Check out the latest installment of the 'award-winning' Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifinakis
Friday, November 20, 2009
Coming down to Earth
There are very few certainties in life. Namely, you can count on death and taxes. And for the last fifteen years, you could also add Pixar movies. With every entry added to their library they create another masterpiece that is well done and a delight for everyone from age 8 to 80. In their latest entry, Up (which ironically has two main characters represented by those ages), however, fail to hit their standard homerun.
That is not to say that this film isn't well done. Once again, the Pixar crew has created a gorgeous looking film. Even on my crummy, bubble-tube television the colors pop off the screen in a glorious visual array. As per usual, the animators have made every effort to put in every last detail into what they are depicting. I can only imagine what this film looked like in 3-D. Unlike so many of these films that are trying to cash in on the fad, this is a movie that didn't need 3-D, yet can still be enhanced by the added technology.
For all its beauty, where Up falters is with its storytelling. If you don't know the plot, it's about an elderly man named Carl (voiced by Ed Asner), who, after his wife's passing, decides to fly to a South American destination that they always wanted to go as a couple but never had the opportunity to. Not wanting to part with his house, Carl rigs up thousands of balloons to float him and his humble abode to this location. Unbeknownst to him until after takeoff, Carl discovers a neighborhood boy has stowed away on his porch. Once arriving in South America, the real adventure for the two takes off.
Throughout this adventure, there are some truly excellent scenes that remind us of why these films are typically excellent. The montage at the beginning of the film chronicling Carl's relationship with his wife is touching and heartbreaking and more moving than most scenes in live action films. There are also several inspired comedic moments as well. Many of them come from the keen observations made about the behavior of dogs. The two main characters encounter several dogs, including the scene-stealing Dug, once they arrive in South America. The filmmakers ability to have the dogs speak like humans, yet still act like dogs provide some of the film's most clever moments.
Overall though, my main problem with the film was that I just never bought into the world that they tried to create in this film. It may seem like an odd thing to say about a cartoon, but this is what happens when Pixar sets the bar so high for themselves. The quality of their previous films have allowed me to buy into concepts like talking toys and gourmet rats. This time they ended up trying to have their cake and eating it too. The opening montage that I spoke about earlier is so rooted in reality that when things get cartoonish later on it becomes all the more jarring. I had problems with both the quickness with which Carl was able to concoct this balloon house plan and that someone his age would be able to pull it off. Then the film really plays fasts and loose with the laws of physics once they arrive in South America. Somehow Carl is able to tether himself to his house and drag it along like its a kite. I kept waiting for some sort of explanation for why all of these outlandish events were happening, but it never came.
Perhaps their problem was entering into PG territory for the first time. It may not seem like a big leap, but obviously there are increased expectations once you move out of the G rating. It was clear that Pixar was reaching for the sky with this film, I just don't think they quite made it. Let it be known that this is not a negative review for the film. I still believe that this is an enjoyable movie that is worth your time to check out now that it is out on DVD. However, I believe that this proved that perhaps Pixar cannot simply skate (or in this case float) by on their name alone. Like all good filmmakers they've got to continually earn the praise they receive for their work. The interesting thing though is that with the Oscars allowing 10 Best Picture nominees this year, there is a chance this might receive one. That would be a shame considering some of the far superior films that have come from this company and have been ignored in the past by the Academy. I won't be too upset though, because Pixar certainly deserves the recognition even if Up failed to reach the heights of some of their other classics. Grade: B+
That is not to say that this film isn't well done. Once again, the Pixar crew has created a gorgeous looking film. Even on my crummy, bubble-tube television the colors pop off the screen in a glorious visual array. As per usual, the animators have made every effort to put in every last detail into what they are depicting. I can only imagine what this film looked like in 3-D. Unlike so many of these films that are trying to cash in on the fad, this is a movie that didn't need 3-D, yet can still be enhanced by the added technology.
For all its beauty, where Up falters is with its storytelling. If you don't know the plot, it's about an elderly man named Carl (voiced by Ed Asner), who, after his wife's passing, decides to fly to a South American destination that they always wanted to go as a couple but never had the opportunity to. Not wanting to part with his house, Carl rigs up thousands of balloons to float him and his humble abode to this location. Unbeknownst to him until after takeoff, Carl discovers a neighborhood boy has stowed away on his porch. Once arriving in South America, the real adventure for the two takes off.
Throughout this adventure, there are some truly excellent scenes that remind us of why these films are typically excellent. The montage at the beginning of the film chronicling Carl's relationship with his wife is touching and heartbreaking and more moving than most scenes in live action films. There are also several inspired comedic moments as well. Many of them come from the keen observations made about the behavior of dogs. The two main characters encounter several dogs, including the scene-stealing Dug, once they arrive in South America. The filmmakers ability to have the dogs speak like humans, yet still act like dogs provide some of the film's most clever moments.
Overall though, my main problem with the film was that I just never bought into the world that they tried to create in this film. It may seem like an odd thing to say about a cartoon, but this is what happens when Pixar sets the bar so high for themselves. The quality of their previous films have allowed me to buy into concepts like talking toys and gourmet rats. This time they ended up trying to have their cake and eating it too. The opening montage that I spoke about earlier is so rooted in reality that when things get cartoonish later on it becomes all the more jarring. I had problems with both the quickness with which Carl was able to concoct this balloon house plan and that someone his age would be able to pull it off. Then the film really plays fasts and loose with the laws of physics once they arrive in South America. Somehow Carl is able to tether himself to his house and drag it along like its a kite. I kept waiting for some sort of explanation for why all of these outlandish events were happening, but it never came.
Perhaps their problem was entering into PG territory for the first time. It may not seem like a big leap, but obviously there are increased expectations once you move out of the G rating. It was clear that Pixar was reaching for the sky with this film, I just don't think they quite made it. Let it be known that this is not a negative review for the film. I still believe that this is an enjoyable movie that is worth your time to check out now that it is out on DVD. However, I believe that this proved that perhaps Pixar cannot simply skate (or in this case float) by on their name alone. Like all good filmmakers they've got to continually earn the praise they receive for their work. The interesting thing though is that with the Oscars allowing 10 Best Picture nominees this year, there is a chance this might receive one. That would be a shame considering some of the far superior films that have come from this company and have been ignored in the past by the Academy. I won't be too upset though, because Pixar certainly deserves the recognition even if Up failed to reach the heights of some of their other classics. Grade: B+
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
Trick in a Box
In the new thriller The Box, a mysterious man (played by the great Frank Langella) gives Norma Lewis (Cameron Diaz) and her family an plain box with a button inside. Langella tells her that if she pushes the button, someone in the world will die, but she will receive $1 million dollars (cue Dr. Evil laugh). The proposition is certainly alluring for Norma. We as the audience are equally intrigued by the thought of a movie centered around this moral dilemma. Sadly, for both the audience and the characters the offer isn't all that it seems.
Director Richard Kelly has great source material to work with (the film is loosely based on a short story by Richard Matheson), but fails to pull it together to deliver a wholly engaging film. At moments, the film evokes genius as it dabbles with moral ambiguity. However, simply dealing with this question isn't enough for Kelly who bogs the film down in sci-fi hokum.
The film comes off for the most point as a wannabe Twilight Zone episode. It tries to create this moody atmosphere that comes off more cheesy than thrilling. The worst offense of this is the film's scores. Trying to fill certain moments with danger and dread, the usage of piano and violins here detracts from the film instead of adding to it.
When the film centers on the actions related to what the characters choose to do with the box, the film works. Those scenes, however, only bookend the film. In the middle is where the film begins to sag. Several elements are continuously added that only cause confusion for the audience members. I couldn't appreciate anything that was happening in the here and now because I was so consumed with trying to figure out how each new, strange twist fit within the context of the film. To the film's credit, it does about as good of a job as possible in explaining everything. None of the answers though were what I considered satisfying.
Kelly attempts to fill the film with symbolism as themes of disfigurement, altruism, free will, and even the work of Sartre are introduced throughout the film. Each alone could have been thought-provoking and worthwhile to explore. However, by cramming all of them into this simple film, none of them get the attention that they deserve. I'm not sure if this is a worst offense than not including any, however since removing them would leave a pretty shallow, empty film.
Unfortunately, The Box is too much work with not enough payoff. The film peppers in moments of inspiration that continue to make you think it's going to turnaround and be something special, but none of them pan out. Instead, what's left is a murky mess that fails to make good on its potential. The film requires your whole attention, so for that reason I would probably suggest you see it at theaters instead of at home if you're still interested in checking it out. However, for most, I suggest you don't push the button and return The Box back to sender. Grade: C
Director Richard Kelly has great source material to work with (the film is loosely based on a short story by Richard Matheson), but fails to pull it together to deliver a wholly engaging film. At moments, the film evokes genius as it dabbles with moral ambiguity. However, simply dealing with this question isn't enough for Kelly who bogs the film down in sci-fi hokum.
The film comes off for the most point as a wannabe Twilight Zone episode. It tries to create this moody atmosphere that comes off more cheesy than thrilling. The worst offense of this is the film's scores. Trying to fill certain moments with danger and dread, the usage of piano and violins here detracts from the film instead of adding to it.
When the film centers on the actions related to what the characters choose to do with the box, the film works. Those scenes, however, only bookend the film. In the middle is where the film begins to sag. Several elements are continuously added that only cause confusion for the audience members. I couldn't appreciate anything that was happening in the here and now because I was so consumed with trying to figure out how each new, strange twist fit within the context of the film. To the film's credit, it does about as good of a job as possible in explaining everything. None of the answers though were what I considered satisfying.
Kelly attempts to fill the film with symbolism as themes of disfigurement, altruism, free will, and even the work of Sartre are introduced throughout the film. Each alone could have been thought-provoking and worthwhile to explore. However, by cramming all of them into this simple film, none of them get the attention that they deserve. I'm not sure if this is a worst offense than not including any, however since removing them would leave a pretty shallow, empty film.
Unfortunately, The Box is too much work with not enough payoff. The film peppers in moments of inspiration that continue to make you think it's going to turnaround and be something special, but none of them pan out. Instead, what's left is a murky mess that fails to make good on its potential. The film requires your whole attention, so for that reason I would probably suggest you see it at theaters instead of at home if you're still interested in checking it out. However, for most, I suggest you don't push the button and return The Box back to sender. Grade: C
Friday, November 6, 2009
NMR: G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra
I didn't expect much here and that's about what I got. This movie was already going to be a tough sell for me since I was never really a fan of the comic books and/or 80s cartoon series, so I had no real affinity for any of the characters. Then again, with the laughable acting by most of the main characters, perhaps it was better I wasn't a fan because I didn't have to worry about seeing beloved characters getting butchered like they were here. If you're able to completely shut off your brain this movie can be palatable at times. But for the most part, it's a noisy mess. The film runs through a gamut of cliches, however, they go from one to the next so quickly you don't even have enough time to groan over their inclusion. I will be real interested to see whether or not a sequel is made. The film ends suggesting one is forthcoming, but the box office for the film was just ok. If they do, let's hope they choose to use the X-Men model, not the Transformers model for creating a second film. As for this film, you're probably better off giving it a pass. Rating: **/Grade: C-
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Hostile takeover
A quick note...I had a free coupon to rent a movie from one of those Redbox machines, so I used it to rent The Taking of Pelham 123. That's why technically this isn't a NMR and why I'll do a bit longer review for this one. I know that's totally arbitrary reasoning, but hey it's my blog, so my rules.
So this is a remake/reimagining of the 1974 Walter Mathau film of the same name. This time around it's John Travolta who hijacks a NYC subway and Denzel Washington, playing the subway dispatcher who is trying to stop him. These two actors have been around long enough to know how to play these characters convincingly. The strength of the film lies in the interplay between them. There are several scenes involving them engaging in conversations about their pasts, their beliefs, and their roles in this situation. Anytime the film gives them this time to do some character disection, the film works. You get drawn in to the games each of them are trying to play in order for this whole ordeal to play out the way they want it to go.
Unfortunately, those moments of dialogue and continuously interrupted with frenetic action scenes that do not really add anything to the film. Travolta's character is demanding a large sum of money, so we see several scenes of the caravan of cop cars racing through NYC in order to get him the money to him before he kills one of his hostages. These scenes, shot with a whip-like nature, are so disparagingly different from the scenes of dialogue between the two main characters that you begin to wonder if you're watching two different films.
You can credit director Tony Scott for the nature of these action sequences. They have his fingerprints all over them. The quick jumps, the zoom maps, the abrupt crashes all here once again, just like they are in so many of his other films. In some cases, like with Enemy of the State, a story needs the infusion of adrenaline that Scott's style can bring. For a film like this or Spy Game, it's just over the top and unnecessary. This could have been such a better film if it just had more faith in letting the actors tell a good story.
In addition to Washington and Travolta, you also get some reliable performances from guys like John Tuturro and James Gandolfini in supporting roles. Gandolfini, playing the mayor of New York, has a particularly engaging performance. There seemed to be a lot more to this guy than just being a figurehead and I wish the film would have delved into his character more.
Like so many action movies, there are a lot of plot holes/gaps in logic. And things kind of break down as the film heads to its conclusion. In a lot of cases, I can look past these indiscretions if the rest of the film is entertaining. However, in this case, those problems got amplified when they are being done with in the hyperkinetic style that Scott used for this film.
There are certainly a lot worse action movies that are made. And the performances by the leads are strong enough to make this worthy of a rental if you're looking for some action. It's just a shame that Tony Scott felt it was necessary to ramp up the adrenaline when a more quite, cerebral film with this story would have worked just fine. Grade: C+
So this is a remake/reimagining of the 1974 Walter Mathau film of the same name. This time around it's John Travolta who hijacks a NYC subway and Denzel Washington, playing the subway dispatcher who is trying to stop him. These two actors have been around long enough to know how to play these characters convincingly. The strength of the film lies in the interplay between them. There are several scenes involving them engaging in conversations about their pasts, their beliefs, and their roles in this situation. Anytime the film gives them this time to do some character disection, the film works. You get drawn in to the games each of them are trying to play in order for this whole ordeal to play out the way they want it to go.
Unfortunately, those moments of dialogue and continuously interrupted with frenetic action scenes that do not really add anything to the film. Travolta's character is demanding a large sum of money, so we see several scenes of the caravan of cop cars racing through NYC in order to get him the money to him before he kills one of his hostages. These scenes, shot with a whip-like nature, are so disparagingly different from the scenes of dialogue between the two main characters that you begin to wonder if you're watching two different films.
You can credit director Tony Scott for the nature of these action sequences. They have his fingerprints all over them. The quick jumps, the zoom maps, the abrupt crashes all here once again, just like they are in so many of his other films. In some cases, like with Enemy of the State, a story needs the infusion of adrenaline that Scott's style can bring. For a film like this or Spy Game, it's just over the top and unnecessary. This could have been such a better film if it just had more faith in letting the actors tell a good story.
In addition to Washington and Travolta, you also get some reliable performances from guys like John Tuturro and James Gandolfini in supporting roles. Gandolfini, playing the mayor of New York, has a particularly engaging performance. There seemed to be a lot more to this guy than just being a figurehead and I wish the film would have delved into his character more.
Like so many action movies, there are a lot of plot holes/gaps in logic. And things kind of break down as the film heads to its conclusion. In a lot of cases, I can look past these indiscretions if the rest of the film is entertaining. However, in this case, those problems got amplified when they are being done with in the hyperkinetic style that Scott used for this film.
There are certainly a lot worse action movies that are made. And the performances by the leads are strong enough to make this worthy of a rental if you're looking for some action. It's just a shame that Tony Scott felt it was necessary to ramp up the adrenaline when a more quite, cerebral film with this story would have worked just fine. Grade: C+
Saturday, October 31, 2009
NMR: Guess the connection
We'll make a little game out of this, see if you can find the common thread between these three films:
Pleasantville: I can't tell you how many times I've seen parts of this film, but this was my first opportunity to watch it all the way through. I felt that the movie is certainly flawed - it plays fast and loose with its rules and leaves a lot unexplained. However, the premise is really interesting and its filled with a lot of good performances from the likes of William H. Macy, Joan Allen, Tobey Maguire, and Reese Witherspoon. Thematically, the film is very rich and has actually given me a couple of ideas to use for possible future academic papers (that is if I ever get this dissertation finished). Rating: ***
The Negotiator: This could have been a standard cop thriller but the film rises above its material thanks to the scenes involving the two leads - Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey. I liked the chess match that these two negotiators engage in as they try out-talk the other. It kind of makes me sad that Kevin Spacey doesn't do more mainstream films because he's so good, even when the material he's working with isn't. Rating: ****
Executive Decision: The movie is not without its stupid moments, logic gaps, and eye rolling stunts. Despite all that, I found myself fully engaged in this. They did just enough to consistently keep me entertained. They always kept the tension high and made the most out of its cramped setting. Kurt Russell is always a likeable actor and he's good here again. If you just shut your mind off, this is an entertaining thriller. Rating: ****
Pleasantville: I can't tell you how many times I've seen parts of this film, but this was my first opportunity to watch it all the way through. I felt that the movie is certainly flawed - it plays fast and loose with its rules and leaves a lot unexplained. However, the premise is really interesting and its filled with a lot of good performances from the likes of William H. Macy, Joan Allen, Tobey Maguire, and Reese Witherspoon. Thematically, the film is very rich and has actually given me a couple of ideas to use for possible future academic papers (that is if I ever get this dissertation finished). Rating: ***
The Negotiator: This could have been a standard cop thriller but the film rises above its material thanks to the scenes involving the two leads - Samuel L. Jackson and Kevin Spacey. I liked the chess match that these two negotiators engage in as they try out-talk the other. It kind of makes me sad that Kevin Spacey doesn't do more mainstream films because he's so good, even when the material he's working with isn't. Rating: ****
Executive Decision: The movie is not without its stupid moments, logic gaps, and eye rolling stunts. Despite all that, I found myself fully engaged in this. They did just enough to consistently keep me entertained. They always kept the tension high and made the most out of its cramped setting. Kurt Russell is always a likeable actor and he's good here again. If you just shut your mind off, this is an entertaining thriller. Rating: ****
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Johnny 5 is alive!!
From EW.com...
I guess we have the popularity of the Transformers movies to thank for this.
Paul Blart: Mall Cop director Steve Carr will direct the new remake of 1986’s Short Circuit, Variety reports. The remake written by Dan Milano (Robot Chicken) brings Johnny 5 up to date. A military built robot, Johnny 5 is hit by lightning and develops his own personality and then he meets a lonely boy and his family.
I guess we have the popularity of the Transformers movies to thank for this.
Is that a grandfather clock ticking now?
Check out the new video previewing the upcoming 8th season of 24.
Acta foolishness
Tribe tabs Acta to be new manager
I know I'm a little late to the party in talking about this move, but I couldn't let that stop me from expressing my utter disappointment over this move. When I first heard the list of candidates, Acta was at the bottom with only the Tribe's AAA manager ranking below him. Acta was unable to do anything with the Washington Nationals, so that doesn't instill a lot of faith in me that he'll do anything to motivate our similar bunch of rookies and no-names. What frustrates me even more about this move is the quickness in which they made it. From the start it seemed that they had determined that this was their guy without doing a proper search. Even if you have a guy in mind, at least give the city the courtesy of acting like you're looking through at all possible options before making your decision. I felt the same thing happened with the Mangini hiring for the Browns and look at how well that's turned out thus far. I still love my Tribe, I just wish this organization would reciprocate that love to me and the rest of the fans more often.
I know I'm a little late to the party in talking about this move, but I couldn't let that stop me from expressing my utter disappointment over this move. When I first heard the list of candidates, Acta was at the bottom with only the Tribe's AAA manager ranking below him. Acta was unable to do anything with the Washington Nationals, so that doesn't instill a lot of faith in me that he'll do anything to motivate our similar bunch of rookies and no-names. What frustrates me even more about this move is the quickness in which they made it. From the start it seemed that they had determined that this was their guy without doing a proper search. Even if you have a guy in mind, at least give the city the courtesy of acting like you're looking through at all possible options before making your decision. I felt the same thing happened with the Mangini hiring for the Browns and look at how well that's turned out thus far. I still love my Tribe, I just wish this organization would reciprocate that love to me and the rest of the fans more often.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
NMR: Land of the Lost
I honestly didn't feel like this looked any good when I had seen the trailers/commercials earlier this year, but I still decided to give it a rental. That ended up being a bad move as my instincts were right and this was pretty terrible. Just a hodge-podge of unfunny material and unengaging visual effects. This movie suffers from some major tonal problems. It can't tell if it wants to be a crass comedy or a family film. It can't tell if it wants it's visual effects to look cheesy as an homage to the original TV show or really impressive and eye-catching (Given the trend this year, I have no idea why they didn't offer this film in 3D). Will Ferrell is talented enough to milk a few laughs out of me, but most of the film falls flat. Compounding the problem is that I didn't care for Danny McBride or Anna Friel and since it's primarily the three of them for the entire movie, it made for an unpleasant experience. There is a quote in the film where Will Ferrell says they have traveled to a world where past, present and future meet. Well this is a film where unfunny, stupidity, and ugliness meet. Rating: **
Noooooooooooooo
From EW.com:
I can't wait to see how fast the number of vistors to their site drops come next year. What an awful, awful idea.
At an industry summit in NYC on Oct. 21, News Corp Deputy Chairman Chase Carey revealed that online video hub Hulu will begin charging users for content as soon as 2010, according to Broadcasting and Cable. Carey told reporters that a subscription system is likely, although some content will probably continue to be offered free of charge. “I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value,” he said.
I can't wait to see how fast the number of vistors to their site drops come next year. What an awful, awful idea.
NMR: Bart Got A Room
This one really surprised me. Released in theaters earlier this year, the plot seems pretty familiar - a boy's quest to find a date for prom. However, this one works because it opts to tell a more realistic and sweet story instead of settling for raunch and shock value like so many other bad teen comedies do. The film is filled with a number of recognizable actors like William H. Macy, Cheryl Hines, and Alia Shawkat (Maeby from Arrested Development) who all provide an extra energy to the film. My only complaint is that the film's climax is a bit overwhelming. However, there are plenty of jokes, particularly at the expense of the small Jewish town in Florida where the film takes place in, to make this a pleasant surprise. You don't need to rush out and rent this, but if you're looking for a title, this is a little-known film that will nicely fit the bill. Rating: ****
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Forward thinking
News came out today that ABC new drama, FlashForward was just picked up for a full season. You can read all about it here.
While I'm talking about the show, I might as well give my reactions to it since I just finally watched the first three episodes over the weekend. In general, I think the show has a lot of promise. I would have preferred had we got storylines/flashforwards from people around the country instead of focusing solely on LA, but I get why they did that. There seems to be some logic gaps with the storytelling and some of the characters storylines aren't interesting me (I'm mainly referring to the sponsor and his dead/alive daughter). However, with time those issues may resolve themselves. I'm definitely invested in seeing where they are going with this, so I'm glad it's gotten picked up for the whole season.
Now for a couple off the wild crazy speculations on my end:
- The father of the boy who's in the hospital will be a bad guy
- John Cho's character will be the one who impregnates the female FBI agent
While I'm talking about the show, I might as well give my reactions to it since I just finally watched the first three episodes over the weekend. In general, I think the show has a lot of promise. I would have preferred had we got storylines/flashforwards from people around the country instead of focusing solely on LA, but I get why they did that. There seems to be some logic gaps with the storytelling and some of the characters storylines aren't interesting me (I'm mainly referring to the sponsor and his dead/alive daughter). However, with time those issues may resolve themselves. I'm definitely invested in seeing where they are going with this, so I'm glad it's gotten picked up for the whole season.
Now for a couple off the wild crazy speculations on my end:
- The father of the boy who's in the hospital will be a bad guy
- John Cho's character will be the one who impregnates the female FBI agent
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)