes something fairly decent.
I'm recommending the film based on the strength of their work. Depp and Mann deserve some recognition during awards season, but I worry now that the weak story may cause most people to overlook their work. For the average viewer, Public Enemies is best suited as a rental since the film lacks that level of significance to make it worthy of seeking out in the theaters. You may not need to rush out and see this film, but Depp and Mann make it one that you ultimately can't refuse. Grade: B+
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Cop out
From EW.com
As sad as I am to see this show go, Reno's most recent season was definitely its weakest and I'd rather see it go out now instead of continuing into a downward spiral.
Comedy Central confirms that it has pulled the plug on Reno 911! Star/co-creator Thomas Lennon broke the news that the show’s recently wrapped sixth season will be its last on his Twitter feed saying, “Reno 911! was cancelled at 1:30 pm today. Won’t be wearing the shorts again.” When contacted by EW today, Comedy Central declined to comment.
As sad as I am to see this show go, Reno's most recent season was definitely its weakest and I'd rather see it go out now instead of continuing into a downward spiral.
Community
I'm sure by now you've all seen the commercials for NBC's new sitcom, Community starring The Soup's Joel McHale. Well if you're tired of summer reruns and crappy reality TV, then I urge you to go here, where you can check out Community's pilot episode. I just finished watching it and was very pleased with what I saw. It had a decent amount of laughs, particularly for a pilot episode and it seems like it's got a strong ensemble cast. I think this will be a great addition to NBC's Thursday comedy lineup.
For those that can't see the pilot or are simply looking for more content, I'm including below a clip from a future episode featuring Ken Jeong (The Hangover, Role Models) as a Spanish teacher at the college.
For those that can't see the pilot or are simply looking for more content, I'm including below a clip from a future episode featuring Ken Jeong (The Hangover, Role Models) as a Spanish teacher at the college.
Papal Chase
You'll forgive me if these next few movies reviews are a little shorter/lighter on analysis. Since I'm doing them so far away from having seen the movies, I may not remember everything I wanted to say about it.
First up is Angels & Demons, the follow up to 2006's The Da Vinci Code, even though in terms of the novels Angels and Demons actually was written first. Like many, I had been disappointed with the effort director Ron Howard and star Tom Hanks had made with The Da Vinci Code. The film was flat and failed to capture the excitement of uncovering cryptic clues that made the book so popular. I was naturally nervous about this second entry, but still willing to give it a shot since both Howard and Hanks are smart enough guys to own up to their rare misfires and work harder to do better the next time out. The end result here is definitely an improvement, if for no other reason than they had better source material to work with.
The plot here sees Robert Langdon (Hanks) called into Vatican City to investigate the kidnapping of four cardinals on the eve of the papal conclave preparing to elect a new pope. Langdon is the guy chosen because the kidnappings seem to be related to an ancient group known as the Illuminati. The Vatican has been warned that they will kill one cardinal every hour leading up to midnight when they plan on blowing up Vatican City. The setup here is simple, yet creates an exciting setting. We watch as Langdon attempts to solve the clues to learn of each cardinal's location in hopes of preventing their deaths. The stakes here are very well laid out unlike the meandering plot of The Da Vinci Code.
Hanks, to his credit, seems much more relaxed in the role this time. He may not play Langdon exactly the way most picture the character as they read the books. But this time, he seems much more assured of how he wants to play the character, which in turns makes his performance better. He also has a better cast to work off of here as Ewan McGregor, Stellen Skarsgaard, and Armin Mueller-Stahl all bring some clout to their supporting roles.
About the only supporting character I was not crazy about was Ayelet Zurer, who played Vittoria. In the book, she's not only integral to helping Langdon solve these puzzles, but she also is somewhat of a love interest. Here, her presence is greatly diminished and she might as well be just a no name cop hanging around as Langdon solves the case. She had such a huge impact on Langdon in the book that he even reminisces about her in The Da Vinci Code. None of that relationship however is developed in the film.
Of course, just like with the Harry Potter films, there are bound to be changes/omissions whenever a film is adapted from a popular book. This film is no exclusion as several key scenes are either left out or changed drastically. However, unlike the alterations made in the HP franchise, I wasn't bothered by the changes here for two reasons. For one, it had actually been quite a few years since I had read the book, so I didn't really realize what had changed until I read about them online later. Also, I felt the film flowed very well and most of the changes seemed to make the story flow better.
What still remains is the outlandish way that the film ends. The over-the-top twists nearly ruin the whole film, but since these things happened in the book, you can't necessarily blame the film for how things get resolved. You'll likely roll your eyes watching these unrealistic events unfold, but at some point you just have to roll with it. Don't let the ending spoil an otherwise decent popcorn flick.
Like it's predecessor, this is a flawed film. However, thanks to Hanks and Howard's familiarity with the material and a more focused story, Angels & Demons is a much more tolerable movie. If you've read the book or actually enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, then you owe it to yourself to seek this out when it eventually finds its way onto home video. It provides just enough action and suspense to make it the perfect movie that will allow you to shut your brain off for a couple of hours and veg out. After all, isn't that the reason they turn books into movies in the first place? Grade: B-
First up is Angels & Demons, the follow up to 2006's The Da Vinci Code, even though in terms of the novels Angels and Demons actually was written first. Like many, I had been disappointed with the effort director Ron Howard and star Tom Hanks had made with The Da Vinci Code. The film was flat and failed to capture the excitement of uncovering cryptic clues that made the book so popular. I was naturally nervous about this second entry, but still willing to give it a shot since both Howard and Hanks are smart enough guys to own up to their rare misfires and work harder to do better the next time out. The end result here is definitely an improvement, if for no other reason than they had better source material to work with.
The plot here sees Robert Langdon (Hanks) called into Vatican City to investigate the kidnapping of four cardinals on the eve of the papal conclave preparing to elect a new pope. Langdon is the guy chosen because the kidnappings seem to be related to an ancient group known as the Illuminati. The Vatican has been warned that they will kill one cardinal every hour leading up to midnight when they plan on blowing up Vatican City. The setup here is simple, yet creates an exciting setting. We watch as Langdon attempts to solve the clues to learn of each cardinal's location in hopes of preventing their deaths. The stakes here are very well laid out unlike the meandering plot of The Da Vinci Code.
Hanks, to his credit, seems much more relaxed in the role this time. He may not play Langdon exactly the way most picture the character as they read the books. But this time, he seems much more assured of how he wants to play the character, which in turns makes his performance better. He also has a better cast to work off of here as Ewan McGregor, Stellen Skarsgaard, and Armin Mueller-Stahl all bring some clout to their supporting roles.
About the only supporting character I was not crazy about was Ayelet Zurer, who played Vittoria. In the book, she's not only integral to helping Langdon solve these puzzles, but she also is somewhat of a love interest. Here, her presence is greatly diminished and she might as well be just a no name cop hanging around as Langdon solves the case. She had such a huge impact on Langdon in the book that he even reminisces about her in The Da Vinci Code. None of that relationship however is developed in the film.
Of course, just like with the Harry Potter films, there are bound to be changes/omissions whenever a film is adapted from a popular book. This film is no exclusion as several key scenes are either left out or changed drastically. However, unlike the alterations made in the HP franchise, I wasn't bothered by the changes here for two reasons. For one, it had actually been quite a few years since I had read the book, so I didn't really realize what had changed until I read about them online later. Also, I felt the film flowed very well and most of the changes seemed to make the story flow better.
What still remains is the outlandish way that the film ends. The over-the-top twists nearly ruin the whole film, but since these things happened in the book, you can't necessarily blame the film for how things get resolved. You'll likely roll your eyes watching these unrealistic events unfold, but at some point you just have to roll with it. Don't let the ending spoil an otherwise decent popcorn flick.
Like it's predecessor, this is a flawed film. However, thanks to Hanks and Howard's familiarity with the material and a more focused story, Angels & Demons is a much more tolerable movie. If you've read the book or actually enjoyed The Da Vinci Code, then you owe it to yourself to seek this out when it eventually finds its way onto home video. It provides just enough action and suspense to make it the perfect movie that will allow you to shut your brain off for a couple of hours and veg out. After all, isn't that the reason they turn books into movies in the first place? Grade: B-
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
NMR: Gran Torino
Technically this is not a Netflix review because I got impatient waiting for my copy of this through them and just decided to watch it On Demand through Time Warner since I had a coupon for a free film. That aside, I ended really enjoying this film, more than I actually thought I would. In what many believe may be his final acting performance, Clint Eastwood does a phenomenal job as Walt Kowalski, a retired veteran who's just lost his wife and hates how his neighborhood is being overtaken by immigrants. Even though Walt isn't a real likable character, I immediately related to him and his annoyance with the way the world was changing around him. With the way everything is set up, it becomes obvious where the story is headed, but I didn't mind knowing that because I had become invested in the character. The main critique most had of the film was the poor acting of some of the Hmong neighbors, who were real people and not professionally trained actors. I would agree that it's obvious that they are unpolished, but I personally did not feel it detracted from the film. Even though it did not get a wide release until January, this is technically a 2008 film, which is why you won't see it on my top ten list, even though I thought it was excellent. Had I thought I would have liked it this much, I would have kept my '08 top ten list up longer so that I could have included this. If you haven't seen it yet, I'd say you should definitely rent it, if for no other reason than to see one of the greatest actors of all time show he's still got it, even at 79. Rating: *****
Saturday, August 8, 2009
OH-IO
So I'm now officially back in the great state of Ohio. I moved in to my new apartment in Dayton this past week and am please with how everything went. My new apartment is probably smaller than my place in NC, but superior to it in every other way (cost, cleanliness, location, etc.). I apologize that there's still been a lack of posts on here recently. Please bear with me on that. I'm heading up to Cleveland this weekend, but once I get back next week, things should begin to return to normal. At that point, hopefully I can write up my reviews for Angels & Demons, Gran Torino, and Public Enemies. Until then, just hang tight. And if you're in the Dayton area, shoot me a line, I'd love to have visitors!
Monday, July 27, 2009
Apologies for absence
Hey, I just wanted to make a quick post to let everyone know I was still alive. Unfortunately I've just been real busy what with preparing to move back to Dayton this Friday and still writing away on the dissertation. It's doubling frustrating because I've got a bunch of stuff I could be writing on including all of the scoops/news coming out of this past weekend's Comic-Con, and new reviews for Gran Torino and Angels & Demons. But that will all have to wait for another day. Until then, it's back to packing boxes. Ohio here I come!
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Bloody good show
I'm reluctant to write my review for the new installment in the Harry Potter series, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. For one, now that we're at the sixth film in the franchise, I can't see my review having much influence on anyone. Fans are going to (or likely already have) see it and those who aren't fans aren't going to want to begin this far along in the story. I also worry that this review may seem redundant from my review of the previous film that I blogged about two years ago as many of the praises/criticisms of that film remain here. Still, out of a sense of duty, I feel I must go on.
Let's get the negatives out of the way first. Most of them are related to the way the film is faithful to the book. As someone who has read the book before seeing the film, I find it to be a blessing and curse. It's a lot easier to follow the story if you have read the book, but it can also be gutwrenching when you see something either cut or altered from the novel. For me, I get more upset with scenes that are different from the book than I am about moments that get left out. The most egregious changes to the book occur at the beginning and end of the film.
Without spoiling too much, let me try to explain these changes and why I did not care for them. At the beginning of the film there's a scene involving Harry at a diner. His interactions in this scene appear to be totally out of character and I have no idea what purpose the scene serves. The other major change comes near the end of the during the key scene. In the book, Harry is helpless from this major event happening, but the same isn't true in the film. Once again, this seems out of character for Harry because if he had the power to do something, he would have.
As I mentioned above, there are also a lot of things left out in the movie from the book. I grudgingly accept that this is a necessary evil of the films. The books are so long that it would be impossible to include everything into a manageable film. Then again, at two and half hours the film flies by (much faster than say Transformers 2), so I don't think fans would complain if they added on another half hour or so. Most of what was omitted isn't essential for the story, just cool scenes that fans would have appreciated seeing visually. However, there are a few key moments left out that may make creating the final film(s) more difficult. I'll be interested to see how they work their way around that when part 1 of book 7 comes out next year.
If you can ignore the changes/omissions from the book, what you're left with is another excellent entry in this film franchise. Watching each new film feels like a high school reunion. It is wonderful to see this rich, talented cast reprise their roles with each film. I think we sometimes take for granted how lucky we are that this great group of British actors have been available and willing to come back for each film, even if they don't always have a large role to play. Everyone knows their characters so well and brings a tremendous amount of both energy and class to their performance. They all should be applauded for allowing these characters to be fully realized.
One performer in particular I want to single out is Michael Gambon, who plays Dumblebore. Gambon is the one actor who was not there from the start. His alternative take on Dumbledore from Richard Harris has been scrutinized by many fans. While his gruff take may not have necessarily fit at times, he delivers an excellent performance in this film. Playing a larger role than in the previous films, Gambon does a good job of displaying the leader/mentor/scholar/friend/wizard and everything else that makes up this character. I hope everyone else will appreciate his performance here as much as I did.
I should also compliment the two major additions to the cast. Jim Broadbent, who plays the new Potions professor, Horace Slughorn. Being the newcomer is never easy, particularly in this cast, but he blends right in and does a fantastic job. He plays Slughorn exactly how I pictured him to be from the book. This was another inspired casting move. Broadbent is very good at playing the fame-hungry, yet cowardly Slughorn. The girl who played Lavender Brown was also very funny and enjoyable. She captured the head-over-heels infatuation that she has for Ron Weasley perfectly.
Lastly I want to talk about director David Yates' work. He is returning for a second time here and definitely showed improvement over his previous effort. While many will take him to task for the changes his films have in comparision to the books, I'm not so sure how much falls on his shoulders. It seems the screenwriter should take more of the blame in this case. What Yates did do is provide the film with a gorgeous look in many of its scenes. He has a number of tracking shots that are very impressive. With just a pan of the camera he's able to capture the move of several characters at once. Those shots go a long way to encapsulating a lot that is going on without taking up a lot of time. Since so much dialogue had to be cut, I give him a lot of credit for trying to say as much as he could with his visuals. The film looks great and once again gives us the sense that we're right there in Hogwarts.
Right now, the differences from the book are the things I think about the most with the book. However, that was true with most of the previous films and I learned to forget about them and appreciate the movies on their own. I truly believe the same will hold true for this one as well. Once you can look past those changes, it becomes clear that this is another great movie. In a year when very little has lived up to its hype, it's nice to have one film that meets expectations. Grade: A-
Let's get the negatives out of the way first. Most of them are related to the way the film is faithful to the book. As someone who has read the book before seeing the film, I find it to be a blessing and curse. It's a lot easier to follow the story if you have read the book, but it can also be gutwrenching when you see something either cut or altered from the novel. For me, I get more upset with scenes that are different from the book than I am about moments that get left out. The most egregious changes to the book occur at the beginning and end of the film.
Without spoiling too much, let me try to explain these changes and why I did not care for them. At the beginning of the film there's a scene involving Harry at a diner. His interactions in this scene appear to be totally out of character and I have no idea what purpose the scene serves. The other major change comes near the end of the during the key scene. In the book, Harry is helpless from this major event happening, but the same isn't true in the film. Once again, this seems out of character for Harry because if he had the power to do something, he would have.
As I mentioned above, there are also a lot of things left out in the movie from the book. I grudgingly accept that this is a necessary evil of the films. The books are so long that it would be impossible to include everything into a manageable film. Then again, at two and half hours the film flies by (much faster than say Transformers 2), so I don't think fans would complain if they added on another half hour or so. Most of what was omitted isn't essential for the story, just cool scenes that fans would have appreciated seeing visually. However, there are a few key moments left out that may make creating the final film(s) more difficult. I'll be interested to see how they work their way around that when part 1 of book 7 comes out next year.
If you can ignore the changes/omissions from the book, what you're left with is another excellent entry in this film franchise. Watching each new film feels like a high school reunion. It is wonderful to see this rich, talented cast reprise their roles with each film. I think we sometimes take for granted how lucky we are that this great group of British actors have been available and willing to come back for each film, even if they don't always have a large role to play. Everyone knows their characters so well and brings a tremendous amount of both energy and class to their performance. They all should be applauded for allowing these characters to be fully realized.
One performer in particular I want to single out is Michael Gambon, who plays Dumblebore. Gambon is the one actor who was not there from the start. His alternative take on Dumbledore from Richard Harris has been scrutinized by many fans. While his gruff take may not have necessarily fit at times, he delivers an excellent performance in this film. Playing a larger role than in the previous films, Gambon does a good job of displaying the leader/mentor/scholar/friend/wizard and everything else that makes up this character. I hope everyone else will appreciate his performance here as much as I did.
I should also compliment the two major additions to the cast. Jim Broadbent, who plays the new Potions professor, Horace Slughorn. Being the newcomer is never easy, particularly in this cast, but he blends right in and does a fantastic job. He plays Slughorn exactly how I pictured him to be from the book. This was another inspired casting move. Broadbent is very good at playing the fame-hungry, yet cowardly Slughorn. The girl who played Lavender Brown was also very funny and enjoyable. She captured the head-over-heels infatuation that she has for Ron Weasley perfectly.
Lastly I want to talk about director David Yates' work. He is returning for a second time here and definitely showed improvement over his previous effort. While many will take him to task for the changes his films have in comparision to the books, I'm not so sure how much falls on his shoulders. It seems the screenwriter should take more of the blame in this case. What Yates did do is provide the film with a gorgeous look in many of its scenes. He has a number of tracking shots that are very impressive. With just a pan of the camera he's able to capture the move of several characters at once. Those shots go a long way to encapsulating a lot that is going on without taking up a lot of time. Since so much dialogue had to be cut, I give him a lot of credit for trying to say as much as he could with his visuals. The film looks great and once again gives us the sense that we're right there in Hogwarts.
Right now, the differences from the book are the things I think about the most with the book. However, that was true with most of the previous films and I learned to forget about them and appreciate the movies on their own. I truly believe the same will hold true for this one as well. Once you can look past those changes, it becomes clear that this is another great movie. In a year when very little has lived up to its hype, it's nice to have one film that meets expectations. Grade: A-
Media lunar-cy
Here's a video with some pretty good satire on how the moon landing would be covered if it happened today instead of 40 years ago.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Lost's burning questions
Shortly after the end of season 5, the folks at Entertainment Weekly asks their readers to send in their "Top 3 Lost Mysteries You Absolutely Need to See Resolved in Season 6". From the fans' responses, EW has put together the 15 most popular questions listed here:
15. What are The Whispers?
14. What's Libby's backstory?
13. What's the complete Dharma backstory?
12. Where did the Others come from?
11. Do all the castaways have a secret connection?
10. Who are Adam and Eve?
9. What's the significance of The Numbers?
8. Why are there Egyptian ruins on the Island?
7. Where are stewardess Cindy and the kids?
6. What is the Island, anyway?
5. What happened to Claire?
4. What was up with Walt?
3. What is the Monster?
2. Who is Jacob?
1. Why doesn't Richard Alpert age?
OK, so now I ask all of you - what is the likelihood of any or all of these questions being answered in the final 18 episodes? And are there any other questions that you want to see answered that did not make this list.
15. What are The Whispers?
14. What's Libby's backstory?
13. What's the complete Dharma backstory?
12. Where did the Others come from?
11. Do all the castaways have a secret connection?
10. Who are Adam and Eve?
9. What's the significance of The Numbers?
8. Why are there Egyptian ruins on the Island?
7. Where are stewardess Cindy and the kids?
6. What is the Island, anyway?
5. What happened to Claire?
4. What was up with Walt?
3. What is the Monster?
2. Who is Jacob?
1. Why doesn't Richard Alpert age?
OK, so now I ask all of you - what is the likelihood of any or all of these questions being answered in the final 18 episodes? And are there any other questions that you want to see answered that did not make this list.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
NMR: What's up doc?
Here's a handful of recent documentaries I recently caught through Netflix...
The League of Ordinary Gentlemen: This is a bowling documentary, yes a bowling documentary, made a couple years ago that attempted to chronicles the PBA's attempt to become mainstream again. This was an interesting subject to me (why else would I have bothered watching it), but the film is too scattershot to be really good. They focus on too many different topics and none of them are particularly engaging. Only if you truly love the sport should you seek out this movie. Rating: ***
Murderball: I found this to be a truly remarkable documentary. Made in 2005, this film covers the U.S. quadrapelegic rugby team. Through the film, we get to learn about the sport, its atheletes and also what these guys have to endure on a daily basis living in a wheelchair. Like the bowling film, Murderball covers a lot of different subjects, but it wasn't a problem here because each vignette is interesting and moving. A well done documentary that I highly recommend. Rating: *****
I.O.U.S.A.: I probably shouldn't include this here because I didn't actually see the whole film. The reason being is that there was a problem with it on Netflix's instant viewer. It just stops halfway through. But I will comment on what I did see in case you want to rent a hard copy of it. This is a sobering documentary about our country's current financial problems. At times it can be a bit overwhelming with the amount of statistics they throw at you. I felt I was back in Professor Rapp's economics class. But I felt the argument was very balanced (i.e. non-partisan) and really aimed to explain where we went wrong and what we have to do to stop this problem. I'll do my best to watch the rest of this when I can. Until then...Rating: N/A
The League of Ordinary Gentlemen: This is a bowling documentary, yes a bowling documentary, made a couple years ago that attempted to chronicles the PBA's attempt to become mainstream again. This was an interesting subject to me (why else would I have bothered watching it), but the film is too scattershot to be really good. They focus on too many different topics and none of them are particularly engaging. Only if you truly love the sport should you seek out this movie. Rating: ***
Murderball: I found this to be a truly remarkable documentary. Made in 2005, this film covers the U.S. quadrapelegic rugby team. Through the film, we get to learn about the sport, its atheletes and also what these guys have to endure on a daily basis living in a wheelchair. Like the bowling film, Murderball covers a lot of different subjects, but it wasn't a problem here because each vignette is interesting and moving. A well done documentary that I highly recommend. Rating: *****
I.O.U.S.A.: I probably shouldn't include this here because I didn't actually see the whole film. The reason being is that there was a problem with it on Netflix's instant viewer. It just stops halfway through. But I will comment on what I did see in case you want to rent a hard copy of it. This is a sobering documentary about our country's current financial problems. At times it can be a bit overwhelming with the amount of statistics they throw at you. I felt I was back in Professor Rapp's economics class. But I felt the argument was very balanced (i.e. non-partisan) and really aimed to explain where we went wrong and what we have to do to stop this problem. I'll do my best to watch the rest of this when I can. Until then...Rating: N/A
Prince captures Knight's title
From Comingsoon.net...
Take that Transformers! This is looking like it's going to be huge. Sadly, I probably won't get to see it for another month until I return to Ohio. At least I don't have to worry about spoilers. Feel free to share your thoughts on the movie here if you've already gotten a chance to see it.
Warner Bros. Pictures' Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince earned an estimated $22.2 million for its 3,003 midnight screenings, beating the $18.5 million midnight runs by the studio's own The Dark Knight and the $16.9 million earned by Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
The sixth installment continues its first day of release in 4,275 domestic locations and will expand to 4,350 theaters on Friday.
Last month, Michael Bay's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen grossed $16 million in midnight runs, also on a Wednesday.
"Half-Blood Prince" opened in the same Wednesday slot that Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix did in 2007. "Order of the Phoenix" grossed $12 million in midnight runs on its way to a $139.7 million five-day debut.
Take that Transformers! This is looking like it's going to be huge. Sadly, I probably won't get to see it for another month until I return to Ohio. At least I don't have to worry about spoilers. Feel free to share your thoughts on the movie here if you've already gotten a chance to see it.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Primative beginning
The summer movies are already starting to hit the budget theater, which means I finally got a chance to see the innaugural film from this year's summer session, X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
This film was equally a good and bad idea. On one hand, this was a good way to continue the X-Men franchise without worrying about trying to get all of the cast members to be free at the same time to film a movie. However, the origin story only works if it's an interesting one. In Wolverine's case, we knew a lot of his origins from the previous X-Men films and there wasn't a huge outcry to see the rest on screen, even if people were interested in seeing him in another film.
The crux of the story here is the relationship between Logan/Wolverine (played once again by Hugh Jackman) and his brother, Victor (played by Liev Schreiber). Both are immortal and have similar mutant powers. Victor, who's also known in the comics as Sabertooth, can grow his nails and has fangs. The film opens with a montage of the two of them fighting in various famous wars. Thanks to good performances by both actors, their relationship is one of the film's strongest points.
The two of them are soon asked by General Stryker (Danny Huston)to join his group of fellow mutants for various military operations. Here's we meet an assortment of other mutants including ones played by Lost's Dominic Monaghan and the Black Eyed Peas' Will.I.Am. One of the other mutants is played by Ryan Reynolds, who later on becomes Deadpool. Many comic book fans were upset by how Deadpool is portrayed here as he's a fan favorite, but isn't given much here. While all of these mutants vary in their levels of cool/interesting characters, you can't help but feel that they're all included in this film simply to see which ones audiences will connect with so they know who to keep for future films.
One other character that would fit into this description is Gambit, who shows up later on in the film. Now this was a character I had a vested interest in seeing as I, like many others became a fan of his, primarily from the 90s X-Men cartoon. I thought he was great here, albeit his time is very limited. This is a cool character and really deserved more screen time, and that includes the previous X-Men films as well. Here's hoping we'll see more of him in future X-Men movies.
Even though this is an origin story, the plot is nothing to write home about. Most of it is setup for the action sequences while throwing in little things to do their best to maintain continuity with the previous films. Some of these continuity scenes seem so forced, however. For instance, at one point in the film we're led to believe that the only thing that will kill Wolverine is an adamantium bullet. However later on, another character states that they won't kill him, but will cause him to lose his memory. The way this scene plays out not only spells out what will happen but comes off sounding like they're just making things up as they go along.
A lot of the film feels rushed and unfinished as I feel this is another big budget film that was a writer's strike victim. I was surprised actually by the look of the visual effects here. A lot of them did not look good and were clearly CGI. Given that this is a comic book movie, I would have hoped that the visuals would have been solid, even if the story wasn't strong.
However, despite the less than stellar quality of everything, I found myself enjoying the film more than I thought I would. The action sequences are fun and the film never really drags. As mentioned before the relationship between Jackman and Schreiber is strong, which carries the film. I also enjoyed the performance of Lynn Collins, who is Wolverine's romantic interest in the film.
With high expectations, this is almost certainly going to come off as a disappointing and underwhelming film. However, seeing this at a budget theater or soon on DVD, this is entertaining enough. There's enough going on here to make this an enjoyable entry in the X-Men series, but clearly far from the best. This isn't quite as good as the first two films, but definitely a notch or two above the abysmal Brett Ratner directed third film. If you've ever had an interest in these films and haven't bothered watching this one yet, I'd say go ahead and give it a look. Grade: B-
This film was equally a good and bad idea. On one hand, this was a good way to continue the X-Men franchise without worrying about trying to get all of the cast members to be free at the same time to film a movie. However, the origin story only works if it's an interesting one. In Wolverine's case, we knew a lot of his origins from the previous X-Men films and there wasn't a huge outcry to see the rest on screen, even if people were interested in seeing him in another film.
The crux of the story here is the relationship between Logan/Wolverine (played once again by Hugh Jackman) and his brother, Victor (played by Liev Schreiber). Both are immortal and have similar mutant powers. Victor, who's also known in the comics as Sabertooth, can grow his nails and has fangs. The film opens with a montage of the two of them fighting in various famous wars. Thanks to good performances by both actors, their relationship is one of the film's strongest points.
The two of them are soon asked by General Stryker (Danny Huston)to join his group of fellow mutants for various military operations. Here's we meet an assortment of other mutants including ones played by Lost's Dominic Monaghan and the Black Eyed Peas' Will.I.Am. One of the other mutants is played by Ryan Reynolds, who later on becomes Deadpool. Many comic book fans were upset by how Deadpool is portrayed here as he's a fan favorite, but isn't given much here. While all of these mutants vary in their levels of cool/interesting characters, you can't help but feel that they're all included in this film simply to see which ones audiences will connect with so they know who to keep for future films.
One other character that would fit into this description is Gambit, who shows up later on in the film. Now this was a character I had a vested interest in seeing as I, like many others became a fan of his, primarily from the 90s X-Men cartoon. I thought he was great here, albeit his time is very limited. This is a cool character and really deserved more screen time, and that includes the previous X-Men films as well. Here's hoping we'll see more of him in future X-Men movies.
Even though this is an origin story, the plot is nothing to write home about. Most of it is setup for the action sequences while throwing in little things to do their best to maintain continuity with the previous films. Some of these continuity scenes seem so forced, however. For instance, at one point in the film we're led to believe that the only thing that will kill Wolverine is an adamantium bullet. However later on, another character states that they won't kill him, but will cause him to lose his memory. The way this scene plays out not only spells out what will happen but comes off sounding like they're just making things up as they go along.
A lot of the film feels rushed and unfinished as I feel this is another big budget film that was a writer's strike victim. I was surprised actually by the look of the visual effects here. A lot of them did not look good and were clearly CGI. Given that this is a comic book movie, I would have hoped that the visuals would have been solid, even if the story wasn't strong.
However, despite the less than stellar quality of everything, I found myself enjoying the film more than I thought I would. The action sequences are fun and the film never really drags. As mentioned before the relationship between Jackman and Schreiber is strong, which carries the film. I also enjoyed the performance of Lynn Collins, who is Wolverine's romantic interest in the film.
With high expectations, this is almost certainly going to come off as a disappointing and underwhelming film. However, seeing this at a budget theater or soon on DVD, this is entertaining enough. There's enough going on here to make this an enjoyable entry in the X-Men series, but clearly far from the best. This isn't quite as good as the first two films, but definitely a notch or two above the abysmal Brett Ratner directed third film. If you've ever had an interest in these films and haven't bothered watching this one yet, I'd say go ahead and give it a look. Grade: B-
UFC 100
So I encountered my first MMA ever last night, catching it at one of the local bars. It was a unique experience to say the least. We unfortunately didn't arrive early enough and had to stand to watch the whole show. Now I know how those Johnny-come-latelys felt at Hooters when I used to go there to watch WWE PPVs. As for the actual show, the two middleweight fights that opened the show were decent, albeit for different reasons. The opener was a well balanced fight that saw both guys get in some decent shots and end in a split decision with the Japanese guy getting the nod. The other middleweight bout featured a vicious knockout punch by Henderson followed by a (unnecessary?) follow-up punch to prove a point. The welterweight title fight was a real snoozer with Georges St. Pierre doing a lot of grappling and basically biding time in order to retain his belt. The main event with Brock Lesnar was short and sweet with him earning a KO in the second round over Frank Mir, who was the only guy he had ever lost to before. Brock's postmatch antics have the UFC community all riled up, but I found them entertaining. Nice to see he hasn't forgotten everything he learned during his time with pro wrestling.
Overall, while I can see the appeal to some this just isn't my cup of tea. For me, there's just not enough payoff throughout the show to make it worthwhile. I also don't get how people can spend so much time looking to injure someone else only to then shake their hand afterwards. There's no appeal to me in trying to hurt someone for the sake of competition. But the biggest strike against MMA has nothing really to do with the sport and everything to do with its fans. Pro wrestling gets a lot of flack for its hillbilly fan base, but I think I prefer most of them to the testosterone-filled, Affliction shirt wearing meatheads and their put upon girlfriends that make up the audiences for these show. I'm glad I got to check this out, but I don't think I'll be watching anymore action from the Octagon anytime soon.
Overall, while I can see the appeal to some this just isn't my cup of tea. For me, there's just not enough payoff throughout the show to make it worthwhile. I also don't get how people can spend so much time looking to injure someone else only to then shake their hand afterwards. There's no appeal to me in trying to hurt someone for the sake of competition. But the biggest strike against MMA has nothing really to do with the sport and everything to do with its fans. Pro wrestling gets a lot of flack for its hillbilly fan base, but I think I prefer most of them to the testosterone-filled, Affliction shirt wearing meatheads and their put upon girlfriends that make up the audiences for these show. I'm glad I got to check this out, but I don't think I'll be watching anymore action from the Octagon anytime soon.
This vacay looks only okay
Here's a trailer for Couples Retreat. This came out a couple weeks ago but I was hesitant to post it because nothing I saw jumped out at me as being particularly great, despite the wonderfully comedic cast. But since I've been light on content recently I opted to post it anyways in hopes maybe someone else can spot something here and show me that this has a chance of being great.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Monster rehash
As a critic, you would prefer films to either be amazingly great or amazingly terrible. In either scenario, you're guaranteed to have plenty to write about. It's the films that are simply ordinary or average that are difficult to write for. Such is the case with the latest film I saw at the budget theater, Monsters vs. Aliens.
On the surface this seems to be anything but an ordinary film. This is a big budget, 3D animated feature from Dreamworks. The film features plenty of colorful characters/creatures and boasts an impressive voice cast. Reese Witherspoon, Seth Rogen, Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Keifer Sutherland, Rainn Wilson, Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler, and Stephen Colbert all lend their pipes to this film. Despite all that, this film failed to capture me in any way.
I could lay the blame on Pixar, who's animated films raise the bar so high that it would be unfair to compare them to any other cartoon. However, Dreamworks has shown at times, in films like Shrek and more recently, Kung Fu Panda, that it is capable of making films that are well done and can be enjoyed by children and adults alike. So it is disappointing to see such a lack of effort here, when the potential was all there.
As I listed above, the film has a long list of talented actors providing the voices for these characters. Each of them have deliver some funny lines in the movie, but I never really believed any of them were their characters. I was aware at all times that it was actor talking, not the character I was watching. The best voice acting occurs when you buy into the character so much that you forget who's providing the voice. Part of the problem here is the distinct voices of the actors in this cast. The other problem is that we never spend enough time with any of the characters, except for maybe Witherspoon's Susan/Ginormica to really get to know them or appreciate them.
The movie also spends way too much time paying homage/satirizing other films and not enough time on their own story. There are a ton of film references here, which provide smiles, but not laughs. The film also tries to create a B-movie feel, but does not go through with it enough to truly do the genre justice. It's more of an acknowledgement of those films rather than representing those films.
The plot of this story revolves around the United States keep various monsters under wraps until an alien invasion forces them to unleash the monsters to help wage war. The odd thing however is that the aliens are only invading because they want the energy being harnessed by one of the monsters. The way this plot is constructed, it basically ignores the human race's perspective, which could have added something. And this battle between monsters vs. aliens does not have enough at stake because the monsters don't really have any reason to hate the aliens. I just wanted everything on a more epic scale and it wasn't there.
The last thing I'll mention is a growing concern I have for other animated features based on this film. Because it was offered in 3D, there are several scenes intended specifically for the technology that are not organic to the story, like a guy playing with a paddleball right in front of the camera. I did not see the film in 3D, so a scene like that looks really stupid. I hope future filmmakers find more subtle ways to incorporate the 3D technology or just abandon it altogether.
Monsters vs. Aliens does have quite a few laughs, thanks to its talented cast, but as a whole left a lot to be desired. They had good actors, creative characters, and an intriguing premise, yet the execution of it all left a lot to be desired. Kids who do not care as much about these nuances will no doubt love this. As for adults, the only enjoyment from this will come if you're passively watching it while also doing something else. If you go into it with high expectations like I did, you'll find them crashing back down to Earth very quickly. Grade: C+
On the surface this seems to be anything but an ordinary film. This is a big budget, 3D animated feature from Dreamworks. The film features plenty of colorful characters/creatures and boasts an impressive voice cast. Reese Witherspoon, Seth Rogen, Hugh Laurie, Will Arnett, Keifer Sutherland, Rainn Wilson, Paul Rudd, Amy Poehler, and Stephen Colbert all lend their pipes to this film. Despite all that, this film failed to capture me in any way.
I could lay the blame on Pixar, who's animated films raise the bar so high that it would be unfair to compare them to any other cartoon. However, Dreamworks has shown at times, in films like Shrek and more recently, Kung Fu Panda, that it is capable of making films that are well done and can be enjoyed by children and adults alike. So it is disappointing to see such a lack of effort here, when the potential was all there.
As I listed above, the film has a long list of talented actors providing the voices for these characters. Each of them have deliver some funny lines in the movie, but I never really believed any of them were their characters. I was aware at all times that it was actor talking, not the character I was watching. The best voice acting occurs when you buy into the character so much that you forget who's providing the voice. Part of the problem here is the distinct voices of the actors in this cast. The other problem is that we never spend enough time with any of the characters, except for maybe Witherspoon's Susan/Ginormica to really get to know them or appreciate them.
The movie also spends way too much time paying homage/satirizing other films and not enough time on their own story. There are a ton of film references here, which provide smiles, but not laughs. The film also tries to create a B-movie feel, but does not go through with it enough to truly do the genre justice. It's more of an acknowledgement of those films rather than representing those films.
The plot of this story revolves around the United States keep various monsters under wraps until an alien invasion forces them to unleash the monsters to help wage war. The odd thing however is that the aliens are only invading because they want the energy being harnessed by one of the monsters. The way this plot is constructed, it basically ignores the human race's perspective, which could have added something. And this battle between monsters vs. aliens does not have enough at stake because the monsters don't really have any reason to hate the aliens. I just wanted everything on a more epic scale and it wasn't there.
The last thing I'll mention is a growing concern I have for other animated features based on this film. Because it was offered in 3D, there are several scenes intended specifically for the technology that are not organic to the story, like a guy playing with a paddleball right in front of the camera. I did not see the film in 3D, so a scene like that looks really stupid. I hope future filmmakers find more subtle ways to incorporate the 3D technology or just abandon it altogether.
Monsters vs. Aliens does have quite a few laughs, thanks to its talented cast, but as a whole left a lot to be desired. They had good actors, creative characters, and an intriguing premise, yet the execution of it all left a lot to be desired. Kids who do not care as much about these nuances will no doubt love this. As for adults, the only enjoyment from this will come if you're passively watching it while also doing something else. If you go into it with high expectations like I did, you'll find them crashing back down to Earth very quickly. Grade: C+
Friday, July 3, 2009
NMR: Gangster's paradise
With Public Enemies being released this week, I figured I'd check out a couple of classic mobster movies...
Goodfellas: Much to the shock of some, I had never seen Martin Scorcese's 1990 gangster film before. Watching the film two things surprised me; 1) I liked it more than I thought I would as it's a tight story that's beautifully filmed and fully establishes it's characters. 2) Despite my enjoyment, I don't get the revere some people have for these characters. These are bad men and portrayed as nothing else. I get the idea of the anti-hero, but the actions of these guys do not seem like something I would want to emulate. Ridiculous hero worship aside for these character, this is a tremendous film and worth a look if you've never seen it before. Rating: ****
The Untouchables: I was really digging this film for about three quarters of the way. There are some tremendous performances, particularly by Sean Connery. Kevin Coster is also very good as Eliott Ness; portraying him as the boy scout who learns to find his edge in order to bring down Al Capone. Speaking of Capone, I was slightly disappointed that they did not give Robert De Niro more to do with this character. De Niro's flat performance is not as big of a deal as the drawn out, aimless conclusion. The film really struggles to find a way to finish. After the shootout that mirrors the scene from Battleship Potemkin, the film wanders around and just sort of peters out. Still, this is mostly a strong film and also warrants a viewing. Rating: ****
Goodfellas: Much to the shock of some, I had never seen Martin Scorcese's 1990 gangster film before. Watching the film two things surprised me; 1) I liked it more than I thought I would as it's a tight story that's beautifully filmed and fully establishes it's characters. 2) Despite my enjoyment, I don't get the revere some people have for these characters. These are bad men and portrayed as nothing else. I get the idea of the anti-hero, but the actions of these guys do not seem like something I would want to emulate. Ridiculous hero worship aside for these character, this is a tremendous film and worth a look if you've never seen it before. Rating: ****
The Untouchables: I was really digging this film for about three quarters of the way. There are some tremendous performances, particularly by Sean Connery. Kevin Coster is also very good as Eliott Ness; portraying him as the boy scout who learns to find his edge in order to bring down Al Capone. Speaking of Capone, I was slightly disappointed that they did not give Robert De Niro more to do with this character. De Niro's flat performance is not as big of a deal as the drawn out, aimless conclusion. The film really struggles to find a way to finish. After the shootout that mirrors the scene from Battleship Potemkin, the film wanders around and just sort of peters out. Still, this is mostly a strong film and also warrants a viewing. Rating: ****
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
The Trailer!
Well it's about damn time. The Informant! trailer is finally here. This was the only film left from my top 30 of '09 that I had not seen any footage from yet and it was in my top 5. This trailer now makes me all the more excited for this film. Still unclear on a release date because the latest I had heard was that it was due out in October, but this video says September. Hopefully we'll get confirmation in a few weeks. Until then, enjoy!
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
NMR: Hoffman of science
Outbreak: This is the film that tried to cash in on the ebola scare back in 1995. It starts out promising with the discovery of a deadly virus spreading throughout a small town in the U.S. However, the film quickly devolves into a stupid action thriller with a dash of government conspiracy. The filmmakers seemingly didn't believe audiences would be interested in the science of this plot and abandoned it for chase scenes and explosions. It would be interesting to see another film like this now after the sucess of shows like CSI, which prove science can be equally as engaging as action. What saves this film is a strong cast that not only has Dustin Hoffman in the lead role, but also Rene Russo, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Spacey and Donald Sutherland in supporting roles. Rating: ***
Sphere: I've moved from John Grisham to Michael Crichton, but the result seems to be the same; crappy adaptations of fun, engaging novels. Another decent cast here with Sharon Stone, Samuel L. Jackson, and Liev Schrieber along for the ride with Hoffman. However, in this case, the cast can't save this film. They play supposedly brilliant scientists in various fields yet their actions don't support that. The audience figures things out way before the characters do. Then we get too many exposition scenes that unnecessarily overexplain everything. The special effects also could have saved this film, but look rather cheap. An all in all disappointment here. Rating: **
Sphere: I've moved from John Grisham to Michael Crichton, but the result seems to be the same; crappy adaptations of fun, engaging novels. Another decent cast here with Sharon Stone, Samuel L. Jackson, and Liev Schrieber along for the ride with Hoffman. However, in this case, the cast can't save this film. They play supposedly brilliant scientists in various fields yet their actions don't support that. The audience figures things out way before the characters do. Then we get too many exposition scenes that unnecessarily overexplain everything. The special effects also could have saved this film, but look rather cheap. An all in all disappointment here. Rating: **
Hasbro strikes again
First Transformers, then G.I. Joe, and now this? These toy movies have to be stopped!
Saturday, June 27, 2009
NMR: The Steve Martin Trio
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels: A con artist comedy that's a lot of fun, even if you can easily predict how everything will play out. What really works here are the performances by Martin and Michael Caine as the competing scammers. They play their characters perfectly and yield as much humor as possible out of both of them. I wasn't crazy about Glenn Headly, who plays the women they're trying to con, but she doesn't detract from things greatly. Nothing fancy here, just good ol' fun and laughs. Rating: ***
The Spanish Prisoner: This is a little known drama from 1997. So little in fact, that I didn't even know much about it before watching it online through Netflix. Steve Martin plays another con artist here, but this is really an ensemble film that also includes Campbell Scott, Felicity Huffman, and Ricky Jay. I thought this was very well done with a lot of twists and turns in a similar vein (although not as great as The Usual Suspects). The only caveat I'll offer is that the film was written and directed by David Mamet, who has a very unique style that is not everybody's tastes. If you enjoy his type of dialogue, you should enjoy this. Rating: ****
Baby Mama: Steve Martin isn't the star here, but since he does have a supporting role, I figured I'd throw this review into the post as well. This is the moderately successful comedy from last year starring Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. There are some really funny moments in here, including many from Martin, who plays Fey's boss. However, the story is very pedestrian and I struggled to remain interested. I did like the romance that develops between Fey and Greg Kinnear, who I typically find too smarmy to be likeable. Had Fey written this film, like she did for Mean Girls, this would have been a lot better. Rating: ***
The Spanish Prisoner: This is a little known drama from 1997. So little in fact, that I didn't even know much about it before watching it online through Netflix. Steve Martin plays another con artist here, but this is really an ensemble film that also includes Campbell Scott, Felicity Huffman, and Ricky Jay. I thought this was very well done with a lot of twists and turns in a similar vein (although not as great as The Usual Suspects). The only caveat I'll offer is that the film was written and directed by David Mamet, who has a very unique style that is not everybody's tastes. If you enjoy his type of dialogue, you should enjoy this. Rating: ****
Baby Mama: Steve Martin isn't the star here, but since he does have a supporting role, I figured I'd throw this review into the post as well. This is the moderately successful comedy from last year starring Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. There are some really funny moments in here, including many from Martin, who plays Fey's boss. However, the story is very pedestrian and I struggled to remain interested. I did like the romance that develops between Fey and Greg Kinnear, who I typically find too smarmy to be likeable. Had Fey written this film, like she did for Mean Girls, this would have been a lot better. Rating: ***
Friday, June 26, 2009
A video to flip for
If only all soccer was as awesome as this video, I might actually consider watching this worthless, boring sport with some regularity.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Scrap metal
I'm either a sucker for big events or a glutton for punishment. I'm not sure which is correct but both apply given that I opted to see Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen last night, despite not being overly crazy about the first one that came out back in 2007.
Most sequels are often described as being just like the original only bigger. That remains true for this film, unfortunately for me, what's bigger are the problems that existed in the original film. Once again, the film stars Shia LeBeouf as Sam Witwicky, a young man who has a strong connection to the Autobots as they continue their war with the Decepticons. Why there needs to be a central human character involved in this war still isn't clear to me, even after two films. It's no surprise to anyone who knows me that I don't care for Shia LeBeouf, but I'll admit he's far from the worst thing about this movie.
Shia looks better comparatively to many of the other human actors that make up the cast. Once again, too much time is spent with these ancillary characters that either don't add anything to the story or are downright annoying. The worst offenders are Sam's mother, who gets way too much screentime at the beginning of the film providing "humor" and Sam's college roommate, who is whiny and useless as he tags along with Sam and his girlfriend Mikaela (once again played by Megan Fox). Speaking of Megan Fox, I keep hearing how she's the next "it girl", but frankly I don't see it. She's attractive, but not THAT gorgeous and has zero talent when it comes to acting. Thankfully, she's only in this movie for T & A, which director Michael Bay uses to his fullest advantage.
The story here also has major problems, mainly because there really isn't any story. The same basic war is being fought and this time everyone is after a different object instead of the AllSpark from the first film. In a movie like this, I can forgive them for not having a strong story because they simply want to feature cool robot fights. However, the one thing that bugged me is that the events of the film did not flow very naturally. Characters continually disappear and then reappear only when it's convenient for them to show up. For instance, after the Fallen, the new bad guy in the film, announces his evil plan he's not seen from again until the very end of the movie. There's this long stretch of exposition scenes that needed to be broken up by showing the bad guys actually going through with their plan.
Now I just mentioned above how story is eschewed for displaying the Transformers fighting. This is the one thing they did improve on from the previous film. There are a ton of new robots featured and there is plenty of robot-on-robot carnage throughout this film. Now there were still parts where I felt it was difficult to differentiate which robot was winning. However, there were a few scenes that were just visually awesome. The forest scene featuring Optimus Prime battling a few Decipticons is particularly great. If only the film could have someone focused on that. Just get rid of the human element and let's watch these machines duke it out.
While they did add plenty of new robots to the mix this time, not all of them were great additions. Most notably, are "the twins"; a pair of jive-talking Autobots that are crass stereotypes. I mean, we're talking Jar Jar Binks territory here. With the way that Michael Bay depicts African American characters in his films, I'm beginning to wonder if he is somewhat of a racist. I hate making such an accusation, but some of the stereotypes seen in both human and non-human characters are crineworthy at times.
In addition, to eliminating these crass characterizations, Michael Bay would have also been better served trimming down this film altogether. At almost two and half hours, this is just too much. There were several scenes that I felt could have been cut. However, it was perhaps most obvious during the final climax which involves Sam and co. racing across the Egyptian desert trying to reach Optimus Prime and the army. This takes forever! I swear Frodo got to Mordor in faster time. And you know we're in trouble if I start giving Lord of the Rings compliments.
In some ways, I feel like this review isn't going to be particularly helpful to readers and is just an opportunity for me to rant. Let's face it, those that were inclined to see this already probably did so already or will soon, regardless of what I say. Those that didn't plan on seeing this will just look at this as confirmation that they were justified in skipping it.
I will say this, for as much as I've pointed out the film's flaws, I truly believe that if you enjoyed the first film there will be enough in here for you to enjoy this one just as much, if not more. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is what it is. Don't expect this to be a best picture contender (even with that news the other day that they plan on expanding the number of nominees from 5 to 10). This is a noisy, action thrill ride that will leave you buzzing, literally. I left the theater feeling like I had just spent the entire day at Cedar Point. Whether you view that as good or bad, at least we can all agree that very few films are capable of that. Grade: C
Most sequels are often described as being just like the original only bigger. That remains true for this film, unfortunately for me, what's bigger are the problems that existed in the original film. Once again, the film stars Shia LeBeouf as Sam Witwicky, a young man who has a strong connection to the Autobots as they continue their war with the Decepticons. Why there needs to be a central human character involved in this war still isn't clear to me, even after two films. It's no surprise to anyone who knows me that I don't care for Shia LeBeouf, but I'll admit he's far from the worst thing about this movie.
Shia looks better comparatively to many of the other human actors that make up the cast. Once again, too much time is spent with these ancillary characters that either don't add anything to the story or are downright annoying. The worst offenders are Sam's mother, who gets way too much screentime at the beginning of the film providing "humor" and Sam's college roommate, who is whiny and useless as he tags along with Sam and his girlfriend Mikaela (once again played by Megan Fox). Speaking of Megan Fox, I keep hearing how she's the next "it girl", but frankly I don't see it. She's attractive, but not THAT gorgeous and has zero talent when it comes to acting. Thankfully, she's only in this movie for T & A, which director Michael Bay uses to his fullest advantage.
The story here also has major problems, mainly because there really isn't any story. The same basic war is being fought and this time everyone is after a different object instead of the AllSpark from the first film. In a movie like this, I can forgive them for not having a strong story because they simply want to feature cool robot fights. However, the one thing that bugged me is that the events of the film did not flow very naturally. Characters continually disappear and then reappear only when it's convenient for them to show up. For instance, after the Fallen, the new bad guy in the film, announces his evil plan he's not seen from again until the very end of the movie. There's this long stretch of exposition scenes that needed to be broken up by showing the bad guys actually going through with their plan.
Now I just mentioned above how story is eschewed for displaying the Transformers fighting. This is the one thing they did improve on from the previous film. There are a ton of new robots featured and there is plenty of robot-on-robot carnage throughout this film. Now there were still parts where I felt it was difficult to differentiate which robot was winning. However, there were a few scenes that were just visually awesome. The forest scene featuring Optimus Prime battling a few Decipticons is particularly great. If only the film could have someone focused on that. Just get rid of the human element and let's watch these machines duke it out.
While they did add plenty of new robots to the mix this time, not all of them were great additions. Most notably, are "the twins"; a pair of jive-talking Autobots that are crass stereotypes. I mean, we're talking Jar Jar Binks territory here. With the way that Michael Bay depicts African American characters in his films, I'm beginning to wonder if he is somewhat of a racist. I hate making such an accusation, but some of the stereotypes seen in both human and non-human characters are crineworthy at times.
In addition, to eliminating these crass characterizations, Michael Bay would have also been better served trimming down this film altogether. At almost two and half hours, this is just too much. There were several scenes that I felt could have been cut. However, it was perhaps most obvious during the final climax which involves Sam and co. racing across the Egyptian desert trying to reach Optimus Prime and the army. This takes forever! I swear Frodo got to Mordor in faster time. And you know we're in trouble if I start giving Lord of the Rings compliments.
In some ways, I feel like this review isn't going to be particularly helpful to readers and is just an opportunity for me to rant. Let's face it, those that were inclined to see this already probably did so already or will soon, regardless of what I say. Those that didn't plan on seeing this will just look at this as confirmation that they were justified in skipping it.
I will say this, for as much as I've pointed out the film's flaws, I truly believe that if you enjoyed the first film there will be enough in here for you to enjoy this one just as much, if not more. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is what it is. Don't expect this to be a best picture contender (even with that news the other day that they plan on expanding the number of nominees from 5 to 10). This is a noisy, action thrill ride that will leave you buzzing, literally. I left the theater feeling like I had just spent the entire day at Cedar Point. Whether you view that as good or bad, at least we can all agree that very few films are capable of that. Grade: C
What's in the box? What's in the box?
Here's a trailer for another thriller set to come out this fall, called The Box starring Cameron Diaz and Frank Langella.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Heroes loses its hero
Breaking news today that Bryan Fuller is once again leaving Heroes. I guess any chance for some turnaround in Season 4 is all but gone at this point. Here's the story from EW.com...
Just as Heroes was gaining some creative momentum comes word of another setback: Bryan Fuller has vacated his post as consulting producer.
The acclaimed Pushing Daisies auteur tells me that he left to focus on developing new projects for NBC, and not (as some have speculated) due to creative differences with series creator Tim Kring.
"I'm crafting two pilots right now and it's a lot of work," admits Fuller, who has an overall deal with NBC. "It was just too hard to [juggle] Heroes and my development; something had to give."
Better Ted than dead
Just as a reminder, ABC's lone decent sitcom, Better Off Ted returns with new episodes starting tomorrow night (June 23). The show was already picked up for a second season, but it would be nice if everyone out there would show it some support by watching these remaining episodes from Season 1 that have yet to air. To give you a taste of the show, here's a video from Veridian Dynamics, the ambiguous company that the main characters work at. Fake PSA's like the one seen here are typically run at the beginning of every episode.
Faith off
Another hot day, plus not being able to be with my dad on Father's Day meant I headed over to the budget theater to relax. This time it was for Nicholas Cage's latest, Knowing.
Knowing made it onto my top 30 for '09 list back in December, albeit with some caveats. The premise of this movie sounded interesting; a man comes across a list of numbers found in a time capsule that list the date and number of casualities for every single disaster that's occurred and some that have yet to happen. However, given Cage's track record of films I fully understood that the movie could easily be complete junk. Sadly, just as the tragedies predicted on that sheet came true, so did my worries for this film.
For the most part, the film works early on. I like the original premise, even if they have Cage figure out the meaning of the numbers too quickly. I also like the scenes involving Cage's efforts to stop the upcoming disasters. One scene involves a plane crash and the other involves a subway derailment. Both scenes are harrowing in their realism. Director Alex Proyas does not pull any punches in depicting the destruction of the actual events nor the frightening moments in the immediate aftermath. With the way these scenes were done, I was intriqued by where the film was headed.
Sadly, the film takes a massive detour, turning this unique premise into a preachy mess related to an impending apocalypse. We get the whole man of science/man of faith debate thrown into the film haphazardly. Anyone that has watched Lost, knows that this dichotomy can be done so much better. None of it seems authentic here, making the film's conclusion all the more hokey.
The film also spends a lot of time with the child characters. Issues relating to them being the "chosen ones" are not fully explained. Instead, Knowing presents them in the same unique/spooky/gifted/bedeviled/creepy way that we've seen in way too many films in recent years. Ever since Haley Joel Osment's performance in The Sixth Sense we've seen this glut of troubled/special children in thrillers. I am hereby calling for an end to this plot point. It's become hackneyed and tired and most kid actors can't pull it off effectively.
I really wanted to like this film, but as it went further and further away from the original premise I wondered why they were making these decisions. It was as if they didn't have any faith in their story and felt they needed to gin it up by making it some end of the world morality tale. It basically combines The Number 23 with The Day The Earth Stood Still, which is not a combination you want to have.
They say knowing is half the battle and in this case Knowing only won half the battle. The other half, which involves executing on the original premise is where this film was lost. Chalk this up as another terrible movie for Nic Cage. With his track record of batting .500, his next film will no dobut be fantastic. As for this one, unless you want to marvel as the visual beauty of horrible tragedies on your HDTV, there's no need to check out Knowing. Grade: C-
Knowing made it onto my top 30 for '09 list back in December, albeit with some caveats. The premise of this movie sounded interesting; a man comes across a list of numbers found in a time capsule that list the date and number of casualities for every single disaster that's occurred and some that have yet to happen. However, given Cage's track record of films I fully understood that the movie could easily be complete junk. Sadly, just as the tragedies predicted on that sheet came true, so did my worries for this film.
For the most part, the film works early on. I like the original premise, even if they have Cage figure out the meaning of the numbers too quickly. I also like the scenes involving Cage's efforts to stop the upcoming disasters. One scene involves a plane crash and the other involves a subway derailment. Both scenes are harrowing in their realism. Director Alex Proyas does not pull any punches in depicting the destruction of the actual events nor the frightening moments in the immediate aftermath. With the way these scenes were done, I was intriqued by where the film was headed.
Sadly, the film takes a massive detour, turning this unique premise into a preachy mess related to an impending apocalypse. We get the whole man of science/man of faith debate thrown into the film haphazardly. Anyone that has watched Lost, knows that this dichotomy can be done so much better. None of it seems authentic here, making the film's conclusion all the more hokey.
The film also spends a lot of time with the child characters. Issues relating to them being the "chosen ones" are not fully explained. Instead, Knowing presents them in the same unique/spooky/gifted/bedeviled/creepy way that we've seen in way too many films in recent years. Ever since Haley Joel Osment's performance in The Sixth Sense we've seen this glut of troubled/special children in thrillers. I am hereby calling for an end to this plot point. It's become hackneyed and tired and most kid actors can't pull it off effectively.
I really wanted to like this film, but as it went further and further away from the original premise I wondered why they were making these decisions. It was as if they didn't have any faith in their story and felt they needed to gin it up by making it some end of the world morality tale. It basically combines The Number 23 with The Day The Earth Stood Still, which is not a combination you want to have.
They say knowing is half the battle and in this case Knowing only won half the battle. The other half, which involves executing on the original premise is where this film was lost. Chalk this up as another terrible movie for Nic Cage. With his track record of batting .500, his next film will no dobut be fantastic. As for this one, unless you want to marvel as the visual beauty of horrible tragedies on your HDTV, there's no need to check out Knowing. Grade: C-
Saturday, June 20, 2009
NMR: Grisham grabbag pt. 2
So I decided to finish off the films out there based on John Grisham novels. I'd write seperate reviews, but my thoughts are basically the same for both.
The Client and A Time to Kill: Both films boast some impressive casts that deliver fine performances. Without those high-profile actors, these movies would be absolute junk. Both of them go on for too long and beat a decent premise into the ground. They feature an endless amount of movie cliches that were tired 15 years ago when these films were first made. They work as decent ambient noise if you have them on the TV in the background, but as quality films they both fall just short. Rating: ***
The Client and A Time to Kill: Both films boast some impressive casts that deliver fine performances. Without those high-profile actors, these movies would be absolute junk. Both of them go on for too long and beat a decent premise into the ground. They feature an endless amount of movie cliches that were tired 15 years ago when these films were first made. They work as decent ambient noise if you have them on the TV in the background, but as quality films they both fall just short. Rating: ***
Friday, June 19, 2009
Donny Brook Theater?!?
Everyone that reads this probably knows that I've been a lifelong wrestling fan. So when I come across footage that I've never seen before, you know it's rare. But thanks to the WWE 24/7 channel, I had the honor/horror of seeing something that not only have I never seen before, but no one has. 'Donny Brook Theater' was a planned show in 1995 that would mix wrestling with sketch comedy. Yes, that's right, pro wrestlers performing in skits. For some reason, someone came to their senses and realized that this was a terrible idea before the show ever made it to air. One episode was taped however and has now been unearthed from the video vault. Please to enjoy...Donny Brook Theater!
Had a devil of a time
Yes, Reaper is long gone, but that doesn't mean we can't talk about it. I stumbled across this interview with Bret Harrison and Tyler Labine (aka Sam and Sock) where they are very candid about how the show was treated and what could have happened had it continued for a third season. Check it out here.
It's the end of the world as we know it aka another day in the life of Roland Emmerich
Here's the first full trailer of the new apocalypse movie, 2012, coming out this November.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Beer and loathing in Las Vegas
It's been killing me not getting a chance to see any of the summer movies thus far, but that finally ended last night when I got a chance to see one of the few movies that is actually exceeding expectations this summer, The Hangover.
This is the new film from director Todd Phillips (Old School) about four guys who go to Vegas for a bachelor party and wake up the next day with the worst hangovers ever not remembering any of the destruction that they now see around them. Worst of all, the groom-to-be (played by Justin Bartha) is nowhere to be found. As is the case in most of Phillips' films, he has once again cast actors that may not be well known, but are perfect for the roles they're playing. Bradley Cooper (Wedding Crashers), Ed Helms (The Office) and stand-up Zack Galifinakis are all fantastic here.
For as much as this film is a comedy, it is just as equally a mystery movie. The audience is left in the dark along with these characters about just what exactly happened during their bender the previous night. At times this can be a little unnerving because of all the problems and damage that you see they've caused. You really begin to dread what exactly happened to them and by them. The movie does a very good job of slowly revealing everything and allows you to go through the roller coaster of emotions that these characters experience.
It would be a disservice to me to reveal any of those surprises, but I will say that each one is packed with laughs. Along the way, these guys run into a number of hilarious characters who help piece things together. Matt Walsh, Ken Jeong, and Mike Epps all show up throughout the movie and provide plenty of laughs. Heather Graham also shows up in one of her most tolerable roles ever, which is high praise on my part. Of course, best of all is the great cameo by Mike Tyson who is funny in the film beyond the scenes that you see in the trailers and commercials.
The real stars of the movie, however, are the three leads. Bradley Cooper gives his first performance that did not make me think of his psychotic character from Wedding Crashers. He showed me here that he's got what it takes to be leading man material. Ed Helms also does a nice job of breaking free of his Office persona and playing a realistic character. You really feel for the guy the way he's abused by his girlfriend (Rachel Harris), yet continues to try and defend her. And finally, I cannot say enough good things about Zack Galifinakis. His form of oddball humor shines in this movie and provides most of the film's best lines. I've been trying to sell people on his act for the past couple of years and I hope this film now gives him the exposure he deserves.
If the film has a flaw it's that it kind of peters out in the third act. The laughs aren't as frequent and everything gets resolved a bit too neatly considering all that has happened. However, the final scenes do feature a cameo from The Dan Band (they were the group that sang the crass version of 'Total Eclipse of the Heart' at the wedding reception in Old School). It was great seeing another crude performance by them. Best of all the montage that runs during the credits is one of the best payoffs to a film in a long time. You must do yourself a favor and stay through the credits to watch it, it is truly hilarious.
While unsettling at times, the mystery that unfolds in The Hangover is a lot of fun to experience. As the gang learns more, you see how far things spiraled out of control. Even once you learn how everything plays out though, I feel like this movie will have a lot of replay value. Similar to Old School, I think most people will find themselves continuing to giggle uncontrollably while watching this late at night when it comes on cable in a few years. This is a fun ride and a great summer flick. I know I don't have a lot to go on, but I'll go out on a limb and say it'll be one of the best films of the summer. If you haven't already, go experience The Hangover. Grade: B+
This is the new film from director Todd Phillips (Old School) about four guys who go to Vegas for a bachelor party and wake up the next day with the worst hangovers ever not remembering any of the destruction that they now see around them. Worst of all, the groom-to-be (played by Justin Bartha) is nowhere to be found. As is the case in most of Phillips' films, he has once again cast actors that may not be well known, but are perfect for the roles they're playing. Bradley Cooper (Wedding Crashers), Ed Helms (The Office) and stand-up Zack Galifinakis are all fantastic here.
For as much as this film is a comedy, it is just as equally a mystery movie. The audience is left in the dark along with these characters about just what exactly happened during their bender the previous night. At times this can be a little unnerving because of all the problems and damage that you see they've caused. You really begin to dread what exactly happened to them and by them. The movie does a very good job of slowly revealing everything and allows you to go through the roller coaster of emotions that these characters experience.
It would be a disservice to me to reveal any of those surprises, but I will say that each one is packed with laughs. Along the way, these guys run into a number of hilarious characters who help piece things together. Matt Walsh, Ken Jeong, and Mike Epps all show up throughout the movie and provide plenty of laughs. Heather Graham also shows up in one of her most tolerable roles ever, which is high praise on my part. Of course, best of all is the great cameo by Mike Tyson who is funny in the film beyond the scenes that you see in the trailers and commercials.
The real stars of the movie, however, are the three leads. Bradley Cooper gives his first performance that did not make me think of his psychotic character from Wedding Crashers. He showed me here that he's got what it takes to be leading man material. Ed Helms also does a nice job of breaking free of his Office persona and playing a realistic character. You really feel for the guy the way he's abused by his girlfriend (Rachel Harris), yet continues to try and defend her. And finally, I cannot say enough good things about Zack Galifinakis. His form of oddball humor shines in this movie and provides most of the film's best lines. I've been trying to sell people on his act for the past couple of years and I hope this film now gives him the exposure he deserves.
If the film has a flaw it's that it kind of peters out in the third act. The laughs aren't as frequent and everything gets resolved a bit too neatly considering all that has happened. However, the final scenes do feature a cameo from The Dan Band (they were the group that sang the crass version of 'Total Eclipse of the Heart' at the wedding reception in Old School). It was great seeing another crude performance by them. Best of all the montage that runs during the credits is one of the best payoffs to a film in a long time. You must do yourself a favor and stay through the credits to watch it, it is truly hilarious.
While unsettling at times, the mystery that unfolds in The Hangover is a lot of fun to experience. As the gang learns more, you see how far things spiraled out of control. Even once you learn how everything plays out though, I feel like this movie will have a lot of replay value. Similar to Old School, I think most people will find themselves continuing to giggle uncontrollably while watching this late at night when it comes on cable in a few years. This is a fun ride and a great summer flick. I know I don't have a lot to go on, but I'll go out on a limb and say it'll be one of the best films of the summer. If you haven't already, go experience The Hangover. Grade: B+
Friday, June 12, 2009
Golden Girls Gone Wild
Here's a fun clip from Late Night with Jimmy Fallon involving Fallon playing beer pong with Betty White. I'm still not sold on Fallon as a late night host, but this is just further proof of how awesome Betty White is!
Time to shake up some martinis
Quantum of Solace may stil be fresh in our minds (for better or worse), but there's already news about the next installment in the James Bond series. From EW.com comes the announcment of the writing team...
This seems like a good mix of quality and familiarity. Sounds like I'll be restarting the Bond countdown in no time.
Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon, The Queen) along with Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, the screenwriters behind the last two Bond films, Quantum of Solace and Casino Royale, will be charged with crafting the script for the 23rd James Bond film. Daniel Craig is set to reprise his role as James Bond in what has become the longest-running franchise in movie-making history. Morgan is currently working on an HBO special called The Special Relationship and the Dreamworks film Hereafter and will focus on Bond after he completes those two projects. Purvis and Wade have collaborated on the last four Bond films and are currently working on the sequel to The Italian Job.
This seems like a good mix of quality and familiarity. Sounds like I'll be restarting the Bond countdown in no time.
Is that a chill in the air?
The trailers for the fall movies are already starting to come out. Here's one for Shutter Island, one of the movies I picked for my top 30 in '09. The film stars Leonardo Dicaprio and is directed by Martin Scorsese.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
NMR: Marley & Me
I haven't seen anything else recently that could be paired up with this, so I guess this will get the solo treatment.
After a ridiculously long wait to receive this, I'm almost wishing I had never even put it in my queue in the first place. This was insufferable to sit through. It was like being forced to watch someone else's home movies. Nothing that happens matters to anyone but the people that it's happening to. There is just endless montages of Marley destroying stuff that serve no purpose. I didn't need thirty reminders that this was a disobedient dog. And I'm sorry, but there is no way that dog would continue to be a menace for that log. Either those people would have gotten rid of it or they would have done something to better train him. Also not believeable was Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston as regular people. They are way too pretty and Hollywood to play these people. For a look at the real John Grogan, visit here. The end result here is manufactured sentimentality. Various points from this couple's life are chosen to manipulate the audience's emotions without providing any cohesion behind them. By the end of the film, I couldn't care less about the obvious conclusion. There was only one bright spot in this movie; Alan Arkin as the newspaper editior. I found the newspaper stuff to be interesting and his character provided the only funny moments in the film. The rest is just junk. Rating: **
After a ridiculously long wait to receive this, I'm almost wishing I had never even put it in my queue in the first place. This was insufferable to sit through. It was like being forced to watch someone else's home movies. Nothing that happens matters to anyone but the people that it's happening to. There is just endless montages of Marley destroying stuff that serve no purpose. I didn't need thirty reminders that this was a disobedient dog. And I'm sorry, but there is no way that dog would continue to be a menace for that log. Either those people would have gotten rid of it or they would have done something to better train him. Also not believeable was Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston as regular people. They are way too pretty and Hollywood to play these people. For a look at the real John Grogan, visit here. The end result here is manufactured sentimentality. Various points from this couple's life are chosen to manipulate the audience's emotions without providing any cohesion behind them. By the end of the film, I couldn't care less about the obvious conclusion. There was only one bright spot in this movie; Alan Arkin as the newspaper editior. I found the newspaper stuff to be interesting and his character provided the only funny moments in the film. The rest is just junk. Rating: **
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
A high for fans of the Winslows
Check out this video of some nerds visiting the house that was seen in all the exterior shots on the 90's sitcom, Family Matters.
NMR: DeNiro double feature
Backdraft: DeNiro has a relatively small role in this firefighting film starring Kurt Russell and William Baldwin. I actually would have liked his role increased as I found his arson investigator character to be interesting. I'm surprised no one has tried to spin off CSI with a show about arson investigators. And if one shows up next year, I'm going to sue! Anyways, this film isn't perfect; I didn't care for the film's climax where the arsonist is revealed. However, Ron Howard does an amazing jobs creating some of the most realistic film fires ever. This movie is nearly twenty years old and I haven't seen anything that comes close to what he did here. It's a decent enough summer action flick to keep you entertained if you've never seen it before. Rating: ****
The Score: DeNiro's role here is much larger as he plays an aging thief who wants to retire but first must do one last big job. And if this sounds awfully familiar to you, then you're not alone. Nothing about this movie is very original. This is pretty much a second rate script that seems a lot better thanks to its all star cast. Aside from DeNiro, the film stars Edward Norton and Marlon Brando; kind of a past, present, future deal there. Despite their good performances, I struggled to remain invested in the movie since I knew how everything was going to play out. If you've never seen a heist movie before, you'll probably love this. Fans of the genre, however, may get bored by the same old song and dance displayed here. Rating: ***
The Score: DeNiro's role here is much larger as he plays an aging thief who wants to retire but first must do one last big job. And if this sounds awfully familiar to you, then you're not alone. Nothing about this movie is very original. This is pretty much a second rate script that seems a lot better thanks to its all star cast. Aside from DeNiro, the film stars Edward Norton and Marlon Brando; kind of a past, present, future deal there. Despite their good performances, I struggled to remain invested in the movie since I knew how everything was going to play out. If you've never seen a heist movie before, you'll probably love this. Fans of the genre, however, may get bored by the same old song and dance displayed here. Rating: ***
First look - Rourke as Whiplash
The first image of Mickey Rourke as Whiplash, one of the villains in the upcoming Iron Man 2 was released today. I can't say that I'm all that impressed, but with no context to the photo, it's really hard to judge. Perhaps comic book enthusiasts out there can have a better read on if this looks any good or not.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
NMR: Grisham grab bag
I've been on a John Grisham kick recently and decided to watch some of the films that have been adapted from his novels.
The Firm: We'll start with the best of the bunch. This is a tense thriller with a wonderful cast. It does suffer from the same problem that all Tom Cruise films suffer from; Cruise playing a jerk, even though he's the protagonist. Directed by the late Sydney Pollack, the movie provides plenty of twists and turns and really makes you wonder how everything is going to get resolved. The solution is a bit contrived, but it still worked for the most part. This is the epitome of popcorn fare. Rating: ****
The Pelican Brief: My excitement over the pairing of Denzel Washington and Julia Roberts was quickly dimished as this was a dull and convaluted film. There were just too many charaters to follow here. Not to mention that the information that could potentially take down the president isn't all that interesting. All of the chasing that goes on in this movie gets old real fast. The only reason to watch this is for Denzel and Julia, who manage to still shine despite the poor story. Rating: ***
The Chamber: A major disappointment here, especially considering the fact that Gene Hackman is starring in it. This film is not only poorly made, it's exploitative too. There seems to be no real purpose to the film other than to have characters spout off racist remarks. Chris O'Donnell doesn't have the gravitas to lead this film and Faye Dunaway looks completely lost on screen. If you want to see a good death row film watch The Green Mile or Dead Man Walking. Rating: **
The Firm: We'll start with the best of the bunch. This is a tense thriller with a wonderful cast. It does suffer from the same problem that all Tom Cruise films suffer from; Cruise playing a jerk, even though he's the protagonist. Directed by the late Sydney Pollack, the movie provides plenty of twists and turns and really makes you wonder how everything is going to get resolved. The solution is a bit contrived, but it still worked for the most part. This is the epitome of popcorn fare. Rating: ****
The Pelican Brief: My excitement over the pairing of Denzel Washington and Julia Roberts was quickly dimished as this was a dull and convaluted film. There were just too many charaters to follow here. Not to mention that the information that could potentially take down the president isn't all that interesting. All of the chasing that goes on in this movie gets old real fast. The only reason to watch this is for Denzel and Julia, who manage to still shine despite the poor story. Rating: ***
The Chamber: A major disappointment here, especially considering the fact that Gene Hackman is starring in it. This film is not only poorly made, it's exploitative too. There seems to be no real purpose to the film other than to have characters spout off racist remarks. Chris O'Donnell doesn't have the gravitas to lead this film and Faye Dunaway looks completely lost on screen. If you want to see a good death row film watch The Green Mile or Dead Man Walking. Rating: **
Friday, June 5, 2009
Zach attack
In light of his new film, The Hangover, opening in theaters today, I thought I would share with you some additional humor from Zach Galifinakis. Here's an installment of his fake interview show, Between Two Ferns where he interviews Mad Men star Jon Hamm. To watch more of these interviews, visit FunnyorDie.com
Holy Man-trimony
So it's been a pretty terrible week with nothing going right, so I decided to escape my problems and go see I Love You, Man at the budget theater and boy was this exactly what I needed. Over the past few years, there's been a resurgence of the R rated comedy thanks mostly to the Apatow gang. And while Judd had nothing to do with this particular film, this is one of the best comedic movies I've seen, right up there with The 40 Year Old Virgin. Those that know me, know that that is high praise.
This film sees Paul Rudd get his first true leading role as Peter Klaven, a recently engaged guy, who realizes he doesn't really have a best friend. Peter's quest for a best man involves one hilarious failure after another before meeting Sydney (Jason Segel), a shoot-from-the-hip dude, who frees Peter of his insecurities. These guys have worked before in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and once again exhibit great chemistry here.
But for as great as Rudd and Segal are, this movie is a comedic success even when they aren't on the screen. This film boasts an embarassment of riches when it comes to the comedic talent in this cast. You have SNL vets like Andy Samberg and Jane Curtain. You have guys from The State like Thomas Lennon and Joe Lo Truglio. As well as other familiar faces like J.K. Simmons, Jaime Pressley, Jon Faverau, and Lou Ferrigno adding their presence to the film. Everybody is hilarious here, yet they have a purpose to the story. These are not cameos for the sake of filling out a thin script. These actors are funny in their brief parts, while remaining organic to the storytelling.
I left out one key cast member because I wanted to single her out. Rashida Jones plays Paul Rudd fiancee in the film and is just phenomenal. Similar to Elizabeth Banks, she has emerged over the past couple of years as that rare breed of sweet, sexy, and funny. She anchors the film and makes you have a rooting interest in her relationship with Rudd. Unlike say Katherine Heigl, who was just a bitch with a pretty face and had no real comedic timing in Knocked Up. That might be a potshot at Heigl, but I don't care. Going back to Rashida Jones, though, I cannot say enough good things about her and I hope she continues to get movie roles (or at least more to do on Parks and Recreation).
The relationship between Rudd and Jones that centers this film makes I Love You, Man a unique movie. This is a rare 'romantic comedy' that I think is equally appealing to men and women. So many terrible romcoms get the distinction of 'chick flicks' because they're so saccharine and ridiculous that no self respecting man would ever want to see them. But we've also lately had films like Knocked Up, which are more slanted to the male perspective and the female characters come off looking bad in them. Here, the relationship is so realistic that both genders can appreciate what the characters go through. The comedy is also balanced so that one side isn't the brunt of all the jokes. Yes, some of the humor may be ridiculous at times, but in general the situations presented here are extremely relatable.
I tried to point out at least one flaw in my reviews, but I'm having trouble coming up with one here. If anything, I guess I maybe would have liked a bit more background on Sydney's character, but I don't feel it was essential. He just has some interesting quirks that could have been explored further. The story works as it is and delving further into his character would have just been some additional padding. Of course, I could complain about wanting to see more from all of the characters, but that would just be greedy on my part.
It's not clear yet when this is set to come out on DVD, but I cannot urge you enough to check it out if you haven't already. If you've got a special someone in your life, it's a great date movie. And if you're flying solo like me, the film has nonstop laughs to make it equally enjoyable. It may be cliched, but I'm not afraid to say it; I love this movie! Grade: A
This film sees Paul Rudd get his first true leading role as Peter Klaven, a recently engaged guy, who realizes he doesn't really have a best friend. Peter's quest for a best man involves one hilarious failure after another before meeting Sydney (Jason Segel), a shoot-from-the-hip dude, who frees Peter of his insecurities. These guys have worked before in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and once again exhibit great chemistry here.
But for as great as Rudd and Segal are, this movie is a comedic success even when they aren't on the screen. This film boasts an embarassment of riches when it comes to the comedic talent in this cast. You have SNL vets like Andy Samberg and Jane Curtain. You have guys from The State like Thomas Lennon and Joe Lo Truglio. As well as other familiar faces like J.K. Simmons, Jaime Pressley, Jon Faverau, and Lou Ferrigno adding their presence to the film. Everybody is hilarious here, yet they have a purpose to the story. These are not cameos for the sake of filling out a thin script. These actors are funny in their brief parts, while remaining organic to the storytelling.
I left out one key cast member because I wanted to single her out. Rashida Jones plays Paul Rudd fiancee in the film and is just phenomenal. Similar to Elizabeth Banks, she has emerged over the past couple of years as that rare breed of sweet, sexy, and funny. She anchors the film and makes you have a rooting interest in her relationship with Rudd. Unlike say Katherine Heigl, who was just a bitch with a pretty face and had no real comedic timing in Knocked Up. That might be a potshot at Heigl, but I don't care. Going back to Rashida Jones, though, I cannot say enough good things about her and I hope she continues to get movie roles (or at least more to do on Parks and Recreation).
The relationship between Rudd and Jones that centers this film makes I Love You, Man a unique movie. This is a rare 'romantic comedy' that I think is equally appealing to men and women. So many terrible romcoms get the distinction of 'chick flicks' because they're so saccharine and ridiculous that no self respecting man would ever want to see them. But we've also lately had films like Knocked Up, which are more slanted to the male perspective and the female characters come off looking bad in them. Here, the relationship is so realistic that both genders can appreciate what the characters go through. The comedy is also balanced so that one side isn't the brunt of all the jokes. Yes, some of the humor may be ridiculous at times, but in general the situations presented here are extremely relatable.
I tried to point out at least one flaw in my reviews, but I'm having trouble coming up with one here. If anything, I guess I maybe would have liked a bit more background on Sydney's character, but I don't feel it was essential. He just has some interesting quirks that could have been explored further. The story works as it is and delving further into his character would have just been some additional padding. Of course, I could complain about wanting to see more from all of the characters, but that would just be greedy on my part.
It's not clear yet when this is set to come out on DVD, but I cannot urge you enough to check it out if you haven't already. If you've got a special someone in your life, it's a great date movie. And if you're flying solo like me, the film has nonstop laughs to make it equally enjoyable. It may be cliched, but I'm not afraid to say it; I love this movie! Grade: A
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)