Well it's been two years since we last checked in with the Sex And The City girls at the theater. Wonder what they're up to these days?
The four original cast members are back again, reprising their roles as Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte and they are more lavish than ever. This is the part of the review generally where I fill you in on the story line. But there in lies some trouble. There is a whole lot of movie here, just not real strong on story. Plus in case you're wondering, this time Sex And The City, has left out the sex part.
SATC movies are tough to review. Their exceptionally loyal fans love this movie before they ever walk into the theater. It's really hard to imagine a bunch of people getting together as a group, going out for cocktails, getting dressed up to go to this movie, only NOT to like it. So it's up to others to be the bad guy. Before moving on, the core fans will love this movie I have no doubt. But those on the fringe.... that's a different story.
SATC 2 is entirely too long. My gosh, checking in at 2 hours 25 minutes. There are big parts of this movie that nothing happens at all. And that's a huge problem. And to be very honest, almost 90 minutes goes by before there is a significant plot development. It's just a fashion fest you get to watch with characters with an endless amount of cash, and vacation time.
Well done though is the attempt to take these high rolling women and simplify them to be more like the woman without all the perks. The struggles of a young marriage, being a young mother, getting older, and the never ending relationship between men and women. But it's the extravagance that many really like to see and there's plenty of that. And to this point, the fans still aren't tired of seeing that yet.
To it's credit, our four stars are in rare form. And the clever and snappy dialogue is fun at times. The movies best times still remain with the four girls at a table discussing their lives and woes. And maybe therein lies the trouble. This show really, really worked on TV. There was just something about watching this format on the tube that is way better than the big screen. The characters are still funny, and the basic idea still is fun, but in a 2:25 movie it loses a whole lot of the snap.
But SATC 2 can't successfully overcome it's pitfalls. It's ridiculous length, it's soft plot, and it's constant rehashing of much of the same old stuff that was growing old on HBO ten years ago. The producers on TV were very savvy and didn't let this wear out it's welcome on HBO. Funny at times? Yes. But maybe too much of a good idea? Sadly, yes too.
But reality takes over, and there's just too much money too be made at the theater these days, much like first movie. I feel we'll be watching these girls buy shoes, and discuss their relationships well into their 70's.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
MOVIE REVIEW - Shrek (3-D)
New in theaters this weekend, the new Shrek. A continuation of the highly successful Shrek series that has entertained families for years now.
There's been regular Shrek, Shrek direct to video and now there's Shrek in 3-D. Always fun and always done as skillfully, that they all can be enjoyed by young and old alike. Successfully straddling the line between the generations, is the signature of the Shrek stories. And it's tough not to love the performances of Mike Myers, and especially Eddie Murphy as Shrek the Orge and Donkey. For Murphy especially it's been the best performance in his career over the past decade of so. He is just hilarious in this and the previous three.
Not to go into deep story lines here, because that's part of the fun of going as a family to the Shrek flicks. But the 3-D is just fantastic. And that's what makes going to this movie an event, and not just another Shrek flick. As this technology continues to be refined, if is simply amazing what is happening to you in the theater. Is is simply amazing.
You have to think that with the coming success of this movie, and the huge success of How To Train Your Dragon, if this 3-D route is going to be standard on virtually all animated movies in the coming years.
Shrek 3-D...wonderful family fun, yet again!
There's been regular Shrek, Shrek direct to video and now there's Shrek in 3-D. Always fun and always done as skillfully, that they all can be enjoyed by young and old alike. Successfully straddling the line between the generations, is the signature of the Shrek stories. And it's tough not to love the performances of Mike Myers, and especially Eddie Murphy as Shrek the Orge and Donkey. For Murphy especially it's been the best performance in his career over the past decade of so. He is just hilarious in this and the previous three.
Not to go into deep story lines here, because that's part of the fun of going as a family to the Shrek flicks. But the 3-D is just fantastic. And that's what makes going to this movie an event, and not just another Shrek flick. As this technology continues to be refined, if is simply amazing what is happening to you in the theater. Is is simply amazing.
You have to think that with the coming success of this movie, and the huge success of How To Train Your Dragon, if this 3-D route is going to be standard on virtually all animated movies in the coming years.
Shrek 3-D...wonderful family fun, yet again!
MOVIE REVIEW - MacGruber
Action comedies are really in vogue right now. It's a movie format that in today's world can marry a bunch of types of movies with all the benefits of each, with no down time. That's MacGruber.
This of course is based in parody f the of ABC TV show MacGuyver. The old poor mans 24 where our hero would build a grenade out of twine, and spool and some mascara. OK, that may be a slight exaggeration, but at the time was serious, but over time that show has turned into pop-culture trivia. Later MacGruber became the parody on Saturday Night Live starring the same cast then as in in the movie today. Will Forte, Kristin Wiig and Maya Rudolph. MacGruber also stars Hollywood stars Ryan Phillippe, Powers Boothe and Val Kilmer.
To be really square, the story here really doesn't make one bit of difference. This is simply an SNL bit strung out over about 80 minutes of so. It is also a great example of the fact that if you pay a B-level star (Forte) enough money, he will literally do anything on camera to try to make you laugh. Let's really be honest here. There's a reason it was a 5 minute SNL bit until now. After a few laughs and the parody wears off, it's just tiresome and the countdown is on till the end.
Some of the ongoing jokes here are kind of clever. MacGruber is stuck in some sort of 1980's time warp, as he goes through today's world as are some of his sidekicks, and that's funny. The soundtrack has a bunch of 80's anthems, fun too. But that's where the fun really stops,. and raunchy and just really not funny take over.
Kristin Wiig is pretty funny as the terribly misguided partner that seems to be the fall gal for many of MacGrubers dumb plans. But Will Forte as our hero, has stolen every play from the Will Farrell playbook, and it's not working for Farrell anymore, and it's certainly not going to start up being clever, or creative now.
MacGruber. Honest observation. In a theater of about 75 people, one guy laughed hysterically for the whole show. The rest of us started laughing at him laughing, far more than the movie. That's the deal here I fear. If you are into this, you'll maybe have a real funny night. This will completely miss with others.
This of course is based in parody f the of ABC TV show MacGuyver. The old poor mans 24 where our hero would build a grenade out of twine, and spool and some mascara. OK, that may be a slight exaggeration, but at the time was serious, but over time that show has turned into pop-culture trivia. Later MacGruber became the parody on Saturday Night Live starring the same cast then as in in the movie today. Will Forte, Kristin Wiig and Maya Rudolph. MacGruber also stars Hollywood stars Ryan Phillippe, Powers Boothe and Val Kilmer.
To be really square, the story here really doesn't make one bit of difference. This is simply an SNL bit strung out over about 80 minutes of so. It is also a great example of the fact that if you pay a B-level star (Forte) enough money, he will literally do anything on camera to try to make you laugh. Let's really be honest here. There's a reason it was a 5 minute SNL bit until now. After a few laughs and the parody wears off, it's just tiresome and the countdown is on till the end.
Some of the ongoing jokes here are kind of clever. MacGruber is stuck in some sort of 1980's time warp, as he goes through today's world as are some of his sidekicks, and that's funny. The soundtrack has a bunch of 80's anthems, fun too. But that's where the fun really stops,. and raunchy and just really not funny take over.
Kristin Wiig is pretty funny as the terribly misguided partner that seems to be the fall gal for many of MacGrubers dumb plans. But Will Forte as our hero, has stolen every play from the Will Farrell playbook, and it's not working for Farrell anymore, and it's certainly not going to start up being clever, or creative now.
MacGruber. Honest observation. In a theater of about 75 people, one guy laughed hysterically for the whole show. The rest of us started laughing at him laughing, far more than the movie. That's the deal here I fear. If you are into this, you'll maybe have a real funny night. This will completely miss with others.
Monday, May 17, 2010
MOVIE REVIEW - Letters To Juliet
In this month of Robin Hood, Iron Man 2 and Elm Street movies, we could use a little break from all the noise.
Enter Letters To Juliet. A new movie this week at the box office with a slightly lower volume, payroll and budget. And also a much more under control story that frankly isn't the best movie on earth. But it's not bad either.
LTJ is a slightly elaborate love story that takes place essentially in Verona, Italy, the most romantic city on earth. Where young love, meets older love. Ancient traditions give way to a modern spin on having love, finding love and rekindling love. Shot in the wonderful city of Verona and the Italian country side, LTJ has a real nice look and a real nice feel too.
Amanda Seyfried stars as our heroine Sophie. She is engaged, but after a trip to Verona, she isn't for sure that her fiance' is he one, and meets a new love. But it's complicated, as he is the grandson of her new friend played by Vanessa Redgrave who is just charming in her small but important role. Will Sophie find love and will it all work out? I'm guessing yes.
LTJ really isn't a romantic comedy, it's just nice little movie. Kind of has the Chocolate' feel to it. Yea, it's a bit predictable, and far-fetched and a bit silly at times, but it's a welcome change of pace right now. Sometimes timing is everything, and this is out at the right time. It feels good. It is also a perfect date movie for many reasons.
Letters To Juliet. It's not perfect by any means. but not many movies are. For young or old people in love, or wanting to be it's a good night at the movies. Well Done.
Enter Letters To Juliet. A new movie this week at the box office with a slightly lower volume, payroll and budget. And also a much more under control story that frankly isn't the best movie on earth. But it's not bad either.
LTJ is a slightly elaborate love story that takes place essentially in Verona, Italy, the most romantic city on earth. Where young love, meets older love. Ancient traditions give way to a modern spin on having love, finding love and rekindling love. Shot in the wonderful city of Verona and the Italian country side, LTJ has a real nice look and a real nice feel too.
Amanda Seyfried stars as our heroine Sophie. She is engaged, but after a trip to Verona, she isn't for sure that her fiance' is he one, and meets a new love. But it's complicated, as he is the grandson of her new friend played by Vanessa Redgrave who is just charming in her small but important role. Will Sophie find love and will it all work out? I'm guessing yes.
LTJ really isn't a romantic comedy, it's just nice little movie. Kind of has the Chocolate' feel to it. Yea, it's a bit predictable, and far-fetched and a bit silly at times, but it's a welcome change of pace right now. Sometimes timing is everything, and this is out at the right time. It feels good. It is also a perfect date movie for many reasons.
Letters To Juliet. It's not perfect by any means. but not many movies are. For young or old people in love, or wanting to be it's a good night at the movies. Well Done.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Crossing Over
Much has been made lately of Lebron James, his free agency and possibly leaving Northeast Ohio now that the Cavs season is suddenly over. There's a bunch of X's and O's talk, but I think it is far simpler than that.
First off, there is not going to be any mention here of who the Cavs should hire, fire, or sign to possibly play with Lebron. Boring. Cavs owner Dan Gilbert will make big moves and do what is necessary. He has a lot on the line in this area with the Cavs, and the casino's. And money is no factor either. Everyone involved has hundreds of millions of dollars many times over. And are only going to get richer.
What this really comes down to is what's truly inside a 25 year old guy who is blessed with once in a lifetime basketball talent. I can't do many of the things Lebron can, but I've been in the world longer (almost twice as long) and so have most of you. That is something way special too. And in the grand scheme of things infinitely more valuable.
Many times it is natural for a young guy to want to live in a bigger city, take on new challenges, see new things and make new friends that run in different circles. And he may be feeling that, who knows? Tough to fight that sometimes. Under normal circumstances once a challenge is complete, new ones seem far more attractive. But these are not normal circumstances and this job is still undone.
I hear fans saying "too much weight on his shoulders" and the whole bit, and I respectfully disagree. You and I have weight on our shoulders living in the real world, with real world problems of which he knows nothing of. I wish my biggest worry on earth was winning an NBA Championship. Whether he likes it or not, he is a big part of our local economy. And that in many ways does become our problem. He brings people to downtown Akron and Cleveland businesses, and the suburbs. He puts us on National TV two times a week, brings wonderful charity events to Akron. All this makes us feel better about our area. That's not carrying weight. That's living a dream.
Truth be told in the current climate of the NBA his chances are just as good of winning a title here as any city. But it's going to be completely up to Lebron, totally out of any one persons hand.. It's simple, does he want to go down as the biggest sports hero in Northeast Ohio history or not? Does he want to be spoken in the same sentence as Jim Brown and Bob Feller when he's 50 or 60? Does he want his statue outside Quicken Loans Arena in the years ahead or not? The Cavs drafted him to resurrect the franchise, which he's done. And take us to a title which he hasn't. Reason being? Because it's hard. Plain and simple.
So many young people today are hungry and assertive. They can't wait to get out in the world to invent new things, start new businesses and make a difference. But there are also those less mature who leave tasks undone because they are too darn hard. Every year, only one city boasts an NBA Championship. The rest are just like us. We are no different than any other city in that regard and we need to grow up and accept that. Quit listening to ESPN's stories about how "tortured" we are as fans. We're not victims, and we need to quit crying about it. For every year there is but ONE champion in any sport.
But as we go forward as witnesses, what do we want to see? NBA players performing little skits, plays and dancing before and during meaningless mid season games against the also -rans for the TV cameras? Or a grown up who knuckles down from opening night and gets the job done even when the competition is brutal and it's hard to do so. I don't remember Micheal Jordan dancing during games. And the only performing I remember from him was making the championship shot...virtually every time - against us. With all things in perspective, it's not our legacy Lebron would be solidifying....it would be his.
This has nothing really to do with sports, but more about being in he world a while and crossing over into real adulthood. Some things in life are hard. Finish what you start, especially when it's hard. Because it's the "hard"...that makes it great.
First off, there is not going to be any mention here of who the Cavs should hire, fire, or sign to possibly play with Lebron. Boring. Cavs owner Dan Gilbert will make big moves and do what is necessary. He has a lot on the line in this area with the Cavs, and the casino's. And money is no factor either. Everyone involved has hundreds of millions of dollars many times over. And are only going to get richer.
What this really comes down to is what's truly inside a 25 year old guy who is blessed with once in a lifetime basketball talent. I can't do many of the things Lebron can, but I've been in the world longer (almost twice as long) and so have most of you. That is something way special too. And in the grand scheme of things infinitely more valuable.
Many times it is natural for a young guy to want to live in a bigger city, take on new challenges, see new things and make new friends that run in different circles. And he may be feeling that, who knows? Tough to fight that sometimes. Under normal circumstances once a challenge is complete, new ones seem far more attractive. But these are not normal circumstances and this job is still undone.
I hear fans saying "too much weight on his shoulders" and the whole bit, and I respectfully disagree. You and I have weight on our shoulders living in the real world, with real world problems of which he knows nothing of. I wish my biggest worry on earth was winning an NBA Championship. Whether he likes it or not, he is a big part of our local economy. And that in many ways does become our problem. He brings people to downtown Akron and Cleveland businesses, and the suburbs. He puts us on National TV two times a week, brings wonderful charity events to Akron. All this makes us feel better about our area. That's not carrying weight. That's living a dream.
Truth be told in the current climate of the NBA his chances are just as good of winning a title here as any city. But it's going to be completely up to Lebron, totally out of any one persons hand.. It's simple, does he want to go down as the biggest sports hero in Northeast Ohio history or not? Does he want to be spoken in the same sentence as Jim Brown and Bob Feller when he's 50 or 60? Does he want his statue outside Quicken Loans Arena in the years ahead or not? The Cavs drafted him to resurrect the franchise, which he's done. And take us to a title which he hasn't. Reason being? Because it's hard. Plain and simple.
So many young people today are hungry and assertive. They can't wait to get out in the world to invent new things, start new businesses and make a difference. But there are also those less mature who leave tasks undone because they are too darn hard. Every year, only one city boasts an NBA Championship. The rest are just like us. We are no different than any other city in that regard and we need to grow up and accept that. Quit listening to ESPN's stories about how "tortured" we are as fans. We're not victims, and we need to quit crying about it. For every year there is but ONE champion in any sport.
But as we go forward as witnesses, what do we want to see? NBA players performing little skits, plays and dancing before and during meaningless mid season games against the also -rans for the TV cameras? Or a grown up who knuckles down from opening night and gets the job done even when the competition is brutal and it's hard to do so. I don't remember Micheal Jordan dancing during games. And the only performing I remember from him was making the championship shot...virtually every time - against us. With all things in perspective, it's not our legacy Lebron would be solidifying....it would be his.
This has nothing really to do with sports, but more about being in he world a while and crossing over into real adulthood. Some things in life are hard. Finish what you start, especially when it's hard. Because it's the "hard"...that makes it great.
Friday, May 14, 2010
MOVIE REVIEW - Just Wright
Gotta be honest, it's been a while since we've had a good physical therapy movie so Just Wright is a welcome addition at the box office.
Alright all sarcasm aside, Queen Latifah, Common, tons of mid level stars and a boatload of NBA type cameo's star in this new attempt at a romantic comedy with a sports backdrop. What we end up getting is one big, complete mess. My gosh man, what was anyone thinking here?
In fairness, I really like Queen Latifah. She is always fun to watch, and is so totally likable. She plays Leslie Wright, a physical therapist who finds herself rehabbing a fictional New Jersey Nets NBA player Scott McKnight (Common). He is a star, and his career is in jeopardy after suffering a bad knee injury. She rehabs him and will they fall in love, and live happily ever after? That's the basic line here with Just Wright.
I was bored just writing that paragraph. JW is flat, slow, and just plain not good. Latifah is charming, witty and fun. She can do a lot with a little, and that's what they asked her to do - I think. As for the rest of this mess, there is enough bad writing bad dialogue and terrible acting to go around. There is awkward scene after awkward scene. Plus watching NBA players trying to act is just flat out hard. I do like the "common girl wins out angle." And Latifah was perfectly cast and easy to digest. But the rest. Sheesh! Barely 90 minutes, this just misses, and misses badly.
Just Wright. Just bad!
Alright all sarcasm aside, Queen Latifah, Common, tons of mid level stars and a boatload of NBA type cameo's star in this new attempt at a romantic comedy with a sports backdrop. What we end up getting is one big, complete mess. My gosh man, what was anyone thinking here?
In fairness, I really like Queen Latifah. She is always fun to watch, and is so totally likable. She plays Leslie Wright, a physical therapist who finds herself rehabbing a fictional New Jersey Nets NBA player Scott McKnight (Common). He is a star, and his career is in jeopardy after suffering a bad knee injury. She rehabs him and will they fall in love, and live happily ever after? That's the basic line here with Just Wright.
I was bored just writing that paragraph. JW is flat, slow, and just plain not good. Latifah is charming, witty and fun. She can do a lot with a little, and that's what they asked her to do - I think. As for the rest of this mess, there is enough bad writing bad dialogue and terrible acting to go around. There is awkward scene after awkward scene. Plus watching NBA players trying to act is just flat out hard. I do like the "common girl wins out angle." And Latifah was perfectly cast and easy to digest. But the rest. Sheesh! Barely 90 minutes, this just misses, and misses badly.
Just Wright. Just bad!
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
MOVIE OF THE MONTH - July
It's that time of the month again. Time to look back and name the best and worst movies of the past month, this time it's July. Movies have to be released to our area in the month mentioned. Box office take is not an issue. I will give you a pick for the best movie, and one honorable mention and the exact same for the worst movie of the month. So let's go!
June and July are tough months. So many of the movies are animation, or action based, so this month when I pick, it's based simply on entertainment value, or lack there of. This fall and winter there will be plenty of time to review the higher end flicks, but for now it's summer.
Best movie of the month - July
Despicable Me - This is 2010's Up! A really well done, well written animated fun movie. The character development was outstanding for an animated film. Loved the voices too. The three little girls in this movie were show stealers. Just flat out good and fun
Honorable mention best - July
Inception - To be honest I didn't review this movie well at all. And there are still a bunch of things in this movie I didn't care for=, including the length. But there are some really well done effects here, and some good imagination. Plus a real good cast. It's the summers big hit. Undeniable.
Worst movie of the month - July
Salt - A good idea just fumbled away. But the character Evelyn Salt is cartoonish, and not at all believable. 100 pound Angelina Jolie can kill dozens of grown FBI and CIA agents with her bare hands in mere seconds. This becomes very video- gamey. PLUS if you're going to have a major plot twist at the end, maybe we shouldn't all know it an hour before it happens.
Honorable mention worst - July
Predators - This is the second month in a row that Adrien Brody made this list. Last month it was Splice. There was really no reason to remake this movie, or whatever this was. Silly, boring, and what's the point?
Check back in next month. Feel free to e-mail me your thoughts too scott@wqmx.com See you at the movies!
June and July are tough months. So many of the movies are animation, or action based, so this month when I pick, it's based simply on entertainment value, or lack there of. This fall and winter there will be plenty of time to review the higher end flicks, but for now it's summer.
Best movie of the month - July
Despicable Me - This is 2010's Up! A really well done, well written animated fun movie. The character development was outstanding for an animated film. Loved the voices too. The three little girls in this movie were show stealers. Just flat out good and fun
Honorable mention best - July
Inception - To be honest I didn't review this movie well at all. And there are still a bunch of things in this movie I didn't care for=, including the length. But there are some really well done effects here, and some good imagination. Plus a real good cast. It's the summers big hit. Undeniable.
Worst movie of the month - July
Salt - A good idea just fumbled away. But the character Evelyn Salt is cartoonish, and not at all believable. 100 pound Angelina Jolie can kill dozens of grown FBI and CIA agents with her bare hands in mere seconds. This becomes very video- gamey. PLUS if you're going to have a major plot twist at the end, maybe we shouldn't all know it an hour before it happens.
Honorable mention worst - July
Predators - This is the second month in a row that Adrien Brody made this list. Last month it was Splice. There was really no reason to remake this movie, or whatever this was. Silly, boring, and what's the point?
Check back in next month. Feel free to e-mail me your thoughts too scott@wqmx.com See you at the movies!
Saturday, May 8, 2010
MOVIE REVIEW - Iron Man 2
Here we are back at it, Robert Downey Jr., and a big cast in Iron Man 2, new at the box office this weekend.
Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) the poster child for ADD, self indulgence of course is the real Iron Man. He is a defense contractor who has invented the Iron Man suit that in his words has "successfully privatized world peace." But of course the cat is out of the bag. The federal government wants the Iron man suit turned over to them. Other nations are trying to duplicate the suit. And there are rogue terrorists out not only to get Stark, but the technology the suit has to offer.
Vanko (Mickey Rourke) is one of them. Vanko is a really scary Russian genius whose family was banished to Siberia as a child, has an axe to grind. He sets out to one-up Iron Man, and kill Stark. Rourke is great in this role. A real sinister villain, with a great evil look and accent that sends chills up your spine. IM2 sets out to to develop a really great character that you can really fear, but unfortunately, IM2 seemingly abandons this about halfway through, and that really hurts this expensive sequel. Vanko is still there, he just has to wait his turn while we meet and learn about far less compelling characters.
Instead, IM2 introduces us to a bunch of new characters, and side plots that aren't necessarily bad, just not as good as a real sinister comic book type villain, we all love to hate. IM2 has a big cast. Gwenyth Paltrow is back as the lovely Pepper Potts. Also starring Samuel L. Jackson in a very small role that seems to be setting up more involvement in IM3 in a year or two. Scarlett Johanson as a federal agent with superhuman self defense skills, and Sam Rockwell as the rival defense contractor who hates Starks success.
IM2 is a very patient movie, and to be honest it may be more patient than you are watching it. This movie is going to viewed very differently by different audiences. They make you wait, and wait for the action sequences. Some are not going to be bothered by this. Others are. The payoff is adequate, not overdone or over the top. IM2 is filled with a lot of gadgetry and side plots that at times bog it down. One of the raps on the original Iron Man as not enough Iron man. But the makers here don't back down. Their formula remains the same. Wait.
For me, leaving Mickey Rourke on the sidelines after a really nice start bogged it down. IM2 would have had a much better comic book feel if the villain remained the main focus. Rourke is great and perfectly cast and is the movies real strength. Truth is tough, IM2 is fun and well paced, with special effects a plenty. Suitable for virtually anyone but does carry a PG-13 rating. Kids will love it, but may be a bit antsy during the long action sequence waits.
Iron Man 2. As far as a comic book movie is concerned, kudos to the fact that much of it lives in the real world and deals with relevant issues that would come up if this was reality. It is a busy movie. More than likely with too many irons in the fire and too many characters who need screen time. An opportunity missed too with a villain that could have been focused on deeper, and feared and hated a bit more.
Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) the poster child for ADD, self indulgence of course is the real Iron Man. He is a defense contractor who has invented the Iron Man suit that in his words has "successfully privatized world peace." But of course the cat is out of the bag. The federal government wants the Iron man suit turned over to them. Other nations are trying to duplicate the suit. And there are rogue terrorists out not only to get Stark, but the technology the suit has to offer.
Vanko (Mickey Rourke) is one of them. Vanko is a really scary Russian genius whose family was banished to Siberia as a child, has an axe to grind. He sets out to one-up Iron Man, and kill Stark. Rourke is great in this role. A real sinister villain, with a great evil look and accent that sends chills up your spine. IM2 sets out to to develop a really great character that you can really fear, but unfortunately, IM2 seemingly abandons this about halfway through, and that really hurts this expensive sequel. Vanko is still there, he just has to wait his turn while we meet and learn about far less compelling characters.
Instead, IM2 introduces us to a bunch of new characters, and side plots that aren't necessarily bad, just not as good as a real sinister comic book type villain, we all love to hate. IM2 has a big cast. Gwenyth Paltrow is back as the lovely Pepper Potts. Also starring Samuel L. Jackson in a very small role that seems to be setting up more involvement in IM3 in a year or two. Scarlett Johanson as a federal agent with superhuman self defense skills, and Sam Rockwell as the rival defense contractor who hates Starks success.
IM2 is a very patient movie, and to be honest it may be more patient than you are watching it. This movie is going to viewed very differently by different audiences. They make you wait, and wait for the action sequences. Some are not going to be bothered by this. Others are. The payoff is adequate, not overdone or over the top. IM2 is filled with a lot of gadgetry and side plots that at times bog it down. One of the raps on the original Iron Man as not enough Iron man. But the makers here don't back down. Their formula remains the same. Wait.
For me, leaving Mickey Rourke on the sidelines after a really nice start bogged it down. IM2 would have had a much better comic book feel if the villain remained the main focus. Rourke is great and perfectly cast and is the movies real strength. Truth is tough, IM2 is fun and well paced, with special effects a plenty. Suitable for virtually anyone but does carry a PG-13 rating. Kids will love it, but may be a bit antsy during the long action sequence waits.
Iron Man 2. As far as a comic book movie is concerned, kudos to the fact that much of it lives in the real world and deals with relevant issues that would come up if this was reality. It is a busy movie. More than likely with too many irons in the fire and too many characters who need screen time. An opportunity missed too with a villain that could have been focused on deeper, and feared and hated a bit more.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
MOVIE REVIEW - A Nightmare On Elm Street
Back to the 80's again at the movies......Wes Craven's Freddie Krueger is back in a new A Nightmare on Elm Street. In case you're wondering, and I was, the original was 1984. Can it really be that long ago?
For those who don't remember the first run of Elm Street movies, they were huge hits and Krueger was a pop culture icon that hung around for a few movies, countless Halloween costumes and spoofs and movie references. In the midst of Friday the 13th, Halloween, and tons of other slasher flicks the separator for the Elm Street movies. as the attempt to give the "slasher" some sort of character and background, the why's on the whole thing. Whether you bought it or not, or if that worked for you was up to you.
Jackie Earle Haley is Freddie, and is perfectly cast as our nightmare-ish slasher. Haley was really great as Rorschach in 2009 Watchmen, and this year in his small roll in Shutter Island. He though has been around for years, as a childhood actor and then kicking around in smaller movies, but he has found his niche as strange, off-beat weirdos. and is real good at it. Much of Krueger is exactly the same, burned face, big slashy, knives for hands, and the wise cracking comments before he does his thing.
But Haley is creepy, and if you're gonna breathe new life into this series, he was the perfect choice. The story is what it is. A guy with a grudge, and a bunch of young adults in peril, and all of us wondering why this guys is who he is. If you're looking for a good slasher flick this is your day. There's a bunch of stalking and blood, and enough dream sequences to go around. Rated R and deservedly so. Not for young kids at all. But shamefully some where there today with their parents.
A Nightmare On Elm Street. Jackie Earle Haley is the right guy in the right role that is for sure. But the bigger question is, do we really need to go down this highly successful, well traveled road again? Are they really out of any new ideas?
For those who don't remember the first run of Elm Street movies, they were huge hits and Krueger was a pop culture icon that hung around for a few movies, countless Halloween costumes and spoofs and movie references. In the midst of Friday the 13th, Halloween, and tons of other slasher flicks the separator for the Elm Street movies. as the attempt to give the "slasher" some sort of character and background, the why's on the whole thing. Whether you bought it or not, or if that worked for you was up to you.
Jackie Earle Haley is Freddie, and is perfectly cast as our nightmare-ish slasher. Haley was really great as Rorschach in 2009 Watchmen, and this year in his small roll in Shutter Island. He though has been around for years, as a childhood actor and then kicking around in smaller movies, but he has found his niche as strange, off-beat weirdos. and is real good at it. Much of Krueger is exactly the same, burned face, big slashy, knives for hands, and the wise cracking comments before he does his thing.
But Haley is creepy, and if you're gonna breathe new life into this series, he was the perfect choice. The story is what it is. A guy with a grudge, and a bunch of young adults in peril, and all of us wondering why this guys is who he is. If you're looking for a good slasher flick this is your day. There's a bunch of stalking and blood, and enough dream sequences to go around. Rated R and deservedly so. Not for young kids at all. But shamefully some where there today with their parents.
A Nightmare On Elm Street. Jackie Earle Haley is the right guy in the right role that is for sure. But the bigger question is, do we really need to go down this highly successful, well traveled road again? Are they really out of any new ideas?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
