Kevin James goes kiddy-style in Paul Blart: Mall Cop, a nice little surprise that struggles to find its way in the first half-hour, but gains a big heart and some cool action in its final hour. It most definitely falls prey to almost every imaginable kids movie cliche in the book.
James plays Paul Blart, a 10-year mall cop who lives with his mother and daughter. He takes his job very seriously, at one point pulling over an old man in an electric wheelchair for "speeding". But he is a bit lonely, and desires a girlfriend. Subsequently, he falls for a kind saleswoman named Amy. But when a group of thieves take over the mall and hold Blart's daughter and Amy hostage, Blart fights his way through the mall to save them.
The film's best scenes are when it parodies 'Die Hard'. A particularly memorable one is where Blart yowls in pain and lifts up his sleeve. A miniscule cut on his arm. He then applies a Hello Kitty band-aid. This is the general attitude of the film. The first 30 minutes are really bad, if only because the jokes either revolve around his weight or...well, that's practically all the jokes are for the first 30 minutes.
When the mall is taken over, the film really picks up the pace. Seeing James as a childrens-film star is startling, but as an action star is pretty funny. It showcases his talent, and he really hasn't been too funny since 'King of Queens'. It's nothing special, but it's funny, has some cool stunts, and as a kids movie isn't too bad. B-
Showing posts with label Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reviews. Show all posts
Friday, January 23, 2009
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Gran Torino
Clint Eastwood became known to us first as The Man With No Name in Sergio Leone's "Dollars Trilogy". There's irony to the fact that he hardly spoke in the role and yet became so iconic. Which makes it really fitting that his final film role should be Walt Kowalski, an outspoken, racist, grouchy, rifle-toting old man. It's exactly that performance that makes Gran Torino a must-see movie, despite its evident flaws.
Eastwood has become one of the best, most consistent directors in the film industry, and continues to evolve even at 78. He is actually quite versatile. He can do Westerns, war flicks, boxing movies, period dramas, literally anything. But what Gran Torino goes to show is that the man can still act, perhaps better than he can direct. It's one of the best performances of 2008.
Eastwood plays Walt Kowalski, a Korean War vet/recent widower whose Detroit neighborhood is dominated by Hmongs and gangs. The local gangs pressure a young Hmong boy into attempting to steal Walt's '72 Gran Torino. When Walt retaliates, he takes the boy under his wing and protects his family from the gangs.
The script is top-notch. It may sound like a violent, somber movie, but it's actually quite funny. The problem, which is actually quite big, are the Hmong actors. Reportedly cast on the scene, they truly are not that good.
The young Hmong boy, who carries a large chunk of the film's emotional core, is simply not up to the plate. He talks too fast, mostly stares at the ground, and delivers half the lines in an odd tone. He gets some good jokes in, but it's a mediocre performance that needed to be great.
Gran Torino could be Clint Eastwood's last film as an actor, although he'll likely continue directing. Gran Torino ranks among his best performances, and despite mediocre performances otherwise, the script is excellent and the film will remain in your memory for a long time. A-
Eastwood has become one of the best, most consistent directors in the film industry, and continues to evolve even at 78. He is actually quite versatile. He can do Westerns, war flicks, boxing movies, period dramas, literally anything. But what Gran Torino goes to show is that the man can still act, perhaps better than he can direct. It's one of the best performances of 2008.
Eastwood plays Walt Kowalski, a Korean War vet/recent widower whose Detroit neighborhood is dominated by Hmongs and gangs. The local gangs pressure a young Hmong boy into attempting to steal Walt's '72 Gran Torino. When Walt retaliates, he takes the boy under his wing and protects his family from the gangs.
The script is top-notch. It may sound like a violent, somber movie, but it's actually quite funny. The problem, which is actually quite big, are the Hmong actors. Reportedly cast on the scene, they truly are not that good.
The young Hmong boy, who carries a large chunk of the film's emotional core, is simply not up to the plate. He talks too fast, mostly stares at the ground, and delivers half the lines in an odd tone. He gets some good jokes in, but it's a mediocre performance that needed to be great.
Gran Torino could be Clint Eastwood's last film as an actor, although he'll likely continue directing. Gran Torino ranks among his best performances, and despite mediocre performances otherwise, the script is excellent and the film will remain in your memory for a long time. A-
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Seven Pounds
Will Smith is undoubtedly the world's top box-office draw, and a great actor at that. But with Hancock (well...those last 45 minutes) and this, Seven Pounds, his choices lately have been less than great. Or less than average for that matter. He's reteaming with 'Pursuit of Happyness' director Gabriele Muccino.
'Pursuit' had its cliches, yes, but the acting was great and it was a perfectly good tearjerker. 'Seven Pounds' has its cliches, OH YES, the acting is mostly sub-par, and although it aims for your heart, it hits your head. Seriously, there's so many plot holes and 'why-didn't-he-just' moments, if I ever see this again I will list them. Which means I'll need a lot of paper.
Will Smith is Ben Thomas (or is he?), an IRS agent (or is he?) who may or may not be suicidal. He most definitely lost his family, he most definitely lost his mind, and we most definitely lose our patience after the ridiculous beginning sequence. He's possibly concocting a plan that will help seven strangers, but falls in love along the way and questions the morals of his plan.
Woody Harrelson is fast becoming the best part of several sub-par movies lately. His role as a heartbroken, blind pianist/phone operator has the best parts of the film. His first scene with Will Smith is awesome, despite Will's ridiculous reaction. Rosario Dawson is a really good actress who unfortunately gets a lot of parts in really bad movies. Her role as Will's love interest is underwritten and doesn't grab our sympathy like it should.
Will Smith himself is good. So why, with all the good performances, is it so bad? I'll tell you. The script is incredibly bad. It doesn't matter how good any acting is, it's what they're acting that counts. The dialogue is terrible, and as said earlier the plot is neck-deep with condractions.
The ending is one of those ones that will go down in history, as that "You have got to be kidding me' one. Oh, and the whole movie oddly revolves around a jellyfish. No joke. I'd tell you to see for yourself, but would you really want to waste $15? Didn't think so. D
'Pursuit' had its cliches, yes, but the acting was great and it was a perfectly good tearjerker. 'Seven Pounds' has its cliches, OH YES, the acting is mostly sub-par, and although it aims for your heart, it hits your head. Seriously, there's so many plot holes and 'why-didn't-he-just' moments, if I ever see this again I will list them. Which means I'll need a lot of paper.
Will Smith is Ben Thomas (or is he?), an IRS agent (or is he?) who may or may not be suicidal. He most definitely lost his family, he most definitely lost his mind, and we most definitely lose our patience after the ridiculous beginning sequence. He's possibly concocting a plan that will help seven strangers, but falls in love along the way and questions the morals of his plan.
Woody Harrelson is fast becoming the best part of several sub-par movies lately. His role as a heartbroken, blind pianist/phone operator has the best parts of the film. His first scene with Will Smith is awesome, despite Will's ridiculous reaction. Rosario Dawson is a really good actress who unfortunately gets a lot of parts in really bad movies. Her role as Will's love interest is underwritten and doesn't grab our sympathy like it should.
Will Smith himself is good. So why, with all the good performances, is it so bad? I'll tell you. The script is incredibly bad. It doesn't matter how good any acting is, it's what they're acting that counts. The dialogue is terrible, and as said earlier the plot is neck-deep with condractions.
The ending is one of those ones that will go down in history, as that "You have got to be kidding me' one. Oh, and the whole movie oddly revolves around a jellyfish. No joke. I'd tell you to see for yourself, but would you really want to waste $15? Didn't think so. D
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Bedtime Stories
Adam Sandler, when given the right script, can be hilarious, (Billy Madison & Happy Gilmore) or can fall flat on his face. (I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, Airheads) Bedtime Stories is his first real foray into the little kids' territory. Although there's some cool action sequences and Russell Brand is funny, I hope it's Sandler's last kids movie, he just isn't meant for Disney.
He plays a hotel handyman named Skeeter whose ridiculously uptight sister makes him watch her children for a couple of days. The kids' normal stories consist of 'The Organic Squirrel Gets A Bike Helmet', so Skeeter decides to improvise his own stories. But then the next day they begin to come to life, which brings problems, as only the things the kids say come true.
Sandler is just fine. Nothing new or inventive, but he's not awful. It seems after last summer's Zohan, which was something of a change for him, he's back to his old acting style. Not awful, not great either.
The huge-eyed pet guinea pig (so enthusiastically displayed in the trailers) is initially cute, and still is, but he's a one-note joke. Adam Sandler says something, the guinea pig responds with a cute noise. Cue the 'awws'. It must be said though, the CGI pig does look horrifically fake.
The problem is simply, its not very involving, and the pace is awful. At the very beginning, the traditional family movie music begins, and some REALLY overenthusiatic narration begins. The corniness hardly lets up. Most of the 'stories' are fairly lame, although one with Sander as a cowboy shows the potential the film had, and missed.
Russell Brand, a raunchy British comedian, is the last person on Earth one would expect in a Disney movie. Which is why its so ironic he's the funniest person in the movie. He has about 10 lines, but they're the best in the movie.
It's sort of sad how much potential Bedtime Stories had. It has a great premise and some good scenes, but the pace is horrible and only kids under 8 can honestly enjoy it. C-
He plays a hotel handyman named Skeeter whose ridiculously uptight sister makes him watch her children for a couple of days. The kids' normal stories consist of 'The Organic Squirrel Gets A Bike Helmet', so Skeeter decides to improvise his own stories. But then the next day they begin to come to life, which brings problems, as only the things the kids say come true.
Sandler is just fine. Nothing new or inventive, but he's not awful. It seems after last summer's Zohan, which was something of a change for him, he's back to his old acting style. Not awful, not great either.
The huge-eyed pet guinea pig (so enthusiastically displayed in the trailers) is initially cute, and still is, but he's a one-note joke. Adam Sandler says something, the guinea pig responds with a cute noise. Cue the 'awws'. It must be said though, the CGI pig does look horrifically fake.
The problem is simply, its not very involving, and the pace is awful. At the very beginning, the traditional family movie music begins, and some REALLY overenthusiatic narration begins. The corniness hardly lets up. Most of the 'stories' are fairly lame, although one with Sander as a cowboy shows the potential the film had, and missed.
Russell Brand, a raunchy British comedian, is the last person on Earth one would expect in a Disney movie. Which is why its so ironic he's the funniest person in the movie. He has about 10 lines, but they're the best in the movie.
It's sort of sad how much potential Bedtime Stories had. It has a great premise and some good scenes, but the pace is horrible and only kids under 8 can honestly enjoy it. C-
Friday, January 2, 2009
Marley and Me
Owen Wilson, Jennifer Aniston, and one adorable dog team up for a better-than-expected family flick, 'Marley and Me'. The book was very good to begin with. It detailed a crazy, out-of-control, lovable dog. It sold millions, rightfully so. Naturally, Hollywood got their hands on it, put two A-list stars to it, played up the cute dog in the marketing, and made a pretty decent movie.
The movie doesn't revolve around much: A young couple buy a cute but destructive puppy named Marley, raise a family, struggle with jobs and home life, and just try to keep Marley from eating everything.
Wilson and Aniston are both charming and funny, although their chemistry is a bit weak. The film centers a bit too much on their newspaper careers. There's some good scenes there, but ultimately it does next to nothing to further the story, at least 30 minutes of that stuff could have been cut. Although it is PG, it surprisingly has some really adult jokes and even a little bit of nudity. It's still a good movie for the little kids, just be prepared for 'What does that mean?'.
The main appeal here is obviously the cute puppy. Almost all of Marley's antics are in the trailer, same goes for the 'aww' moments. Marley actually really is adorable, despite being portrayed by 14 different dogs at different times. Ironically, a lot of the funny moments don't even center around Marley, although he has his share.
As far as dog lovers are concerned, this is the year of the dog. 'Bolt', 'Beverly Hills Chihuahua', and now this. Out of the trio this is the best, and actually becomes of the more involving, entertaining family movies of 2008.
The movie doesn't revolve around much: A young couple buy a cute but destructive puppy named Marley, raise a family, struggle with jobs and home life, and just try to keep Marley from eating everything.
Wilson and Aniston are both charming and funny, although their chemistry is a bit weak. The film centers a bit too much on their newspaper careers. There's some good scenes there, but ultimately it does next to nothing to further the story, at least 30 minutes of that stuff could have been cut. Although it is PG, it surprisingly has some really adult jokes and even a little bit of nudity. It's still a good movie for the little kids, just be prepared for 'What does that mean?'.
The main appeal here is obviously the cute puppy. Almost all of Marley's antics are in the trailer, same goes for the 'aww' moments. Marley actually really is adorable, despite being portrayed by 14 different dogs at different times. Ironically, a lot of the funny moments don't even center around Marley, although he has his share.
As far as dog lovers are concerned, this is the year of the dog. 'Bolt', 'Beverly Hills Chihuahua', and now this. Out of the trio this is the best, and actually becomes of the more involving, entertaining family movies of 2008.
Monday, December 29, 2008
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' is a hard film to classify. Is it a fantasy? Is it a sweeping love story, or a visual effects spectacle, or meditation on life, death, love and time? To properly appreciate the film, you must accept it as all of these things, because it truly has alot to offer. Perhaps more than any other film this year.
The film is essentially a showcase for Brad Pitt, who is surprisingly subtle and quiet as the title character. He is what people will be talking about after the movie. Half for his great performance, the other half for the remarkable make-up and special effects employed to effectively 'age' backwards. I can safely say that the technology in this movie, and perhaps this movie in general, will change the way and standard that movies are made.
On the last day of the first World War, Benjamin Button is born a baby, but outwardly appears to be 85 years old. As he becomes older, he grows younger. But along the way he leaves for war, travels, sails, and falls in love with ballet dancer Daisy. But with her growing older and him growing younger, it can't possibly last.
This just goes to show that to be a visual effects spectacle, you don't have to have giant stunts and big explosions. That visual effects can be so integrated yet so invisible, most of the time you don't even notice them. The sheer force of what you've just seen mostly hits you after the film, where you truly begin to realize just how elaborate and complex the special effects must have been.
Cate Blanchett is, no surprise, great as Daisy. It seems these days another day, another awesome Blanchett performance. As Kate Hepburn, a Russian agent, Queen Elizabeth, heck even Bob Dylan, Blanchett completely disappears into every role she tackles.
Although initially Daisy is a one-note character, over time (and through some awesome aging makeup) she becomes a complex, sympathetic character. Some particularly good, but tragic scenes towards the end are single-handedly carried by her. Especially the very end, which prompted many sniffles from the audience. I'll just say it's both predictable and hard-hitting at the same time.
The film has been compared to 'Forrest Gump', wrongfully so. Yes, they are written by the same guy, and follow a man's life and the incredible things they see, but the comparisons end there. 'Forrest Gump' is more fun, but 'Benjamin Button' is flat out better. Period.
David Fincher, known for 'Seven' and 'Fight Club' takes the helm of 'Benjamin Button', and he couldn't have done it better. The film doesn't wander around, seeking to elicit emotions randomly, like it so easily could have. It's rather funny. Fincher has been known for dark, violent fare, but if his future epics turn out to be like this, he will be the next David Lean.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a great film on all levels. It's surprisingly funny at times. The storytelling is expansive, the film is undermined by great performances. The visual effects deserve an Oscar. Maybe the movie does too. A
The film is essentially a showcase for Brad Pitt, who is surprisingly subtle and quiet as the title character. He is what people will be talking about after the movie. Half for his great performance, the other half for the remarkable make-up and special effects employed to effectively 'age' backwards. I can safely say that the technology in this movie, and perhaps this movie in general, will change the way and standard that movies are made.
On the last day of the first World War, Benjamin Button is born a baby, but outwardly appears to be 85 years old. As he becomes older, he grows younger. But along the way he leaves for war, travels, sails, and falls in love with ballet dancer Daisy. But with her growing older and him growing younger, it can't possibly last.
This just goes to show that to be a visual effects spectacle, you don't have to have giant stunts and big explosions. That visual effects can be so integrated yet so invisible, most of the time you don't even notice them. The sheer force of what you've just seen mostly hits you after the film, where you truly begin to realize just how elaborate and complex the special effects must have been.
Cate Blanchett is, no surprise, great as Daisy. It seems these days another day, another awesome Blanchett performance. As Kate Hepburn, a Russian agent, Queen Elizabeth, heck even Bob Dylan, Blanchett completely disappears into every role she tackles.
Although initially Daisy is a one-note character, over time (and through some awesome aging makeup) she becomes a complex, sympathetic character. Some particularly good, but tragic scenes towards the end are single-handedly carried by her. Especially the very end, which prompted many sniffles from the audience. I'll just say it's both predictable and hard-hitting at the same time.
The film has been compared to 'Forrest Gump', wrongfully so. Yes, they are written by the same guy, and follow a man's life and the incredible things they see, but the comparisons end there. 'Forrest Gump' is more fun, but 'Benjamin Button' is flat out better. Period.
David Fincher, known for 'Seven' and 'Fight Club' takes the helm of 'Benjamin Button', and he couldn't have done it better. The film doesn't wander around, seeking to elicit emotions randomly, like it so easily could have. It's rather funny. Fincher has been known for dark, violent fare, but if his future epics turn out to be like this, he will be the next David Lean.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a great film on all levels. It's surprisingly funny at times. The storytelling is expansive, the film is undermined by great performances. The visual effects deserve an Oscar. Maybe the movie does too. A
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Valkyrie
Tom Cruise recently said in an interview, "Go kill Hitler this Christmas!", in promotion for his film Valkyrie. The ironic part is that in this film Cruise tries, fails, and is executed for his attempt. It's not really a spoiler in any way, for this is actually a true story. Regardless of Mr. Cruise's false statement, Valkyrie is a fun, tense thriller that will keep you glued to your seat, ridiculous moments included.
Cruise is Colonel Klaus von Stauffenberg, a German officer in 1944 who is becoming increasingly fed up with the Nazis' planning and ideals. He begins to assemble a team to plot to kill Adolf Hitler himself. What results makes history.
The plot of the film is simple, the plan of the characters is not. The director of the film is Bryan Singer, who has mastered tension before, to the tune of 2 Oscars. (The Usual Suspects, anyone?) The fact that even though we know the end Singer still creates such tension deserves to be mentioned. The musical score is partly responsible, it's elegant yet undeniably gritty.
The supporting cast is great. Kenneth Branagh, Tom Wilkinson, Bill Nighy, Terence Stamp. But the best supporting performance is by David Bamber. I've never heard of him before this. But in his 3 minutes as Adolf Hitler, he almost literally gives you chills. Cruise is pretty good in this. Nothing Oscar-worthy (or Tropic Thunder-worthy for that matter) but not distractingly or face-meltingly bad, as he has been called.
It isn't all roses though. There are some moments that are undeniably corny. I won't give most away, but one in particular where Cruise is forced to 'Heil Hitler' with his severed arm was just ridiculous. It was the only time during the movie where people actually laughed.
One major thing that bugs you is the abscence of any accents whatsoever. They all have the look of Germans, and type in German. And yet everyone has an American or British accent. Oddly enough, Cruise's eyepatch doesn't ever bug you though.
It has taken a lot of bad advance buzz, a hundred date swaps and one big budget to get Valkyrie to the screen. It was worth it. B+
Cruise is Colonel Klaus von Stauffenberg, a German officer in 1944 who is becoming increasingly fed up with the Nazis' planning and ideals. He begins to assemble a team to plot to kill Adolf Hitler himself. What results makes history.
The plot of the film is simple, the plan of the characters is not. The director of the film is Bryan Singer, who has mastered tension before, to the tune of 2 Oscars. (The Usual Suspects, anyone?) The fact that even though we know the end Singer still creates such tension deserves to be mentioned. The musical score is partly responsible, it's elegant yet undeniably gritty.
The supporting cast is great. Kenneth Branagh, Tom Wilkinson, Bill Nighy, Terence Stamp. But the best supporting performance is by David Bamber. I've never heard of him before this. But in his 3 minutes as Adolf Hitler, he almost literally gives you chills. Cruise is pretty good in this. Nothing Oscar-worthy (or Tropic Thunder-worthy for that matter) but not distractingly or face-meltingly bad, as he has been called.
It isn't all roses though. There are some moments that are undeniably corny. I won't give most away, but one in particular where Cruise is forced to 'Heil Hitler' with his severed arm was just ridiculous. It was the only time during the movie where people actually laughed.
One major thing that bugs you is the abscence of any accents whatsoever. They all have the look of Germans, and type in German. And yet everyone has an American or British accent. Oddly enough, Cruise's eyepatch doesn't ever bug you though.
It has taken a lot of bad advance buzz, a hundred date swaps and one big budget to get Valkyrie to the screen. It was worth it. B+
Friday, December 26, 2008
Doubt
Perhaps the most compelling, and unlikely match of wits occurs in Doubt: Streep vs. Hoffman. Two of the best actors of our generation, in an emotional, exhausting duel of morals. One is right, the other is wrong. Finding which is which tests your patience, and there is sort of a "Thats it?" feeling at the end. However, it has four of the best performances of the year, three of those expected, one that one wouldn't suspect.
It is 1964. Times are changing, and Sister Aloysius is watching it all, with contempt. The whole movie is set in a Bronx Catholic church/school, and it takes a while to realize just how confined the film really is. She is the principal of the school, feared amongst the children, parents, and even fellow nuns.
The church itself is changing. The charismatic Father Flynn is trying to bring more fun and friendliness to the church, which raises Sister Aloysius' eyebrows. But when a young African-American boy is called to the rectory by Father Flynn, Sister Aloysius immediately suspects inappropriate contact and right or wrong, crusades against Father Flynn to have him removed. What results is more tense than most straightforward thrillers this year.
If there is a major weakness its the direction, though I'll get to that later. Although it could have been a great cliche, Streep plays it as the more human, more conflicted nun. It goes without saying that Streep is probably the best actress alive right now, and it's really interesting seeing her go from Mamma Mia to this. She is almost disturbingly bleak, unflinching in her quest to take out this priest. She only lets up at the very end, which is almost disturbing to see.
Philip Seymour Hoffman has been consistently excellent in everything he does. Capote, Charlie Wilson's War, heck, even Mission Impossible 3. He acts quite well in this, and somehow pulls it off where you honestly believe it could be either way. He is charismatic, warm and occasionally funny, but almost sinister in an odd way. It truly does leave you guessing until the end.
The ending, many will argue, is unsatisfactory. On a storytelling level, it is. Emotionally? Heck, no. The ending is probably the most involving part of the film, as in the last 20 minutes.
The film is interestingly paced. At least 40 minutes of establishing shots and characters and circumstances then boom. The last hour is a firecracker filled with quick-paced arguments that truly show off all the acting talent this film has to offer.
Amy Adams, who you remember as the princess from 'Enchanted', plays a fellow nun in this film. She isn't exactly Oscar-worthy, but by no means is she inferior to anyone else in this film, she has some great moments. The best performance in the film is likely the most brief: Viola Davis as the young boy's mother. Her scene with Meryl Streep is like the film: Starts slow, then escalates, bit by bit, into sheer intensity.
Doubt will split people, on its quality and implications. I'm on the side that unabashedly loved it. A-
It is 1964. Times are changing, and Sister Aloysius is watching it all, with contempt. The whole movie is set in a Bronx Catholic church/school, and it takes a while to realize just how confined the film really is. She is the principal of the school, feared amongst the children, parents, and even fellow nuns.
The church itself is changing. The charismatic Father Flynn is trying to bring more fun and friendliness to the church, which raises Sister Aloysius' eyebrows. But when a young African-American boy is called to the rectory by Father Flynn, Sister Aloysius immediately suspects inappropriate contact and right or wrong, crusades against Father Flynn to have him removed. What results is more tense than most straightforward thrillers this year.
If there is a major weakness its the direction, though I'll get to that later. Although it could have been a great cliche, Streep plays it as the more human, more conflicted nun. It goes without saying that Streep is probably the best actress alive right now, and it's really interesting seeing her go from Mamma Mia to this. She is almost disturbingly bleak, unflinching in her quest to take out this priest. She only lets up at the very end, which is almost disturbing to see.
Philip Seymour Hoffman has been consistently excellent in everything he does. Capote, Charlie Wilson's War, heck, even Mission Impossible 3. He acts quite well in this, and somehow pulls it off where you honestly believe it could be either way. He is charismatic, warm and occasionally funny, but almost sinister in an odd way. It truly does leave you guessing until the end.
The ending, many will argue, is unsatisfactory. On a storytelling level, it is. Emotionally? Heck, no. The ending is probably the most involving part of the film, as in the last 20 minutes.
The film is interestingly paced. At least 40 minutes of establishing shots and characters and circumstances then boom. The last hour is a firecracker filled with quick-paced arguments that truly show off all the acting talent this film has to offer.
Amy Adams, who you remember as the princess from 'Enchanted', plays a fellow nun in this film. She isn't exactly Oscar-worthy, but by no means is she inferior to anyone else in this film, she has some great moments. The best performance in the film is likely the most brief: Viola Davis as the young boy's mother. Her scene with Meryl Streep is like the film: Starts slow, then escalates, bit by bit, into sheer intensity.
Doubt will split people, on its quality and implications. I'm on the side that unabashedly loved it. A-
Monday, December 22, 2008
Yes Man
Jim Carrey does his normal hilarious, over-the-top schtick in a normal, over-the-top, occasionally hilarious comedy. In '98, Carrey did a fairly good movie called 'Liar Liar'. Basically an average Joe, mildly disappointed with his life, trying something outrageous that changes his life. That is almost the exact same story here. The fact that this remains really enjoyable is a testament to Carrey's talent, I suppose.
Carrey plays a bank loan officer (how timely) named Carl, who after a tough break-up is sort of living in a shell with his job, two friends, and apartment. But his friends take notice, and sign him up for a seminar: "The Power of Yes". Basically, he must say yes to anything and everything. It has its advantages: he finds a new love and gets promoted. But there is always a downside to freewheeling, and Carl will realize that the hard way.
Zooey Deschanel stars as Carl's free-spirited gilfriend. Ever since Elf, she has become more and more charming by each film that goes by. Terence Stamp (that old guy from Superman II/Wall Street) plays the man who introduces Carrey to 'Yes'. He mostly looks bored, although he has the best line in the whole movie, at the very end. The very end is actually the best part, although seeing Carrey play guitar and speak Korean is hysterical beyond most measure.
It goes without saying that the general story is kind of tired, and that the formula for the whole thing is really evident. But Jim Carrey plays practically the same character he has since 'Dumb and Dumber'. The saving grace about that? That character is insanely likable. That sort of applies to the movie. You've seen it before, but you like it. B+
Carrey plays a bank loan officer (how timely) named Carl, who after a tough break-up is sort of living in a shell with his job, two friends, and apartment. But his friends take notice, and sign him up for a seminar: "The Power of Yes". Basically, he must say yes to anything and everything. It has its advantages: he finds a new love and gets promoted. But there is always a downside to freewheeling, and Carl will realize that the hard way.
Zooey Deschanel stars as Carl's free-spirited gilfriend. Ever since Elf, she has become more and more charming by each film that goes by. Terence Stamp (that old guy from Superman II/Wall Street) plays the man who introduces Carrey to 'Yes'. He mostly looks bored, although he has the best line in the whole movie, at the very end. The very end is actually the best part, although seeing Carrey play guitar and speak Korean is hysterical beyond most measure.
It goes without saying that the general story is kind of tired, and that the formula for the whole thing is really evident. But Jim Carrey plays practically the same character he has since 'Dumb and Dumber'. The saving grace about that? That character is insanely likable. That sort of applies to the movie. You've seen it before, but you like it. B+
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Frost/Nixon
Frank Langella gives his best performance, and admittedly puts Anthony Hopkins' portrayal to shame in Frost/Nixon, the story of David Frost's interviews with Richard Nixon that was one of the most watched television events in history. Although some parts are fabricated (believe me, you'll realize which ones), this is a fairly accurate portrayal of the events that happened.
Michael Sheen, (great as Tony Blair in "The Queen") plays David Frost as something of a careless playboy at the beginning, but then the movie suddenly jerks him as becoming a determined, righteous man towards the end. He probably was both at one point or another, but most definitely not over the course of 3 or so months. However, Sheen is excellent, and together the two lead performances are most definitely the best part of the movie.
The film's plot is simple: Richard Nixon is disgraced by Watergate and his resignation. The American public is dissatisfied by Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon, and want a confession. Talk show host David Frost decides to try and take Nixon on for an interview. History is made.
The problem lies in two factors. One, it has been built up for so long as the awards messiah, and it's a letdown. Two, it's far too pedestrian, too 'been there, done that'. Nothing truly feels surprising. The film's best moments are during the interviews, where the two actors truly shine.
The script, although mildly cliched, is actually pretty witty and occasionally funny. As said before, Langella and Sheen are both excellent. Langella makes Nixon quite human, not the monster portrayed in so many other movies. Although it's inconsistent and disappointing, it's good entertainment. Just don't expect it to sweep the Oscars. B-
Michael Sheen, (great as Tony Blair in "The Queen") plays David Frost as something of a careless playboy at the beginning, but then the movie suddenly jerks him as becoming a determined, righteous man towards the end. He probably was both at one point or another, but most definitely not over the course of 3 or so months. However, Sheen is excellent, and together the two lead performances are most definitely the best part of the movie.
The film's plot is simple: Richard Nixon is disgraced by Watergate and his resignation. The American public is dissatisfied by Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon, and want a confession. Talk show host David Frost decides to try and take Nixon on for an interview. History is made.
The problem lies in two factors. One, it has been built up for so long as the awards messiah, and it's a letdown. Two, it's far too pedestrian, too 'been there, done that'. Nothing truly feels surprising. The film's best moments are during the interviews, where the two actors truly shine.
The script, although mildly cliched, is actually pretty witty and occasionally funny. As said before, Langella and Sheen are both excellent. Langella makes Nixon quite human, not the monster portrayed in so many other movies. Although it's inconsistent and disappointing, it's good entertainment. Just don't expect it to sweep the Oscars. B-
Friday, December 19, 2008
Slumdog Millionaire
Slumdog Millionaire is a film that is so good, so universal, so touching, so involving, that it demands awards, attention, tears. And your heart. It has something for everyone. Shoot-outs, laughter, romance, family drama, incredible tension, chase sequences. It's all there. Essentially, it's a crowd pleaser. An Oscar-worthy crowd pleaser at that.
It has an odd, non-linear structure that is so familiar with recent movies, but doesn't feel forced here. It is set in Mumbai, and occasionally is quite odd, actually. An uplifting, beautiful scene is filmed in the Mumbai train station. The same place where terrorists opened fire only so many weeks ago. It doesn't distract, just has an odd sort of aura.
The film opens with a young, 18-year old guy named Jamal being tortured. We then flash back. Only the previous night Jamal was a contestant on the Indian version of 'Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?'. (The irony? The top prize on the show, 20 million rupees, is roughly 400,000 US dollars) But Jamal was suspected of cheating, and was yanked off the show, one question away from 20 million rupees.
After the torture, Jamal reveals his life story, and how he knew the questions. We flash back to when he was 7, and it continually alternates between the show, the police questioning, and just how he knew the answers. Sounds like alot on the plate but believe me, it works and well. He reveals his brother's descent into crime and how over all these years he has just yearned for one thing: his love, Latika.
The two halves are actually radically different in events and elements, although the plot and general mood remain consistent. The first has more humor and dry wit, although some violence is littered throughout. The second half is somewhat more somber, more violent, but ultimately more uplifting and rewarding.
The performances simply must be noted. Dev Patel as the elder Jamal, although rarely used, manipulates many emotions in about 30 minutes, and deserves a Supporting Actor nomination. The young 7 and 14 year olds playing the main characters over the course of time are all great. A couple of 7-year olds pretty much dominate the first hour, and it really, truly works.
But the true star of the film is its director, Danny Boyle. Previously noted for directing a drug-laced cult comedy and a zombie flick, it spawns one decade, four timelines, multiple set-pieces, and it doesn't fall apart. That alone deserves recognition. But the fact that he elicited such fine performances, emboldened a great script and captured the true beauty of Mumbai, is pretty incredible.
So see Slumdog Millionaire. Tell your friends to see Slumdog Millionaire. I make a sworn statement, right now, that it will get Academy Award nominations for Best Picture and Director. It's simply that good. A
It has an odd, non-linear structure that is so familiar with recent movies, but doesn't feel forced here. It is set in Mumbai, and occasionally is quite odd, actually. An uplifting, beautiful scene is filmed in the Mumbai train station. The same place where terrorists opened fire only so many weeks ago. It doesn't distract, just has an odd sort of aura.
The film opens with a young, 18-year old guy named Jamal being tortured. We then flash back. Only the previous night Jamal was a contestant on the Indian version of 'Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?'. (The irony? The top prize on the show, 20 million rupees, is roughly 400,000 US dollars) But Jamal was suspected of cheating, and was yanked off the show, one question away from 20 million rupees.
After the torture, Jamal reveals his life story, and how he knew the questions. We flash back to when he was 7, and it continually alternates between the show, the police questioning, and just how he knew the answers. Sounds like alot on the plate but believe me, it works and well. He reveals his brother's descent into crime and how over all these years he has just yearned for one thing: his love, Latika.
The two halves are actually radically different in events and elements, although the plot and general mood remain consistent. The first has more humor and dry wit, although some violence is littered throughout. The second half is somewhat more somber, more violent, but ultimately more uplifting and rewarding.
The performances simply must be noted. Dev Patel as the elder Jamal, although rarely used, manipulates many emotions in about 30 minutes, and deserves a Supporting Actor nomination. The young 7 and 14 year olds playing the main characters over the course of time are all great. A couple of 7-year olds pretty much dominate the first hour, and it really, truly works.
But the true star of the film is its director, Danny Boyle. Previously noted for directing a drug-laced cult comedy and a zombie flick, it spawns one decade, four timelines, multiple set-pieces, and it doesn't fall apart. That alone deserves recognition. But the fact that he elicited such fine performances, emboldened a great script and captured the true beauty of Mumbai, is pretty incredible.
So see Slumdog Millionaire. Tell your friends to see Slumdog Millionaire. I make a sworn statement, right now, that it will get Academy Award nominations for Best Picture and Director. It's simply that good. A
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Rachel Getting Married
When a film ends and you don't want to leave the theater, you know you've seen a great movie. 'Rachel Getting Married' provides such a feeling. Be it the sharp, poignant writing from Jenny Lumet, or the excellent direction from Jonathan Demme. Or the cinematography, shot so that you feel that you're truly there. No, none of those. It is, plain and simple, the performances.
It all begins when Kym gets out of rehab. A recovering addict, in and out of rehab for 10 years. Almost minutes after, she is driven to her sister's wedding, Rachel. Right off the bat, Kym and Rachel's first scene together is pitch-perfect in writing and acting. You see the humor, love, and underlying tension. Kym's return stirs up everyone, brings back bad memories, and most of all, aggravates her sister.
The best part of the film lies in its three key performances. Bill Irwin, Rosemarie DeWitt, and Anne Hathaway. Bill Irwin is charming, sarcastic, and likely the comic relief in the film. Rosemarie DeWitt is quietly, subtly, but wickedly good and funny as a woman whose sister is seriously pushing her over the edge, and who harbors a couple secrets of her own.
But the true revelation here is Anne Hathaway. Seeing her 8 or so years ago in The Princess Diaries, one wouldn't think she'd pull this off. She has an Oscar nomination in the bag. Hathaway masterfully depicts the randomness, the mood swings, the rambling, the sheer craziness, that is her character.
The director here, Jonathan Demme (Silence of the Lambs, anyone?) has done an excellent job. The cinematography and editing doesn't exactly ride on the whole shaky crazy camera work that seems to be the latest craze. But it somehow gets the right balance so when the lights come up you remember your world, your life, and sigh. Very few movies do that. A
It all begins when Kym gets out of rehab. A recovering addict, in and out of rehab for 10 years. Almost minutes after, she is driven to her sister's wedding, Rachel. Right off the bat, Kym and Rachel's first scene together is pitch-perfect in writing and acting. You see the humor, love, and underlying tension. Kym's return stirs up everyone, brings back bad memories, and most of all, aggravates her sister.
The best part of the film lies in its three key performances. Bill Irwin, Rosemarie DeWitt, and Anne Hathaway. Bill Irwin is charming, sarcastic, and likely the comic relief in the film. Rosemarie DeWitt is quietly, subtly, but wickedly good and funny as a woman whose sister is seriously pushing her over the edge, and who harbors a couple secrets of her own.
But the true revelation here is Anne Hathaway. Seeing her 8 or so years ago in The Princess Diaries, one wouldn't think she'd pull this off. She has an Oscar nomination in the bag. Hathaway masterfully depicts the randomness, the mood swings, the rambling, the sheer craziness, that is her character.
The director here, Jonathan Demme (Silence of the Lambs, anyone?) has done an excellent job. The cinematography and editing doesn't exactly ride on the whole shaky crazy camera work that seems to be the latest craze. But it somehow gets the right balance so when the lights come up you remember your world, your life, and sigh. Very few movies do that. A
Monday, December 8, 2008
Four Christmases
Vince Vaughn, Reese Witherspoon, Robert Duvall and Jon Voight star in Four Christmases, in what feels like the billionth Christmas movie Vince Vaughn's been in. Vaughn and Witherspoon bring their traditional charm here, and have a good chemistry, despite their giant height difference.
Brad and Kate are a couple who take great pride in the fact that they have no children, aren't married, and have no plans to - ever. For the last 3 years, in fact, they have skipped Christmas with their families for vacations - although they tell their families they are leaving for charity.
Then on Christmas Day, when they are supposed to leave for Fiji, all flights are cancelled due to awful weather. (Although oddly enough, later on in the film the weather is crystal clear.) When Brad and Kate are seen on TV and their parents phone in, they get stuck in a situation - they have to visit all four of their divorced parents for Christmas. Mayhem ensues.
I wrote a little checklist in my head about what to expect during this movie. Homophobia? Check. Crazy relative who beats up Vince Vaughn? Check. Awkward revaltions about Brad and Kate, spilled by their parents? CHECK!! This movie is exactly what you'd expect, and frankly, I had low expectations.
Vince Vaughn, when given the right material, beats Will Ferrell and Ben Stiller anyday. Reese Witherspoon is a great actress (see Election & Walk the Line) who seems tailor-made for these comedies. The problem lies not with the cast, the cast is actually the best part of the movie. Jon Favreau as Vaughn's wacko brother is really funny. (The name sound familiar? Favreau directed a little movie earlier this year called Iron Man.)
The film's marketing is questionable. While it delivers everything you'd expect, (not a plus) some stuff here is way too mature for the little kids who'll wanna see this. Nothing totally inappropriate, but a revelation about Santa Claus that'll seriously impair their vision of Christmas. It's also interesting how Jon Voight is featured so prominently in the marketing and has, literally, 3 lines.
I was disappointed. The cast was good but lets face it, this has been made before and better. C-
Brad and Kate are a couple who take great pride in the fact that they have no children, aren't married, and have no plans to - ever. For the last 3 years, in fact, they have skipped Christmas with their families for vacations - although they tell their families they are leaving for charity.
Then on Christmas Day, when they are supposed to leave for Fiji, all flights are cancelled due to awful weather. (Although oddly enough, later on in the film the weather is crystal clear.) When Brad and Kate are seen on TV and their parents phone in, they get stuck in a situation - they have to visit all four of their divorced parents for Christmas. Mayhem ensues.
I wrote a little checklist in my head about what to expect during this movie. Homophobia? Check. Crazy relative who beats up Vince Vaughn? Check. Awkward revaltions about Brad and Kate, spilled by their parents? CHECK!! This movie is exactly what you'd expect, and frankly, I had low expectations.
Vince Vaughn, when given the right material, beats Will Ferrell and Ben Stiller anyday. Reese Witherspoon is a great actress (see Election & Walk the Line) who seems tailor-made for these comedies. The problem lies not with the cast, the cast is actually the best part of the movie. Jon Favreau as Vaughn's wacko brother is really funny. (The name sound familiar? Favreau directed a little movie earlier this year called Iron Man.)
The film's marketing is questionable. While it delivers everything you'd expect, (not a plus) some stuff here is way too mature for the little kids who'll wanna see this. Nothing totally inappropriate, but a revelation about Santa Claus that'll seriously impair their vision of Christmas. It's also interesting how Jon Voight is featured so prominently in the marketing and has, literally, 3 lines.
I was disappointed. The cast was good but lets face it, this has been made before and better. C-
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Bolt
Bolt is the new movie from Disney, with excellent animation, a great cast, and an unsurprisingly predictable story. John Travolta, Miley Cyrus and Susie Essman seem like an incredibly unlikely cast, but they all fit their characters quite well. Don't even get me started on Rhino the hamster, an adorable creation who automatically steals any scene he's in.
Bolt is a super-dog, with powers such as speed, strength, and the famous 'Super-Bark', who saves his owner Penny from the bad guys every time. Except there's one problem. It's all just a TV show.
However, Bolt has been brought up to genuinely believe that he has powers. So when he thinks Penny is in danger, he escapes from the set and is accidentally shipped from Los Angeles to New York.
Now with the help of a sarcastic cat voiced by none other than Susie Essman and a plump hamster named Rhino, self-described as Bolt's "#1 fan", Bolt must get back to Los Angeles.
Surprisingly the action is really cool here, 100x cooler than anything in that one movie that I hated (Twilight, I'm talking to you). The beginning of the film is basically one big, long action sequence that is geninuely, legimately, awesome. It completely sets the film up.
Many times throughout the film you have to suspend your disbelief, which is perfectly alright with a Disney movie. John Travolta is good, he's always sort of been one of my favorite actors. Miley Cyrus is okay although shes barely on for 15 minutes despite receiving second billing on all the trailers and such.
Bolt has the potty humor for the little kids, the action for the teens, and the broad humor for the adults. In other words, it's a family flick worth seeing. B+
Bolt is a super-dog, with powers such as speed, strength, and the famous 'Super-Bark', who saves his owner Penny from the bad guys every time. Except there's one problem. It's all just a TV show.
However, Bolt has been brought up to genuinely believe that he has powers. So when he thinks Penny is in danger, he escapes from the set and is accidentally shipped from Los Angeles to New York.
Now with the help of a sarcastic cat voiced by none other than Susie Essman and a plump hamster named Rhino, self-described as Bolt's "#1 fan", Bolt must get back to Los Angeles.
Surprisingly the action is really cool here, 100x cooler than anything in that one movie that I hated (Twilight, I'm talking to you). The beginning of the film is basically one big, long action sequence that is geninuely, legimately, awesome. It completely sets the film up.
Many times throughout the film you have to suspend your disbelief, which is perfectly alright with a Disney movie. John Travolta is good, he's always sort of been one of my favorite actors. Miley Cyrus is okay although shes barely on for 15 minutes despite receiving second billing on all the trailers and such.
Bolt has the potty humor for the little kids, the action for the teens, and the broad humor for the adults. In other words, it's a family flick worth seeing. B+
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Australia
Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman star in Australia , one of the most ambitious movies of the year. Best of the year? Not really. The director, Baz Luhrmann is an immensely talented guy who has done Romeo+Juliet and one of my favorite movies, Moulin Rouge. He hasn't directed in 7 years, 3 of those years gone into planning and shooting this.
The film suffers from bipolar disorder. In order, it shifts from comedy to romance to western to drama to comedy to western to action to romance to comedy to drama to western to action to romance. Well, it is three hours, so I suppose it can't be all too consistent.
Lady Ashley has come from England to Australia in 1939 to purchase a cattle farm called Faraway Downs. When she arrives there she learns her husband is dead. When a greedy opportunist tries to seize control of Faraway Downs, Lady Ashley teams up with Mr. Drover to save Faraway Downs and drive 2,000 cattle from the Downs to Darwin , in order to supply the military with meat.
Afterwards, Lady Ashley and Mr. Drover fall in love, but 2 years later Drover leaves for a driving mission and Lady Ashley for Darwin - right during the attack on Darwin . Can they survive?
There's just about something for everyone in here - I suppose thats a curse and a blessing. Hugh Jackman is in top form here, and although Nicole Kidman at the first 30 minutes is whiny and screechy, in the last 2 1/2 hours she turns in a really good performance. The young boy who plays the adopted Aboriginal boy is also really really good, there are top-form performances EVERYWHERE.
The action is quite well-paced, and one scene has such breathtaking beauty it could be the must-see scene of the year. (Want a final opinion? Tune in January for the 2nd Annual Ryan Michaels Awards!) The comedy is mostly based on how stuck up Nicole Kidman is, but what does that matter.
But alas, the first 45 minutes are so unwatchable in so many ways. If you end up seeing them, just say to yourself, "Ryan said the last 2 hours are awesome, I can get through it!" In actuality, the first 45 minutes probably could have been cut out completely and replaced with a 5-minute narration.
The romantic parts are good, and surprisingly most of the dialogue is actually fairly good for a romance. There was one part though, where I was cracking up uncontrollably.
So alas, Australia is an old-fashioned epic in the sense of Gone With The Wind. Mind you, Australia doesn't even come close to the sheer masterpiece that is Gone With The Wind, but it's a good ol' time at the movies. Mind you, it is something of a mixed bag. B
The film suffers from bipolar disorder. In order, it shifts from comedy to romance to western to drama to comedy to western to action to romance to comedy to drama to western to action to romance. Well, it is three hours, so I suppose it can't be all too consistent.
Lady Ashley has come from England to Australia in 1939 to purchase a cattle farm called Faraway Downs. When she arrives there she learns her husband is dead. When a greedy opportunist tries to seize control of Faraway Downs, Lady Ashley teams up with Mr. Drover to save Faraway Downs and drive 2,000 cattle from the Downs to Darwin , in order to supply the military with meat.
Afterwards, Lady Ashley and Mr. Drover fall in love, but 2 years later Drover leaves for a driving mission and Lady Ashley for Darwin - right during the attack on Darwin . Can they survive?
There's just about something for everyone in here - I suppose thats a curse and a blessing. Hugh Jackman is in top form here, and although Nicole Kidman at the first 30 minutes is whiny and screechy, in the last 2 1/2 hours she turns in a really good performance. The young boy who plays the adopted Aboriginal boy is also really really good, there are top-form performances EVERYWHERE.
The action is quite well-paced, and one scene has such breathtaking beauty it could be the must-see scene of the year. (Want a final opinion? Tune in January for the 2nd Annual Ryan Michaels Awards!) The comedy is mostly based on how stuck up Nicole Kidman is, but what does that matter.
But alas, the first 45 minutes are so unwatchable in so many ways. If you end up seeing them, just say to yourself, "Ryan said the last 2 hours are awesome, I can get through it!" In actuality, the first 45 minutes probably could have been cut out completely and replaced with a 5-minute narration.
The romantic parts are good, and surprisingly most of the dialogue is actually fairly good for a romance. There was one part though, where I was cracking up uncontrollably.
So alas, Australia is an old-fashioned epic in the sense of Gone With The Wind. Mind you, Australia doesn't even come close to the sheer masterpiece that is Gone With The Wind, but it's a good ol' time at the movies. Mind you, it is something of a mixed bag. B
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Twilight
The insanely popular book comes to the big screen with mixed results in Twilight. Having read the book with equally mixed results, it seemed this week I either review this or The Secret Life of Bees. The title of that alone drew me off, I chose Twilight.
Bella Swan has just moved to a small town in Washington where despite being quite shy, she makes friends almost immediately. Then she meets Edward Cullen. She thinks he is quite handsome, but he appears to hate her. Turns out Edward is a vampire who, with his family, is hiding out here in Forks. Edward doesn't sleep in coffins or have fangs. No, he appears human, but has super strength and speed, and is immortal. But then a trio of evil vampires come to town, killing the local people. Can Edward stop the killing and save Bella?
Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson play the leads. Stewart, having acted in some excellent films (Panic Room, Into the Wild) was quite good, convincingly having the look of an average girl and yet you can see why this vampire is so in love with her. Perhaps it helps that, instead of 99% of actors playing teenagers, Stewart is actually is one. Pattinson is okay, although at times it appears he's just trying too hard to be intense.
The special effects are laughable, albiet thankfully few. It's the rare movie where I'm glad there's only one fight scene. The supporting cast is okay, and the mega-Twilight fans out there are likely pleased with the vision that has been brought to screen. But alas, there are moments, many moments actually, where I laughed uncontrollably. (Hint: Not at the jokes.) The script needed more tweaking. The sudden popularity of the books forced the writer to speed up the script, and it shows at times.
If you're a teenage girl or a mega-Twilight fan (I've narrowed it down to about 30 million) then you will love this, make no mistake. As for me, I can go without another billion sequels. Judging by the money this will make, Hollywood probably won't listen to me. C
Bella Swan has just moved to a small town in Washington where despite being quite shy, she makes friends almost immediately. Then she meets Edward Cullen. She thinks he is quite handsome, but he appears to hate her. Turns out Edward is a vampire who, with his family, is hiding out here in Forks. Edward doesn't sleep in coffins or have fangs. No, he appears human, but has super strength and speed, and is immortal. But then a trio of evil vampires come to town, killing the local people. Can Edward stop the killing and save Bella?
Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson play the leads. Stewart, having acted in some excellent films (Panic Room, Into the Wild) was quite good, convincingly having the look of an average girl and yet you can see why this vampire is so in love with her. Perhaps it helps that, instead of 99% of actors playing teenagers, Stewart is actually is one. Pattinson is okay, although at times it appears he's just trying too hard to be intense.
The special effects are laughable, albiet thankfully few. It's the rare movie where I'm glad there's only one fight scene. The supporting cast is okay, and the mega-Twilight fans out there are likely pleased with the vision that has been brought to screen. But alas, there are moments, many moments actually, where I laughed uncontrollably. (Hint: Not at the jokes.) The script needed more tweaking. The sudden popularity of the books forced the writer to speed up the script, and it shows at times.
If you're a teenage girl or a mega-Twilight fan (I've narrowed it down to about 30 million) then you will love this, make no mistake. As for me, I can go without another billion sequels. Judging by the money this will make, Hollywood probably won't listen to me. C
Friday, November 14, 2008
Quantum of Solace
Bond is back for the 22th time in the highly anticipated sequel, Quantum of Solace. Following up the best Bond movie ever was never an easy task, and it doesn't fulfill that nearly impossible task. Casino Royale was a story of self-discovery, love and trust. This is a flat-out revenge flick. And it's mighty fine at bringing the action.
The reason that Casino Royale was so great was that it brought a very real, very human side to Bond. (Anyone remember that CGI surfing scene in Die Another Day?) This expands on that, and also partly throws out that gritty realism from Casino Royale. Well, it's still gritty.
The realism? Meh...
Picking up hours after the end of Casino Royale, Bond is vengefully mourning the death of Vesper Lynd. How? By engaging in a 20-minute chase through car, prison cell, parade, and rooftops, to catch a would-be assassin of his boss, M. The man is linked to the mysterious, vast terrorist organization called Quantum.
A transcontinental journey for Bond gives him one lead from Quantum: Dominic Greene, an environmentalist with a hidden agenda: Vanquish the water supply of Bolivia. Bond gets help from Camille, a mysterious Russian woman who is seeking revenge for the death of her family.
If this sounds alot more formulaic than Casino Royale, thats cause frankly, it is. It's not as complex, as human, or well, as good. However, Daniel Craig is still awesome at James Bond, and is probably the most human rendition of Bond out of all 6 Bonds. (Anyone remember George Lazenby?)
Olga Kurylenko is a fairly interesting Bond girl, and another named Strawberry Fields is rather pointless. Take her character away and everything still plays out the same. The action sequences are half adrenaline-fueled, another half you want it to end. The cinematography and editing are quite good, especially during a shoot-out scene following an opera sequence.
Director Marc Forster has done excellent movies (i.e., Finding Neverland) but this is his first action gig. You can kind of see the influence of The Bourne Ultimatum on the cinematography. He's pretty good at the staging and such, and during the character-driven moments his directing skills are highlighted.
Ultimately, it's a mild disappointment, but is still definitely worth seeing. Too bad Casino Royale looms over it. B
The reason that Casino Royale was so great was that it brought a very real, very human side to Bond. (Anyone remember that CGI surfing scene in Die Another Day?) This expands on that, and also partly throws out that gritty realism from Casino Royale. Well, it's still gritty.
The realism? Meh...
Picking up hours after the end of Casino Royale, Bond is vengefully mourning the death of Vesper Lynd. How? By engaging in a 20-minute chase through car, prison cell, parade, and rooftops, to catch a would-be assassin of his boss, M. The man is linked to the mysterious, vast terrorist organization called Quantum.
A transcontinental journey for Bond gives him one lead from Quantum: Dominic Greene, an environmentalist with a hidden agenda: Vanquish the water supply of Bolivia. Bond gets help from Camille, a mysterious Russian woman who is seeking revenge for the death of her family.
If this sounds alot more formulaic than Casino Royale, thats cause frankly, it is. It's not as complex, as human, or well, as good. However, Daniel Craig is still awesome at James Bond, and is probably the most human rendition of Bond out of all 6 Bonds. (Anyone remember George Lazenby?)
Olga Kurylenko is a fairly interesting Bond girl, and another named Strawberry Fields is rather pointless. Take her character away and everything still plays out the same. The action sequences are half adrenaline-fueled, another half you want it to end. The cinematography and editing are quite good, especially during a shoot-out scene following an opera sequence.
Director Marc Forster has done excellent movies (i.e., Finding Neverland) but this is his first action gig. You can kind of see the influence of The Bourne Ultimatum on the cinematography. He's pretty good at the staging and such, and during the character-driven moments his directing skills are highlighted.
Ultimately, it's a mild disappointment, but is still definitely worth seeing. Too bad Casino Royale looms over it. B
Friday, November 7, 2008
Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa
One of the best casts of the year unite for one of the more disappointing films of the year, Madagascar 2. Being a mild fan of the original, I wanted to check this out. And the cast definitely does not disappoint. Ben Stiller, Chris Rock, Jada Smith, Sacha Baron Cohen, Alec Baldwin, and the late, great, Bernie Mac all get their spotlight. Heck, even the lead rapper of the Black Eyed Peas is here.
A couple of the jokes really are quite clever and it's more mature than the original. But quite simply, it's not that funny.
Our original animal heroes return from the first film. Alex, the showman lion, Marty, the wise-cracking zebra, Gloria, the sassy hippo, and Melman, the quirky giraffe. They are still stuck on Madagascar, but the penguins (yes! they return) devise a plan for them to fly to NYC with a crashed plane. It doesn't work too well, and they crashland in Africa.
Alex is reunited with his parents there, Marty meets about a million other zebras exactly like him (all of them also voiced by Chris Rock), Melman is made the local witch doctor. And Gloria? She falls for a giant (and do I mean giant) hippo named (wait for it) Moto Moto. Why does Moto Moto like Gloria?
- "Well, uh, you giant, girl!"
- "Well yeah, but Moto Moto, why else do you like me?"
- "Cuz you huge, Gloria!"
It seems great in Africa but a sneaky, mean lion named Makunga causes events that banish Alex from the land. And then the water hole dries up. Can he fix everything before it's too late?
Like I said, some moments are genuinely hilarious. The best scene in the film involves, unsurprisingly, the penguins and their grand plan to hijack a local tour bus. Chris Rock is still really funny as Marty, and Sacha Baron Cohen is underused, albeit hilarious. But alot of the jokes are either really "kiddy" or would just fly over their heads. I was surprised and disgusted when a couple of homophobic jokes popped up.
But alas, Madagascar 2 is for the kiddies, and the kiddies and their parents will flock to it in droves. One will like it, another will be staring at their watch. I leave the guessing to you. C-
A couple of the jokes really are quite clever and it's more mature than the original. But quite simply, it's not that funny.
Our original animal heroes return from the first film. Alex, the showman lion, Marty, the wise-cracking zebra, Gloria, the sassy hippo, and Melman, the quirky giraffe. They are still stuck on Madagascar, but the penguins (yes! they return) devise a plan for them to fly to NYC with a crashed plane. It doesn't work too well, and they crashland in Africa.
Alex is reunited with his parents there, Marty meets about a million other zebras exactly like him (all of them also voiced by Chris Rock), Melman is made the local witch doctor. And Gloria? She falls for a giant (and do I mean giant) hippo named (wait for it) Moto Moto. Why does Moto Moto like Gloria?
- "Well, uh, you giant, girl!"
- "Well yeah, but Moto Moto, why else do you like me?"
- "Cuz you huge, Gloria!"
It seems great in Africa but a sneaky, mean lion named Makunga causes events that banish Alex from the land. And then the water hole dries up. Can he fix everything before it's too late?
Like I said, some moments are genuinely hilarious. The best scene in the film involves, unsurprisingly, the penguins and their grand plan to hijack a local tour bus. Chris Rock is still really funny as Marty, and Sacha Baron Cohen is underused, albeit hilarious. But alot of the jokes are either really "kiddy" or would just fly over their heads. I was surprised and disgusted when a couple of homophobic jokes popped up.
But alas, Madagascar 2 is for the kiddies, and the kiddies and their parents will flock to it in droves. One will like it, another will be staring at their watch. I leave the guessing to you. C-
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The Nightmare Before Christmas (2008 re-release)
Tim Burton and Danny Elfman display their genius in the stop-motion classic, Nightmare Before Christmas. Yes, I know. The Nightmare Before Christmas came out 15 years ago, so why am I reviewing it? In light of its 3-D re-release last week, I figured this review wouldn't be completely irrelevant. Cause if this hadn't came out in 1993, it would easily make my top 10 this year.
Jack Skellington lives in Halloweentown, a fantasy-town where the setting is perpetually Halloween. It looks like something only Tim Burton could conjure. But when Jack accidentally opens a magical portal to Christmastown (where it is perpetually Christmas). Jack kidnaps Santa Claus and tries to pose as Santa Claus. and well, everything that could possibly go wrong does.
The songs are absolutely hilarious. The lyrics are creative and the animation...The animation is absolutely gorgeous. The images are so vivid and beautiful. This is a truly amazing experience and just goes to show that with all the CGI animation today that stop-motion animation is still an amazing, revolutonary art.
The story is incredibly quirky, and the animation team put their imagination in every detail, however minuscule. In the age of Shrek, this is a breath of fresh air. Forget the fact that it's 15 years old. A
Jack Skellington lives in Halloweentown, a fantasy-town where the setting is perpetually Halloween. It looks like something only Tim Burton could conjure. But when Jack accidentally opens a magical portal to Christmastown (where it is perpetually Christmas). Jack kidnaps Santa Claus and tries to pose as Santa Claus. and well, everything that could possibly go wrong does.
The songs are absolutely hilarious. The lyrics are creative and the animation...The animation is absolutely gorgeous. The images are so vivid and beautiful. This is a truly amazing experience and just goes to show that with all the CGI animation today that stop-motion animation is still an amazing, revolutonary art.
The story is incredibly quirky, and the animation team put their imagination in every detail, however minuscule. In the age of Shrek, this is a breath of fresh air. Forget the fact that it's 15 years old. A
Sunday, October 26, 2008
High School Musical 3: Senior Year
The wildly popular Disney Channel series comes to the big screen in "High School Musical 3". Sure, "High School Musical 2" was okay, but given my none too glowing reviews of "High School Musical" and the recent disasterpiece "Camp Rock", I was very skeptical about this. Just a note: If you are a boy under the age of 10 or a girl under the age of 17, you will love this movie.
High School Musical is made for the tween girls and little kids, and takes no shame in declaring so. And true, a couple of songs are pretty catchy, and Zac Efron's a real talent to watch out for in the future. The dancing choreography is energetic and very very "Disney." But also, it's really, really predictable. (Well, OK maybe that's not too surprising) The acting is pretty dang wooden for the most part, and the dialogue isn't too great either.
It's the senior year at East High for all the characters of the past "High School Musical" movies. People are both anxious and sad for school to be over, and are choosing their colleges. So as a goodbye, they organize a final show to put on. But with Gabriella off at a Stanford visit, frictions between Troy and Chad beginning, and Sharpay as always trying to sabotage everything, can it really all come through okay?
Reading that synopsis, you likely already know the ending. But I admit, some parts of the film are a really good time at the movies. Some other times, you want to throw stuff at the screen. C+
High School Musical is made for the tween girls and little kids, and takes no shame in declaring so. And true, a couple of songs are pretty catchy, and Zac Efron's a real talent to watch out for in the future. The dancing choreography is energetic and very very "Disney." But also, it's really, really predictable. (Well, OK maybe that's not too surprising) The acting is pretty dang wooden for the most part, and the dialogue isn't too great either.
It's the senior year at East High for all the characters of the past "High School Musical" movies. People are both anxious and sad for school to be over, and are choosing their colleges. So as a goodbye, they organize a final show to put on. But with Gabriella off at a Stanford visit, frictions between Troy and Chad beginning, and Sharpay as always trying to sabotage everything, can it really all come through okay?
Reading that synopsis, you likely already know the ending. But I admit, some parts of the film are a really good time at the movies. Some other times, you want to throw stuff at the screen. C+
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
