There's been a lot made of the new Steven Spielberg flick, War Horse. The novel, and the stage play have been around for a while and now it's the movie's turn.
War Horse is the story of an extraordinary thoroughbred horse in the early 20th century. Joey is his name, and he leads a adventure filled life. He is born in England and is sold to a drunken farmer who for some reason bought the running horse instead of a plow horse that he needed. His young son then bonds with the horse and makes him more than just a running horse. Joey is then purchased by the Army at the beginning of WWI. Joey is an English officer's horse till the officer is killed.
Joey then is confiscated by the German army, then escapes. Then he is the property of various sides and continually escapes. Many times Joey is facing the end of his storied life, all the while wanting to be reunited with his owner from many years ago back on the farm. Can Joey make it through all the horrific situations that were WWI? That is War Horse.
First of all this is a wonderfully filmed movie, with many breathtaking scenes. Plus, there are many heart moving, emotionally powerful scenes with truly unbelievable performances by the horses themselves. You find yourself locked in to Joey's life for the most part, and are rooting for him the whole while. From a movie making perspective, much of this is championship movie caliber. The story is one you have not seen before told with this backdrop. Spielberg is capable of making "pretty" movies and this is one.
There are some difficulties though with War Horse. There were a few portions in the first hour where they were losing me. A stumble out of the gate if you will. Too much time in a repeated set up that we completely understood the first time. War Horse though does gain momentum.
War Horse too at times becomes a real commentary of the deplorable conditions of WWI. Now that's not a bad thing, but there are a few moments where focus is lost, but are quickly regained. For those viewers having no idea about WWI this will be a real learning tool, and I think that is great. But be advised, there are some hard to watch scenes here, and many of them do involve much cruelty that was inflicted on these animals, and people in WWI. (None actually in the movie making of course.)
I think it is very important point out this is not a typical "horse" movie. Put all those older movies out of your mind when considering going in here. This is entitled "War Horse." This is the story of horse fighting to live through the most cruel, and detestable war in history. This is really tough stuff at times. Do not think this is a young child's, or young family movie. There are numerous moments that animal lovers, and children will have a hard time digesting if they can even bear to watch the screen.
But the strength of War Horse as a story are the caring people on both sides of the war that came across Joey and realize that there was something chosen about him. That no matter what the conflict between nations were, there was still the love of animals, and the respect that a horse soldier could stir up in these men. And that makes for good story telling.
War Horse. Yes, it's a story of finding your way home and that's nothing new. But it is so much more. A beautifully filmed Spielberg film. Not one of the years 5 best, but certainly an upper tier movie.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - We Bought A Zoo
The new Cameron Crowe written and directed movie We Bought A Zoo is new this week. Based somewhat on a true story, starring Matt Damon, and Scarlett Johansson.
This is the story of a young widower Benjamin (Damon), and his struggling young family. After his wife's death, he strikes out and takes his family in a new direction. He buys an 18 acre piece of property that is actually a local working zoo. He has no zoo experience of course, but there are people that do there. Can he take his family on this new adventure, and keep the zoo afloat? That's We Bought A Zoo.
This for many will be a feel good holiday movie for most of the family to enjoy. But to get down to brass tacks, this is not a very good movie, and that's a shame. A dirty, rotten shame. It's not the story though. I think there is enough here for a nice little movie. But that's part of the trouble. This is an attempt to make this a big movie, and it doesn't work. Checking in at 2 hours, this would have been far sweeter at 90 minutes. And have a different feel to it.
The writing is horrible. For some reason they try to weave in a love story between Benjamin and Kelly (Johansson) who is the head zookeeper. But it never seems to go anywhere at all. It just strings you along with no payoff. Also they blend in a "love story" that involves two 14 year-olds that is really stupid and off point. This subplot, and eventual outcome is embarrassingly bad. And of course, they have to make the cardinal sin of many movies like this. They make Benjamin's 7 year old daughter, Rosie "a wise old soul." And 7 year old Rosie has the insight on life, and the vocabulary of a 30 year old. And as cute as she is, it's just incredibly dumb, and insulting. The best kids on TV and movies talk like kids. And they wrote her badly.
It's also a story you don't know and that's generally a good thing. But here you know the whole time, from start to finish how this will end. It just takes way too long to get there. I would have loved to see this movie reworked, shortened down, and rewritten a bit to allow it to go in a different direction. And for heaven sake cut out some of the fat, and make these characters real.
With an eye on the entire project though, this will find a following and will do well over the holidays as some families will enjoy this. There is nothing in this movie that is objectionable, and pretty much anyone can see it. The timing is right for its release as people have the time to go. And you're gonna need it. 2 hours and 5 minutes of dragging you along.
We Bought A Zoo. It's no one on camera fault. It's terrible writing. This is a huge opportunity missed here. Could have been so much more, by being so much less.
This is the story of a young widower Benjamin (Damon), and his struggling young family. After his wife's death, he strikes out and takes his family in a new direction. He buys an 18 acre piece of property that is actually a local working zoo. He has no zoo experience of course, but there are people that do there. Can he take his family on this new adventure, and keep the zoo afloat? That's We Bought A Zoo.
This for many will be a feel good holiday movie for most of the family to enjoy. But to get down to brass tacks, this is not a very good movie, and that's a shame. A dirty, rotten shame. It's not the story though. I think there is enough here for a nice little movie. But that's part of the trouble. This is an attempt to make this a big movie, and it doesn't work. Checking in at 2 hours, this would have been far sweeter at 90 minutes. And have a different feel to it.
The writing is horrible. For some reason they try to weave in a love story between Benjamin and Kelly (Johansson) who is the head zookeeper. But it never seems to go anywhere at all. It just strings you along with no payoff. Also they blend in a "love story" that involves two 14 year-olds that is really stupid and off point. This subplot, and eventual outcome is embarrassingly bad. And of course, they have to make the cardinal sin of many movies like this. They make Benjamin's 7 year old daughter, Rosie "a wise old soul." And 7 year old Rosie has the insight on life, and the vocabulary of a 30 year old. And as cute as she is, it's just incredibly dumb, and insulting. The best kids on TV and movies talk like kids. And they wrote her badly.
It's also a story you don't know and that's generally a good thing. But here you know the whole time, from start to finish how this will end. It just takes way too long to get there. I would have loved to see this movie reworked, shortened down, and rewritten a bit to allow it to go in a different direction. And for heaven sake cut out some of the fat, and make these characters real.
With an eye on the entire project though, this will find a following and will do well over the holidays as some families will enjoy this. There is nothing in this movie that is objectionable, and pretty much anyone can see it. The timing is right for its release as people have the time to go. And you're gonna need it. 2 hours and 5 minutes of dragging you along.
We Bought A Zoo. It's no one on camera fault. It's terrible writing. This is a huge opportunity missed here. Could have been so much more, by being so much less.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW -Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
There's been a ton of hype and anticipation about the new thriller, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. And here it is, in all of its two hour and forty minute glory.
Based on the immensely popular books, Daniel Craig stars in a deep, and dark story of family secrets and murder. Before we dive in, should be noted this movie is highly adult in about every way. There are a few images that could be exceedingly disturbing to many. It deals with virtually every harsh thing that could possibly be undertaken in one feature length movie. So the audience should be monitored. It is highly graphic at times.
It's too complicated to really explain in detail, and you may have read the books. It's basically the story of a small magazine publisher (Craig). He has lost most of his life savings due to a libel lawsuit he lost. He is then hired by a stinking rich businessman in Sweden to investigate a 40 year old murder in his own family. A 16 year old niece disappeared in 1966, and some members of the family are convinced it was a family member the did the deed. This starts to get pretty ugly.
As he investigates he hires a totally disturbed young woman with the Dragon Tattoo as an assistant. She is insane , and borderline genius. She is also an accomplished computer hacker that can seemingly hack any computer anywhere and get the info she needs to assist our investigator. She is also completely ruthless, and will go to about any length to get what she wants in every avenue of her life. She is a most compelling character. Can they solve the riddle?
There is far more to this story than simply that. But in a nutshell, that's where we are. This is a very interesting story, that I am positive would read better than the movie. This is a pretty good flick, and the story carries the day. This is pure movie making and that's refreshing in today's move making climate. This is just a great story, told well, without a lot of bells and whistles. Besides is graphic nature, it is kind of throwback movie making. A real intense, thrilling, mystery drama.
If you read the book, I'm sure you are thrilled for the movie. But beware that many times reading something, and seeing something are two completely different things. This movie is certainly not for everyone. It will be way too graphic, and dark for many. But for those entranced by the story or book, it's right on target.
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Not exactly a movie full of holiday cheer, but good nonetheless. This may suffer some from a bit too much hype, but over all this is pretty good.
Based on the immensely popular books, Daniel Craig stars in a deep, and dark story of family secrets and murder. Before we dive in, should be noted this movie is highly adult in about every way. There are a few images that could be exceedingly disturbing to many. It deals with virtually every harsh thing that could possibly be undertaken in one feature length movie. So the audience should be monitored. It is highly graphic at times.
It's too complicated to really explain in detail, and you may have read the books. It's basically the story of a small magazine publisher (Craig). He has lost most of his life savings due to a libel lawsuit he lost. He is then hired by a stinking rich businessman in Sweden to investigate a 40 year old murder in his own family. A 16 year old niece disappeared in 1966, and some members of the family are convinced it was a family member the did the deed. This starts to get pretty ugly.
As he investigates he hires a totally disturbed young woman with the Dragon Tattoo as an assistant. She is insane , and borderline genius. She is also an accomplished computer hacker that can seemingly hack any computer anywhere and get the info she needs to assist our investigator. She is also completely ruthless, and will go to about any length to get what she wants in every avenue of her life. She is a most compelling character. Can they solve the riddle?
There is far more to this story than simply that. But in a nutshell, that's where we are. This is a very interesting story, that I am positive would read better than the movie. This is a pretty good flick, and the story carries the day. This is pure movie making and that's refreshing in today's move making climate. This is just a great story, told well, without a lot of bells and whistles. Besides is graphic nature, it is kind of throwback movie making. A real intense, thrilling, mystery drama.
If you read the book, I'm sure you are thrilled for the movie. But beware that many times reading something, and seeing something are two completely different things. This movie is certainly not for everyone. It will be way too graphic, and dark for many. But for those entranced by the story or book, it's right on target.
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Not exactly a movie full of holiday cheer, but good nonetheless. This may suffer some from a bit too much hype, but over all this is pretty good.
MOVIE REVIEW - MIssion Impossible 4
Tom Cruise is back, overacting but still trying to find new ways to keep the Mission Impossible series alive with Ghost Protocol.
This is his fourth installment of this 1960's TV show come to the movies, and to be fair it is what it is. No one is going to change cinematic history with this, or win 11 Oscars. But it is pretty fun. And that's what these are. This is holiday fun - period. And I'm good with that.
The IMF team is still doing amazing things with out of this world gadgets, and making it all look pretty easy. This time they are trying to stave off nuclear war with Russia, after someone bombs the Kremlin, and lays the blame on the IMF team. Will they succeed?
For the most part this is well paced, and well thought out. Although there are a few holes in it. But again, this is holiday fun so let's not get carried away here. Great music soundtrack again and some really wonderful action scenes. The scene where Ethan is scaling the worlds tallest building from the outside is really sweaty palm stuff, and is exceptionally compelling. There is a bunch of slow burn tension moments too that set this above most action flicks. And that's great.
But there is entirely too much people chasing people. One sand storm scene goes on for what seems like years, and there are a few very unimaginative chase scenes that actually slow this whole thing down. Cruise still has a tendency to overact at times and becomes a slight parody of himself, by overall he is still good in this series.
This is available to you in regular D, 3-D, and there is IMAX for this. I know the IMAX is pricey, but I would think that may be very compelling for this flick, especially in the tall building scene. May have to go back and check that out.
Mission Impossible 4. Good holiday fun for virtually anyone.
This is his fourth installment of this 1960's TV show come to the movies, and to be fair it is what it is. No one is going to change cinematic history with this, or win 11 Oscars. But it is pretty fun. And that's what these are. This is holiday fun - period. And I'm good with that.
The IMF team is still doing amazing things with out of this world gadgets, and making it all look pretty easy. This time they are trying to stave off nuclear war with Russia, after someone bombs the Kremlin, and lays the blame on the IMF team. Will they succeed?
For the most part this is well paced, and well thought out. Although there are a few holes in it. But again, this is holiday fun so let's not get carried away here. Great music soundtrack again and some really wonderful action scenes. The scene where Ethan is scaling the worlds tallest building from the outside is really sweaty palm stuff, and is exceptionally compelling. There is a bunch of slow burn tension moments too that set this above most action flicks. And that's great.
But there is entirely too much people chasing people. One sand storm scene goes on for what seems like years, and there are a few very unimaginative chase scenes that actually slow this whole thing down. Cruise still has a tendency to overact at times and becomes a slight parody of himself, by overall he is still good in this series.
This is available to you in regular D, 3-D, and there is IMAX for this. I know the IMAX is pricey, but I would think that may be very compelling for this flick, especially in the tall building scene. May have to go back and check that out.
Mission Impossible 4. Good holiday fun for virtually anyone.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW -Sherlock Holmes 2
Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law are back again for the next installment of the Sherlock Holmes series. Sometimes movie are made strictly for fun. And that is this movie.
Just like the first Holmes flick this is not you fathers Sherlock Holmes. Baring little resemblance to the iconic literary character developed by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the late 1800's. But in fairness, that Holmes wouldn't fly today with the movie going public at all. So Holmes and Watson have been morphed into 19th century action figures, and it seems to be working.
This story has Holmes and Watson in the middle of a late 19th century terrorist plot to start up a world war by diabolical men. Holmes as usual is one step ahead and is trying to hold off world war as along as he can. And he drags along Watson (who was on his honeymoon at the time). Will he succeed? I'm guessing.
Downey has done a great job in the first two movies now of creating a new Sherlock Holmes character. He is perfectly cast. And when all is said and done, these performances may be the ones he is most remembered for. He seems comfortable in this role, and brings a nice believability to this. Jude Law is strong at Dr. Watson, and seems on the same page with Downey most of the time.
These movies are not award winning cinema by any means, but they are a few things that are really good. They are fun, and released at the perfect time of the year. This will provide a ton of holiday movie going fun for fans well into January. They are loaded with action, and humor, and overall, pace long quickly and give you a well rounded day at the movies.
Sherlock Holmes 2. Nothing,except holiday fun. That's all we ask, and that all this is.
Just like the first Holmes flick this is not you fathers Sherlock Holmes. Baring little resemblance to the iconic literary character developed by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the late 1800's. But in fairness, that Holmes wouldn't fly today with the movie going public at all. So Holmes and Watson have been morphed into 19th century action figures, and it seems to be working.
This story has Holmes and Watson in the middle of a late 19th century terrorist plot to start up a world war by diabolical men. Holmes as usual is one step ahead and is trying to hold off world war as along as he can. And he drags along Watson (who was on his honeymoon at the time). Will he succeed? I'm guessing.
Downey has done a great job in the first two movies now of creating a new Sherlock Holmes character. He is perfectly cast. And when all is said and done, these performances may be the ones he is most remembered for. He seems comfortable in this role, and brings a nice believability to this. Jude Law is strong at Dr. Watson, and seems on the same page with Downey most of the time.
These movies are not award winning cinema by any means, but they are a few things that are really good. They are fun, and released at the perfect time of the year. This will provide a ton of holiday movie going fun for fans well into January. They are loaded with action, and humor, and overall, pace long quickly and give you a well rounded day at the movies.
Sherlock Holmes 2. Nothing,except holiday fun. That's all we ask, and that all this is.
Friday, December 16, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Young Adult
I love movies that say something. It's a trait that is attempted by many, but successful by few. The new Young Adult starring Charlize Theron has a loud, amplified social message that will resonate through, and land with a whole lot of people.
Young Adult is the story of Mavis (Theron). Mavis is a 37 year old divorced woman who lives in Minneapolis. She is from a very small town called Mercury, Minnesota. She is a ghost writer of a teen book series for young adults. She is probably the most immature, irresponsible, less than grown up person you can imagine. She is living in some kind of high school time warp and her mental growth stopped about 1993. It also appears that she may be living through the fictional stories she writes. She decides to go back to her hometown and try to rekindle her high school romance with her ex boyfriend from 20 years ago. Problem is, he is happily married and has a newborn baby.
Mavis goes to great drunken lengths to reconnect with him, and has no real sense of any kind of reality or decency. Mavis has retreated from the world because she can. There is nothing adult about her. She is seen as a pathetic has been by all of her ex-school mates who cross paths with her. You begin to wonder if she is mentally ill, or what her exact mental malady is. But in the end you must decide if she is ill, or just so incredibly immature that she may never really become a functioning adult. And moreover, why is she this way? It is a question worth asking, as she is not all that rare in today's world.
Theron is simply fantastic. She is the very rare combination of beauty, and trash all at the same time. Her Oscar winning performance in Monster a few years ago was proof positive of that. And she relives that magic here. Theron is very funny, and despicable all at the same time. She is so convincing as this completely detached young woman, who is so self involved that the world around her has grown up and left her behind. She is staggeringly good, and is representative of the perception of many young adults today. I think most fans will point to the screen and picture someone they know of. This is Oscar-worthy. Hard to overestimate how good she is here. Although she is aided by a compelling story, and equally good writing.
This movie is very skillfully done it's almost scary. Mavis is so bold and out of touch, you almost feel uncomfortable in your seat for her and everyone else in many scenes. This is loud, and I mean loud social commentary of some young adults today it's almost deafening. It's a story for our times, and blazes a new trail of more that I am sure to come. It's tidy, a quick 90 minutes with an Indy-feel music soundtrack, and a story you don't know with message sent.
Young Adult. Theron is great, great! And so is this movie. It's bold a risk taking and one of the years best.
Young Adult is the story of Mavis (Theron). Mavis is a 37 year old divorced woman who lives in Minneapolis. She is from a very small town called Mercury, Minnesota. She is a ghost writer of a teen book series for young adults. She is probably the most immature, irresponsible, less than grown up person you can imagine. She is living in some kind of high school time warp and her mental growth stopped about 1993. It also appears that she may be living through the fictional stories she writes. She decides to go back to her hometown and try to rekindle her high school romance with her ex boyfriend from 20 years ago. Problem is, he is happily married and has a newborn baby.
Mavis goes to great drunken lengths to reconnect with him, and has no real sense of any kind of reality or decency. Mavis has retreated from the world because she can. There is nothing adult about her. She is seen as a pathetic has been by all of her ex-school mates who cross paths with her. You begin to wonder if she is mentally ill, or what her exact mental malady is. But in the end you must decide if she is ill, or just so incredibly immature that she may never really become a functioning adult. And moreover, why is she this way? It is a question worth asking, as she is not all that rare in today's world.
Theron is simply fantastic. She is the very rare combination of beauty, and trash all at the same time. Her Oscar winning performance in Monster a few years ago was proof positive of that. And she relives that magic here. Theron is very funny, and despicable all at the same time. She is so convincing as this completely detached young woman, who is so self involved that the world around her has grown up and left her behind. She is staggeringly good, and is representative of the perception of many young adults today. I think most fans will point to the screen and picture someone they know of. This is Oscar-worthy. Hard to overestimate how good she is here. Although she is aided by a compelling story, and equally good writing.
This movie is very skillfully done it's almost scary. Mavis is so bold and out of touch, you almost feel uncomfortable in your seat for her and everyone else in many scenes. This is loud, and I mean loud social commentary of some young adults today it's almost deafening. It's a story for our times, and blazes a new trail of more that I am sure to come. It's tidy, a quick 90 minutes with an Indy-feel music soundtrack, and a story you don't know with message sent.
Young Adult. Theron is great, great! And so is this movie. It's bold a risk taking and one of the years best.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - New Years Eve
Did you see last years Valentines Day at the movies? If so, you may or may not want to see the new New Years Eve opening this week. You see, it is the exact same movie. Different holiday, some of the same cast, and basically the exact same formula and story line.
I'm just going to say this up front. New Years Eve is putrid. Just awful, hard to find a worse movie. - Seriously. This is another attempt at jamming together a ton of good looking mid level stars in a movie and hoping for a good result. The trouble is not with our so-so stars, it's the writing. It's pathetic. And it gets no better from there.
This movie has a bad case of Hollywood ADD. It's basically a bunch of disconnected stories of "love" on New Years Eve, that slowly become connected. Just like Valentines Day. It jumps crazily from boring plot line to stupid plot line in a very amateurish fashion. There are a couple of applaudable moments and twists, but they are rare. But after those, and a few obligatory "awww" moments come and go, there is the rest of this junk heap. And there are far more questions to be asked about this movie.
First, what is the lovely, 2-time Oscar winner Hilary Swank doing anywhere hear this hunk of trash. She's usually so good, she shouldn't even go to this movie, let alone star in it! Same goes for Oscar winner beauty Halle Berry, and Oscar winner and icon Robert DeNiro. For a few bucks, they just watered down all these great awards. Someone should have reminded these three who they were, or maybe read the script before signing on the dotted line and flushing their credibility forcefully down the can.
Look, I get people like Jessica Biel, Josh Duhamel, Ashton Kutcher, Bon Jovi, Sarah Jessica Parker and Katherine Heigl making flicks like this. They can't bring people to the movies on their own, so they team up and make drivel like this. Understandable. Our expectations of them are relatively low, or non existent, so if this movie must be made they are the people for it.
I could only shake my head at Swank. Amazingly talented actress in the prime of her career stooping to such a low point in role choices. She is the main star of this movie, as her character is in charge of the Big Ball dropping in New York City. Boy there's a role of a lifetime! Her character is so ridiculously written it's hard to watch. Berry, has a role that is about minutes long, and DeNiro lays in a hospital bed most of the time dying on New Years Eve, but he wants only to see the ball drop.
Do you believe that Kathering Heigl as the greatest new chef in New York City? Me either. Do you want to hear Bon Jovi sing two songs that literally sound like Barry Manilow? Me either. How about Sarah Jessica Parker as a frustrated mom of a teen? No? Or 15 year old Abigail Breslin as her spoiled daughter? Still no?
Then maybe you just can't wait to see Michelle Pfeiffer as a shy, pathetic woman, who ends of doing things on screen I'm sure she never, ever dreamed of. It's all so embarrassing. Or maybe watching two other pregnant women characters and their husbands in a "squeeze out" contest to win at all costs to see who has the first baby of 2012. Because they will win $25,000. Good gravy man make this stop!! I never prayed so hard for a movie projector failure in my life.
New Years Eve. Quite possibly the worst movie of the year. Nothing about this is worth one dime, or one minute of time.
I'm just going to say this up front. New Years Eve is putrid. Just awful, hard to find a worse movie. - Seriously. This is another attempt at jamming together a ton of good looking mid level stars in a movie and hoping for a good result. The trouble is not with our so-so stars, it's the writing. It's pathetic. And it gets no better from there.
This movie has a bad case of Hollywood ADD. It's basically a bunch of disconnected stories of "love" on New Years Eve, that slowly become connected. Just like Valentines Day. It jumps crazily from boring plot line to stupid plot line in a very amateurish fashion. There are a couple of applaudable moments and twists, but they are rare. But after those, and a few obligatory "awww" moments come and go, there is the rest of this junk heap. And there are far more questions to be asked about this movie.
First, what is the lovely, 2-time Oscar winner Hilary Swank doing anywhere hear this hunk of trash. She's usually so good, she shouldn't even go to this movie, let alone star in it! Same goes for Oscar winner beauty Halle Berry, and Oscar winner and icon Robert DeNiro. For a few bucks, they just watered down all these great awards. Someone should have reminded these three who they were, or maybe read the script before signing on the dotted line and flushing their credibility forcefully down the can.
Look, I get people like Jessica Biel, Josh Duhamel, Ashton Kutcher, Bon Jovi, Sarah Jessica Parker and Katherine Heigl making flicks like this. They can't bring people to the movies on their own, so they team up and make drivel like this. Understandable. Our expectations of them are relatively low, or non existent, so if this movie must be made they are the people for it.
I could only shake my head at Swank. Amazingly talented actress in the prime of her career stooping to such a low point in role choices. She is the main star of this movie, as her character is in charge of the Big Ball dropping in New York City. Boy there's a role of a lifetime! Her character is so ridiculously written it's hard to watch. Berry, has a role that is about minutes long, and DeNiro lays in a hospital bed most of the time dying on New Years Eve, but he wants only to see the ball drop.
Do you believe that Kathering Heigl as the greatest new chef in New York City? Me either. Do you want to hear Bon Jovi sing two songs that literally sound like Barry Manilow? Me either. How about Sarah Jessica Parker as a frustrated mom of a teen? No? Or 15 year old Abigail Breslin as her spoiled daughter? Still no?
Then maybe you just can't wait to see Michelle Pfeiffer as a shy, pathetic woman, who ends of doing things on screen I'm sure she never, ever dreamed of. It's all so embarrassing. Or maybe watching two other pregnant women characters and their husbands in a "squeeze out" contest to win at all costs to see who has the first baby of 2012. Because they will win $25,000. Good gravy man make this stop!! I never prayed so hard for a movie projector failure in my life.
New Years Eve. Quite possibly the worst movie of the year. Nothing about this is worth one dime, or one minute of time.
MOVIE REVIEW - The Sitter
Funnyman Jonah Hill stars in the new comedy The Sitter. Upon viewing this movie, you may want to leave Nana at home for this one.
The Sitter is another in a long line sophomoric comedies targeted squarely at young adult males who can't seem to get enough of this kind of humor. The Sitter is a bit more than just a bunch of sight gags, and edgy bits. Many of the people that pay money to go and laugh at this movie won't even really get that this is total parody of young adults. The perception that many early 20 somethings are lazy, unmotivated, and entitled is exploited to the highest. Also lampooned is the perception of some that today's parents are basically not in charge anymore, and not very skilled at parenting.
The parody rolls on, as the drug and street culture are also painted in the lampooning spotlight. And young kids too, they are portrayed as highly screwed up, troubled, and materialistic. They all intertwine and they try to give us laughs in The Sitter.
Hill plays Noah. He is a 23 year old guy who lives with his mom. He ends up babysitting 3 neighbor kids. As a result he breaks every rule a sitter should have. He takes them (9, 11,13) into New York City in the night, and puts them in the middle of a drug deal gone bad. Noah and the kids steal a dealers cocaine and then spend the rest of the night trying to raise cash to pay the dealer back. And they are also trying not to get caught by said dealer because he is going to kill Noah. This is pretty much a mess.
They do try to grow a heart late in this movie, as Noah seemingly has the epiphany that he should grow up and be an adult. The kids as a result of this drug chase of a night, are suddenly awakened by our wonderful role model Noah, and each shed their baggage as well. Not sure it's reality, huh?
Hey, there are a few laughs here and Hill can be very funny. But I think we are laughing because Hill is in this movie. This script is really edgy, not overly funny, and not terribly creative. This is envelope pushing with these young kid characters. As they continue to push the line further out. Language is not as horrible as it could have been, and I've certainly seen more vile and offensive movies. But after Hill was in Moneyball, I was hoping he would turn the corner. This looks like a movie that was filmed a while ago, the old Hill.
The Sitter. It will be a hit with it's fans, but not really very good.
The Sitter is another in a long line sophomoric comedies targeted squarely at young adult males who can't seem to get enough of this kind of humor. The Sitter is a bit more than just a bunch of sight gags, and edgy bits. Many of the people that pay money to go and laugh at this movie won't even really get that this is total parody of young adults. The perception that many early 20 somethings are lazy, unmotivated, and entitled is exploited to the highest. Also lampooned is the perception of some that today's parents are basically not in charge anymore, and not very skilled at parenting.
The parody rolls on, as the drug and street culture are also painted in the lampooning spotlight. And young kids too, they are portrayed as highly screwed up, troubled, and materialistic. They all intertwine and they try to give us laughs in The Sitter.
Hill plays Noah. He is a 23 year old guy who lives with his mom. He ends up babysitting 3 neighbor kids. As a result he breaks every rule a sitter should have. He takes them (9, 11,13) into New York City in the night, and puts them in the middle of a drug deal gone bad. Noah and the kids steal a dealers cocaine and then spend the rest of the night trying to raise cash to pay the dealer back. And they are also trying not to get caught by said dealer because he is going to kill Noah. This is pretty much a mess.
They do try to grow a heart late in this movie, as Noah seemingly has the epiphany that he should grow up and be an adult. The kids as a result of this drug chase of a night, are suddenly awakened by our wonderful role model Noah, and each shed their baggage as well. Not sure it's reality, huh?
Hey, there are a few laughs here and Hill can be very funny. But I think we are laughing because Hill is in this movie. This script is really edgy, not overly funny, and not terribly creative. This is envelope pushing with these young kid characters. As they continue to push the line further out. Language is not as horrible as it could have been, and I've certainly seen more vile and offensive movies. But after Hill was in Moneyball, I was hoping he would turn the corner. This looks like a movie that was filmed a while ago, the old Hill.
The Sitter. It will be a hit with it's fans, but not really very good.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Hugo
Hugo is in theaters now. And for as good as a movie as it is, it has played to very little fanfare.
Hugo is a very strange movie set in 1930's Paris of a young boy named Hugo. He suddenly becomes orphaned, and lives in a train station, dodging the Inspector who is bent on throwing him in the orphanage. Hugo also is a young thief who by accident comes across an old man who owns a toy stand in the station by stealing from him. Who is this man? And who exactly is Hugo?
Hugo then friends up a young girl, Isabelle, who is connected to the old man. Hugo is convinced that his dead father is trying to communicate with him from the dead through a machine that his clockmaker father found in an old museum, and leaves for Hugo. Does this all sound too incredibly weird? Too much so to really explain? Well, it is.
But, go see Hugo. This is a Martin Scorsese directed movie that is an absolute feast for all of your senses. This is shot in 3-D. I know you've seen 3-D before, but this is different. This 3-D is so full of texture, there will be times you will not believe your eyes. This is wonderfully filmed, and skillfully crafted. It is also a movie that virtually anyone can see. But, the every young will not really find this very interesting. Don't put this 3-D movie in the same breath as all the others, it is different and better.
Hugo in fairness, does stumble out of the gates. The first 20 minutes or so to me had a bit to be desired. But as this story moves along, it gains momentum. And really becomes a very compelling story based part on fact and part on fiction. It's also a story that no one has really seen before, and that always helps. Great casting with Ben Kingsley, Sasha Baron Cohen, Asa Butterfield, and Chole Grace Moretz. Moretz is simply outstanding as Isabelle.
There's not much about this movie that isn't good. It does start out a bit slow, and it may be a bit too long, but none of that is a deal breaker. Hugo really is something to see, and you'll learn a bit of something too along the way.
Hugo. Well written, acted, and filmed in 3-D like no other movie to date. I'm not going all the way and saying it's the best movie of the year like some others. But it's pretty darn good!
Hugo is a very strange movie set in 1930's Paris of a young boy named Hugo. He suddenly becomes orphaned, and lives in a train station, dodging the Inspector who is bent on throwing him in the orphanage. Hugo also is a young thief who by accident comes across an old man who owns a toy stand in the station by stealing from him. Who is this man? And who exactly is Hugo?
Hugo then friends up a young girl, Isabelle, who is connected to the old man. Hugo is convinced that his dead father is trying to communicate with him from the dead through a machine that his clockmaker father found in an old museum, and leaves for Hugo. Does this all sound too incredibly weird? Too much so to really explain? Well, it is.
But, go see Hugo. This is a Martin Scorsese directed movie that is an absolute feast for all of your senses. This is shot in 3-D. I know you've seen 3-D before, but this is different. This 3-D is so full of texture, there will be times you will not believe your eyes. This is wonderfully filmed, and skillfully crafted. It is also a movie that virtually anyone can see. But, the every young will not really find this very interesting. Don't put this 3-D movie in the same breath as all the others, it is different and better.
Hugo in fairness, does stumble out of the gates. The first 20 minutes or so to me had a bit to be desired. But as this story moves along, it gains momentum. And really becomes a very compelling story based part on fact and part on fiction. It's also a story that no one has really seen before, and that always helps. Great casting with Ben Kingsley, Sasha Baron Cohen, Asa Butterfield, and Chole Grace Moretz. Moretz is simply outstanding as Isabelle.
There's not much about this movie that isn't good. It does start out a bit slow, and it may be a bit too long, but none of that is a deal breaker. Hugo really is something to see, and you'll learn a bit of something too along the way.
Hugo. Well written, acted, and filmed in 3-D like no other movie to date. I'm not going all the way and saying it's the best movie of the year like some others. But it's pretty darn good!
Monday, December 5, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Muppets
I've put this one off for a while, but after hearing a bunch of really good things about The Muppets, I took it in.
I am not going into the plot line here, because that won't allure you to this movie. It's the Muppets. And it's fun. And the family can and should go. It isn't often in Hollywood these days that less is more - way more. But here it is.
The Muppets stars, well the Muppets. And funnyman Jason Segal, and lovely Amy Adams. The Muppets are just as we left them many years ago. By today's movie standards they could be a relic, a dinosaur. For of course they are puppets, operated by puppeteers that live and breathe air, and not by a computer. Voiced too, by same. And it is so refreshing to see this kind of movie making again.
This is skillfully done. Still snappy and witty all these years later. I know, there are some that will remember them as the felty friends that got on your nerves on TV, and yes, at times they still can. But this movie is fun, delightful, and a very different kind of movie experience that you and your kids can really enjoy together. This is the perfect intersection of your generation, and your children's. You will remember the Muppets from your childhood, and your kids will be thrilled to learn of them in theirs.
A long list too of cameo's will make you laugh as the grown up and they Muppets will make your kids giggle for about 80 fun minutes. And I am a story guy, and this is a great story too, told well. With some singing production numbers and plenty of parody to go around. I wish they would make more movies like this for young families.
The Muppets. Put the computer generated characters, and animation away. Simpler can be better, way better. Rated G all the way. Really, really fun.
I am not going into the plot line here, because that won't allure you to this movie. It's the Muppets. And it's fun. And the family can and should go. It isn't often in Hollywood these days that less is more - way more. But here it is.
The Muppets stars, well the Muppets. And funnyman Jason Segal, and lovely Amy Adams. The Muppets are just as we left them many years ago. By today's movie standards they could be a relic, a dinosaur. For of course they are puppets, operated by puppeteers that live and breathe air, and not by a computer. Voiced too, by same. And it is so refreshing to see this kind of movie making again.
This is skillfully done. Still snappy and witty all these years later. I know, there are some that will remember them as the felty friends that got on your nerves on TV, and yes, at times they still can. But this movie is fun, delightful, and a very different kind of movie experience that you and your kids can really enjoy together. This is the perfect intersection of your generation, and your children's. You will remember the Muppets from your childhood, and your kids will be thrilled to learn of them in theirs.
A long list too of cameo's will make you laugh as the grown up and they Muppets will make your kids giggle for about 80 fun minutes. And I am a story guy, and this is a great story too, told well. With some singing production numbers and plenty of parody to go around. I wish they would make more movies like this for young families.
The Muppets. Put the computer generated characters, and animation away. Simpler can be better, way better. Rated G all the way. Really, really fun.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - My Week With Marilyn
Every once in a while a good movie comes out that has as its calling card, a really great performance. That is the basic deal with the new My Week With Marilyn.
This is based on a true story in 1956 told from the memoirs of then 23 year old Colin Clark. Colin was a young English movie executive who was lucky enough to get his first paid gig working on a Marilyn Monroe movie, The Prince And The Showgirl. He somehow becomes a sort of assistant to Monroe at the height of her fame during this filming in England. He becomes her confidant, and friend, and he guides her through the tough time she had on this films set.
Supposedly, he documents the entire visit, and even goes so far as to say that Monroe wanted to sleep with him, skinny dip with him, and wanted him. Even though she was married at the time to famous playwright, Arthur Miller. Right up front, this story may have a hole or two, and it may raise an eyebrow or two, as it is the recollection of a star struck 23 year old normal man. It's not a deal breaker.
And the reason is simple. Michelle Williams. She is Monroe, and is absolutely fantastic. How incredibly difficult is this role? Playing Marilyn the movie star, the drug addict, the scared little girl, and the lonely love starved woman. Many times weaving between each in several scenes at the same time. Lots of actors play iconic figures on screen. But playing Monroe has an element that every single other one does not. You have to be the most beautiful woman on earth in your era. Williams is beautiful, and completely at ease with this role she was seemingly born to play. she has Monroe down pat, without being over the top. She looks amazingly like her, throughout this entire movie.
This movie positions Monroe as a deeply troubled, but gifted actor and person. And that seems consistent with all historical accounts. She is 30 years old in this movie, and it's the Marilyn we all like to remember. Iconic, captivating, amazingly alluring and the worlds biggest star at the time. Williams pulls it off perfectly in a movie that is good, but less than perfect. but, this is the runaway best performance of any actress so far this year. Although, Meryl Streep is still yet to be heard from in her portrayal of Margret Thatcher in The Iron Lady later in December.
Qualifying statement here, I am a big Marilyn Monroe fan. And I am not a real huge Michelle Williams fan. That is one of the main reasons I am so blown away with her performance here. As many good roles as she has had, this may be the one she is most remembered when all is said and done. I say, the Oscar may be hers to lose. Should be noted too, the courage it takes to play a character like this. Well done.
My Week With Marilyn. Perfect...no. But Michelle Williams is. Simply perfect.
This is based on a true story in 1956 told from the memoirs of then 23 year old Colin Clark. Colin was a young English movie executive who was lucky enough to get his first paid gig working on a Marilyn Monroe movie, The Prince And The Showgirl. He somehow becomes a sort of assistant to Monroe at the height of her fame during this filming in England. He becomes her confidant, and friend, and he guides her through the tough time she had on this films set.
Supposedly, he documents the entire visit, and even goes so far as to say that Monroe wanted to sleep with him, skinny dip with him, and wanted him. Even though she was married at the time to famous playwright, Arthur Miller. Right up front, this story may have a hole or two, and it may raise an eyebrow or two, as it is the recollection of a star struck 23 year old normal man. It's not a deal breaker.
And the reason is simple. Michelle Williams. She is Monroe, and is absolutely fantastic. How incredibly difficult is this role? Playing Marilyn the movie star, the drug addict, the scared little girl, and the lonely love starved woman. Many times weaving between each in several scenes at the same time. Lots of actors play iconic figures on screen. But playing Monroe has an element that every single other one does not. You have to be the most beautiful woman on earth in your era. Williams is beautiful, and completely at ease with this role she was seemingly born to play. she has Monroe down pat, without being over the top. She looks amazingly like her, throughout this entire movie.
This movie positions Monroe as a deeply troubled, but gifted actor and person. And that seems consistent with all historical accounts. She is 30 years old in this movie, and it's the Marilyn we all like to remember. Iconic, captivating, amazingly alluring and the worlds biggest star at the time. Williams pulls it off perfectly in a movie that is good, but less than perfect. but, this is the runaway best performance of any actress so far this year. Although, Meryl Streep is still yet to be heard from in her portrayal of Margret Thatcher in The Iron Lady later in December.
Qualifying statement here, I am a big Marilyn Monroe fan. And I am not a real huge Michelle Williams fan. That is one of the main reasons I am so blown away with her performance here. As many good roles as she has had, this may be the one she is most remembered when all is said and done. I say, the Oscar may be hers to lose. Should be noted too, the courage it takes to play a character like this. Well done.
My Week With Marilyn. Perfect...no. But Michelle Williams is. Simply perfect.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Descendants
Here come those three little words that generally are followed by a great review. "In limited release," the new George Clooney flick, The Descendants is in theaters just in time for the holiday weekend. And it is worth the wait.
The Descendants is a wonderful story of a successful father in Hawaii (Clooney). He has been in trusted with the 150 year old family inheritance and much of the sacred land in the trust is for sale. As a result, all of the relatives want their cash now. His young wife has just had a terrible boating accident and in an a irreversible coma and will be coming off life support hopefully soon. He has a 10 year old troubled daughter and a 17 year old rebellious daughter. And somehow he has to raise them, repair their relationships, deal with his wife's situation, and the family too. Oh yeah, his wife was having an affair at the time of her accident. And he didn't know.
I am a story guy. And this is a new story we don't know. I know it sounds very deep and highly emotional. and at times this is. But this is also splendidly told in a fashion that lends itself to some humor, drama and irony. This, in feel, not in story is highly reminiscent of Up In The Air from 2 years ago. This has an original story to tell, tells it, and thoroughly entertains the whole time.
This is what Clooney does best and not by a little. Star in movies. No producing, writing, directing, editorializing, or making political statements. This is simply George Clooney the movie star. And that's really what we want. This movie, although exuding a sophisticated feel, is not elitist or above ones head. As this is a departure from recent Clooney flicks, this one is better. Clooney is far more Dr. Ross from ER here and less "I'm the smartest guy in the room Clooney" of late. And it really works.
This movie has a story to tell, not a statement to make. And for me, that is Clooney at his best. Being a true movie star in a time we so badly need one. Nice supporting cast, and a wonderfully adapted Hawaiian soundtrack that sounds weird to tell you about, but really blends in expertly and gives this movie real texture.
The Descendants. This is flat out good. Fun, original, powerful and complete. Clooney has not been this good in a few years, and this is one of the years best. Well, well done!
The Descendants is a wonderful story of a successful father in Hawaii (Clooney). He has been in trusted with the 150 year old family inheritance and much of the sacred land in the trust is for sale. As a result, all of the relatives want their cash now. His young wife has just had a terrible boating accident and in an a irreversible coma and will be coming off life support hopefully soon. He has a 10 year old troubled daughter and a 17 year old rebellious daughter. And somehow he has to raise them, repair their relationships, deal with his wife's situation, and the family too. Oh yeah, his wife was having an affair at the time of her accident. And he didn't know.
I am a story guy. And this is a new story we don't know. I know it sounds very deep and highly emotional. and at times this is. But this is also splendidly told in a fashion that lends itself to some humor, drama and irony. This, in feel, not in story is highly reminiscent of Up In The Air from 2 years ago. This has an original story to tell, tells it, and thoroughly entertains the whole time.
This is what Clooney does best and not by a little. Star in movies. No producing, writing, directing, editorializing, or making political statements. This is simply George Clooney the movie star. And that's really what we want. This movie, although exuding a sophisticated feel, is not elitist or above ones head. As this is a departure from recent Clooney flicks, this one is better. Clooney is far more Dr. Ross from ER here and less "I'm the smartest guy in the room Clooney" of late. And it really works.
This movie has a story to tell, not a statement to make. And for me, that is Clooney at his best. Being a true movie star in a time we so badly need one. Nice supporting cast, and a wonderfully adapted Hawaiian soundtrack that sounds weird to tell you about, but really blends in expertly and gives this movie real texture.
The Descendants. This is flat out good. Fun, original, powerful and complete. Clooney has not been this good in a few years, and this is one of the years best. Well, well done!
Friday, November 18, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1
Here we go again. The Twilight series continues and this time it's Breaking Dawn Part 1. Without question, to be a major hit at the movies this weekend.
These are the hardest movies to really review. The fans of this series love this movie 6 months before it ever hits the theaters. The fans are rabid, and there is virtually nothing the movie makers can do to mess this up. So how do you take an honest look at a movie that not many are willing to look at honestly? The quandary here is simple. To many this movie will be "the most amazing movie ever!" And to others this movie will look absolutely ridiculous.
In Breaking Dawn, the wolves and the vampires are still for some reason fighting over the incredibly boring Bella. Team Edward will be glad to know that Bella marries Edward, and they go to Rio on their honeymoon. (Well of course they did). She then becomes pregnant by Edward after a series of "awww" honeymoon scenes. The pregnancy with a human and a vampire does not go well, and so they return to the Cullen mansion in Seattle, where Bella does the next logical thing. The newly married pregnant woman calls Jacob. The wolf she rejected to marry Edward. They all get together to help Bella through her pregnancy troubles. And all involved are fine with this. Will Bella survive this ordeal?
Looking at this movie from the outside, it is true that this series has grown with the core of its fan base. But for the new and very young girls coming on board, this installment of the series is fairly intense. This movie deals with unplanned pregnancy, and the decision to terminate, or not terminate such. The overall feel to this is far more real rather than the super fantasy of the first few. But at the same time, the whole vampires fighting wolves thing is starting to look silly, and is frankly getting tired. Parents may want to monitor very young fans.
This series seems to be mired down in a creative bog. And at the same time, paint a picture that love obsession for young people is cool and really has no consequences. In this series, no one has any other interests whatsoever. They don't have jobs, or responsibilities, and all they have to do is obsess over each other. I know it's a fantasy, but I'm not 13 and forming my views on the world, love and relationships.
The performances are what they are. They do keep these characters remarkably consistent from flick to flick. Kristin Stewart (Bella) is still boring us to tears, and praying this series ends no time soon. This has always been the troubling thing about this entire story. Bella is so completely boring, one dimensional, and uninteresting, it's amazing anyone would be interested in her. I know, she's the every girl, but she is far more Jane Plain than Jane Plain would ever be. Jane Plain looks like a party animal next to Bella Swan.
And Robert Pattinson (Edward) is praying this does end soon, because he is a real interesting actor, who has been very good in other projects way beyond this. When this ends, he may be poised to take off as one of Hollywood's premiere leading men.
Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1. No matter what anyone says or feels about this movie, it is destined to maybe bring in 100 million or so in its opening. But keeping everything in proper perspective, at 10 bucks a ticket that means around 10 million people will go to see it this weekend. Which means about 320 million people in this country will not.
Just sayin'.
These are the hardest movies to really review. The fans of this series love this movie 6 months before it ever hits the theaters. The fans are rabid, and there is virtually nothing the movie makers can do to mess this up. So how do you take an honest look at a movie that not many are willing to look at honestly? The quandary here is simple. To many this movie will be "the most amazing movie ever!" And to others this movie will look absolutely ridiculous.
In Breaking Dawn, the wolves and the vampires are still for some reason fighting over the incredibly boring Bella. Team Edward will be glad to know that Bella marries Edward, and they go to Rio on their honeymoon. (Well of course they did). She then becomes pregnant by Edward after a series of "awww" honeymoon scenes. The pregnancy with a human and a vampire does not go well, and so they return to the Cullen mansion in Seattle, where Bella does the next logical thing. The newly married pregnant woman calls Jacob. The wolf she rejected to marry Edward. They all get together to help Bella through her pregnancy troubles. And all involved are fine with this. Will Bella survive this ordeal?
Looking at this movie from the outside, it is true that this series has grown with the core of its fan base. But for the new and very young girls coming on board, this installment of the series is fairly intense. This movie deals with unplanned pregnancy, and the decision to terminate, or not terminate such. The overall feel to this is far more real rather than the super fantasy of the first few. But at the same time, the whole vampires fighting wolves thing is starting to look silly, and is frankly getting tired. Parents may want to monitor very young fans.
This series seems to be mired down in a creative bog. And at the same time, paint a picture that love obsession for young people is cool and really has no consequences. In this series, no one has any other interests whatsoever. They don't have jobs, or responsibilities, and all they have to do is obsess over each other. I know it's a fantasy, but I'm not 13 and forming my views on the world, love and relationships.
The performances are what they are. They do keep these characters remarkably consistent from flick to flick. Kristin Stewart (Bella) is still boring us to tears, and praying this series ends no time soon. This has always been the troubling thing about this entire story. Bella is so completely boring, one dimensional, and uninteresting, it's amazing anyone would be interested in her. I know, she's the every girl, but she is far more Jane Plain than Jane Plain would ever be. Jane Plain looks like a party animal next to Bella Swan.
And Robert Pattinson (Edward) is praying this does end soon, because he is a real interesting actor, who has been very good in other projects way beyond this. When this ends, he may be poised to take off as one of Hollywood's premiere leading men.
Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1. No matter what anyone says or feels about this movie, it is destined to maybe bring in 100 million or so in its opening. But keeping everything in proper perspective, at 10 bucks a ticket that means around 10 million people will go to see it this weekend. Which means about 320 million people in this country will not.
Just sayin'.
Monday, November 14, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Jack And Jill
Jack And Jill is going to be a big hit. The theaters will fill, and a bunch of people are going to laugh and laugh. But for the life of me, I will not understand why.
Jack And Jill is the new Adam Sandler movie in which he plays identical twins, where we have to watch him parade around in drag for most of the movie. And performing without question the worst character voice I have ever heard. It's the story of Jack who is a TV commercial producer in Hollywood. His twin sister Jill comes to visit, and of course she is a real character that generally makes everyone uncomfortable she comes in contact with. She is supposed to be funny, but she's not.
Sandler is so irritating in this movie it almost baffles the mind. I get it, Jill is supposed to be lots of things, including irritating, but this is simply over the top. There is so much terrible dialogue, physical comedy, bad acting, horrible editing, and juvenile humor to go around. This movie will resonate with some younger movie goers, but not all. And this will miss with most, because it is not funny.
Granted, there are a few laughs in this movie, and that's OK. But I emphasize - a few. For the most part this is simply horrible. The laughing I heard today sounded forced. Like this is where you were supposed to laugh. But it wasn't me. I was checking my cell phone screen seeing if it was time to go home.
There are tons, and I mean tons of cameo's in this movie too. A virtual who's who of Hollywood lined up for their few seconds on screen. Some of this works, but most is ho-hum. Most namely, Al Pacino. Pacino plays himself...actually a parody of himself, and at times is funny. But there are a few things he does in this movie, where I could hardly believe my eyes. Sinking to such a low point. Stunning. Someone should have reminded him he was Al Pacino. In fairness in the last five minutes of this movie he is pretty funny. But before that? Oh, boy!
Being more than honest here, this is simply a money printing press movie. Of course with it being Sandler there is a built in audience that will go no matter what he does, and doesn't he know it. Also, this is product placement central. There is so much product placement mentions, and logo's in this movie, it's shameless. Not only is this poorly written and acted even worse, it is unapologetic in it's motive to put advertisers on screen and think we won't notice.
Also for some reason I can't figure out, Tom Cruise's wife Katie Holmes decided to come along on this ill-conceived ride, as did Johnny Depp in a cameo, and a ton more. I get it. Sandler is rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams, and maybe some of these folks were just too tempted by the potential pay day. But seriously, it's not worth it.
Jack And Jill. Quite possible one of the most irritating movies I have ever seen. A laugh or two, can't erase 2 hours of teeth and nails scraping across a blackboard, and watching Sandler wearing a dress. Just putrid!
Jack And Jill is the new Adam Sandler movie in which he plays identical twins, where we have to watch him parade around in drag for most of the movie. And performing without question the worst character voice I have ever heard. It's the story of Jack who is a TV commercial producer in Hollywood. His twin sister Jill comes to visit, and of course she is a real character that generally makes everyone uncomfortable she comes in contact with. She is supposed to be funny, but she's not.
Sandler is so irritating in this movie it almost baffles the mind. I get it, Jill is supposed to be lots of things, including irritating, but this is simply over the top. There is so much terrible dialogue, physical comedy, bad acting, horrible editing, and juvenile humor to go around. This movie will resonate with some younger movie goers, but not all. And this will miss with most, because it is not funny.
Granted, there are a few laughs in this movie, and that's OK. But I emphasize - a few. For the most part this is simply horrible. The laughing I heard today sounded forced. Like this is where you were supposed to laugh. But it wasn't me. I was checking my cell phone screen seeing if it was time to go home.
There are tons, and I mean tons of cameo's in this movie too. A virtual who's who of Hollywood lined up for their few seconds on screen. Some of this works, but most is ho-hum. Most namely, Al Pacino. Pacino plays himself...actually a parody of himself, and at times is funny. But there are a few things he does in this movie, where I could hardly believe my eyes. Sinking to such a low point. Stunning. Someone should have reminded him he was Al Pacino. In fairness in the last five minutes of this movie he is pretty funny. But before that? Oh, boy!
Being more than honest here, this is simply a money printing press movie. Of course with it being Sandler there is a built in audience that will go no matter what he does, and doesn't he know it. Also, this is product placement central. There is so much product placement mentions, and logo's in this movie, it's shameless. Not only is this poorly written and acted even worse, it is unapologetic in it's motive to put advertisers on screen and think we won't notice.
Also for some reason I can't figure out, Tom Cruise's wife Katie Holmes decided to come along on this ill-conceived ride, as did Johnny Depp in a cameo, and a ton more. I get it. Sandler is rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams, and maybe some of these folks were just too tempted by the potential pay day. But seriously, it's not worth it.
Jack And Jill. Quite possible one of the most irritating movies I have ever seen. A laugh or two, can't erase 2 hours of teeth and nails scraping across a blackboard, and watching Sandler wearing a dress. Just putrid!
Friday, November 11, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - J. Edgar
Here come the big time movies for the end of the year. This week it's the Clint Eastwood directed J. Edgar.
J. Edgar stars Leonardo Dicaprio as the iconic 48 year Director of the FBI J. Edgar Hoover. It tells his personal and professional story over the entire term of his reign as the nations most powerful law enforcement officer. It is told in flashback form, that at times seems a bit disjointed, and choppy.
To say the the actual Hoover was a complicated man would be an understatement. In this piece, he is portrayed as a determined man, bent on crushing enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic. He is also portrayed as a man that may have had a difficult time identifying exactly who was the enemy. Was he paranoid? Was he mentally ill? Eastwood seems to give him his due as a capable man who successfully built the FBI from the ground up. But also as man on mission to grab as much power along the way was possible.
J. Edgar also targets his personal life. From his highly unusual relationship with his mother, to his sexual preference, and his absolute fear and lack of knowledge of how to communicate with women. Overall, it is an eye-opening view into the life of one of the most powerful men that has even been a position of power in United States history.
Decaprio is well cast in this most demanding role. As his performance has to take our character from the time he was about 20, till his death. Makeup and costuming are terrific, possibly Oscar worthy on both counts. This movie has the typical Eastwood feel. Light and well placed music, great camera angles, and somehow he always gets the very best out of all of his actors. That is what Eastwood does best.
Things that may hold this back from being super well received by the public is simple. It is a bit long, at two hours and twenty minutes. It is complicated at times, and you need to have at least some knowledge of history to really understand all that is transpiring. Also, for many there is a lack of action, and long periods of music free scenes. In short for some, there just may not be enough going on.
But this is well written, and well acted. And as is true with most Eastwood picks, he finds stories that you don't know, and tells ones that are worth telling. That is true here for the most part. But I'm not so sure that Hoovers story may not be better told in a Ken Burns documentary, rather than a dramatic movie. There is a lot of story here, and maybe not enough time to tell it perfectly. Also be warned, this is not a glorification of Hoover, but adapted from a story that attempts to tell the entire story of Hoover the man. Not just the law man.
J. Edgar. I think this will fall into the category of "critically acclaimed" and I'm fine with that. I think box office gold is not in the offing here. Not a bad movie, but not Eastwood's best.
J. Edgar stars Leonardo Dicaprio as the iconic 48 year Director of the FBI J. Edgar Hoover. It tells his personal and professional story over the entire term of his reign as the nations most powerful law enforcement officer. It is told in flashback form, that at times seems a bit disjointed, and choppy.
To say the the actual Hoover was a complicated man would be an understatement. In this piece, he is portrayed as a determined man, bent on crushing enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic. He is also portrayed as a man that may have had a difficult time identifying exactly who was the enemy. Was he paranoid? Was he mentally ill? Eastwood seems to give him his due as a capable man who successfully built the FBI from the ground up. But also as man on mission to grab as much power along the way was possible.
J. Edgar also targets his personal life. From his highly unusual relationship with his mother, to his sexual preference, and his absolute fear and lack of knowledge of how to communicate with women. Overall, it is an eye-opening view into the life of one of the most powerful men that has even been a position of power in United States history.
Decaprio is well cast in this most demanding role. As his performance has to take our character from the time he was about 20, till his death. Makeup and costuming are terrific, possibly Oscar worthy on both counts. This movie has the typical Eastwood feel. Light and well placed music, great camera angles, and somehow he always gets the very best out of all of his actors. That is what Eastwood does best.
Things that may hold this back from being super well received by the public is simple. It is a bit long, at two hours and twenty minutes. It is complicated at times, and you need to have at least some knowledge of history to really understand all that is transpiring. Also, for many there is a lack of action, and long periods of music free scenes. In short for some, there just may not be enough going on.
But this is well written, and well acted. And as is true with most Eastwood picks, he finds stories that you don't know, and tells ones that are worth telling. That is true here for the most part. But I'm not so sure that Hoovers story may not be better told in a Ken Burns documentary, rather than a dramatic movie. There is a lot of story here, and maybe not enough time to tell it perfectly. Also be warned, this is not a glorification of Hoover, but adapted from a story that attempts to tell the entire story of Hoover the man. Not just the law man.
J. Edgar. I think this will fall into the category of "critically acclaimed" and I'm fine with that. I think box office gold is not in the offing here. Not a bad movie, but not Eastwood's best.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Tower Hiest
I've felt it. I've seen, it and I've said it. "Seen one Ben Stiller movie and you've seen them all." And for the most part that is right. But I have to admit, Tower Heist is not typical Ben Stiller at all.
Has someone finally gotten through to that thick, and exceedingly rich skull of his, that his typical bumbling, stammering, tasteless self act has grown tired and worn out? Seems so. In Tower Heist, Stiller has reinvented himself, and has made a movie that's not perfect by any means, but way better than you might have thought.
TH is ripped right out of the headlines. It's a comedy that is clearly inspired by Wall Street rip-off artist Bernie Madoff. Stiller is Josh. He is the building manager of this gigantic apartment tower in New York City. The star resident is Mr. Shaw (Alan Alda). Shaw is a Wall Street tycoon who rips off everyone's money in the building along with thousands of other people in a swindling scheme. So, after the FBI arrests Shaw, Josh and his band of merry men decide to get their money back one way or another from Shaw.
It's an action comedy that also stars Eddie Murphy, Matthew Broderick, and a nice supporting cast overall. Some of this really works and some really does not. There are moments that are funny, and over all this movie has a nice feel to it. Stiller has grown up. At least for a little while. He doesn't go all "Ben Stiller" on us with that old routine. Josh is a real guy, and they actually develop a nice character here. This is such an improvement, it is so much more watchable. Kudos.
Murphy tough, is still the same guy he always is. There is nothing new about Eddie Murphy all these years later, but he's in a supporting role, and we can look past it. Broderick is horribly miscast as in his role as a Wall Street banker that has lost it all. But serious kudos to Tea Leoni. She plays FBI agent Claire, who is in charge of the case, and is the movies other nice surprise. She should have been doing comedy all along. She has made some horrific role choices before in some really terrible movies, but not here. In a scene where she has way to much to drink with Josh, Leoni completely steals the show, and give us the biggest laughs of the movie by far. She is absolutely hilarious in that scene.
Yeah, there are a few holes in this story, and not all of this is told well, but TH is over all pretty good. It's a fun 90 minutes or so without being offensive, crude, or selling out to a ton of typical contemporary comedy stunts. It is more grown up and moves along nicely. Good to see some growth too in some or our stars.
Tower Heist. This is nothing except a fun time.
Has someone finally gotten through to that thick, and exceedingly rich skull of his, that his typical bumbling, stammering, tasteless self act has grown tired and worn out? Seems so. In Tower Heist, Stiller has reinvented himself, and has made a movie that's not perfect by any means, but way better than you might have thought.
TH is ripped right out of the headlines. It's a comedy that is clearly inspired by Wall Street rip-off artist Bernie Madoff. Stiller is Josh. He is the building manager of this gigantic apartment tower in New York City. The star resident is Mr. Shaw (Alan Alda). Shaw is a Wall Street tycoon who rips off everyone's money in the building along with thousands of other people in a swindling scheme. So, after the FBI arrests Shaw, Josh and his band of merry men decide to get their money back one way or another from Shaw.
It's an action comedy that also stars Eddie Murphy, Matthew Broderick, and a nice supporting cast overall. Some of this really works and some really does not. There are moments that are funny, and over all this movie has a nice feel to it. Stiller has grown up. At least for a little while. He doesn't go all "Ben Stiller" on us with that old routine. Josh is a real guy, and they actually develop a nice character here. This is such an improvement, it is so much more watchable. Kudos.
Murphy tough, is still the same guy he always is. There is nothing new about Eddie Murphy all these years later, but he's in a supporting role, and we can look past it. Broderick is horribly miscast as in his role as a Wall Street banker that has lost it all. But serious kudos to Tea Leoni. She plays FBI agent Claire, who is in charge of the case, and is the movies other nice surprise. She should have been doing comedy all along. She has made some horrific role choices before in some really terrible movies, but not here. In a scene where she has way to much to drink with Josh, Leoni completely steals the show, and give us the biggest laughs of the movie by far. She is absolutely hilarious in that scene.
Yeah, there are a few holes in this story, and not all of this is told well, but TH is over all pretty good. It's a fun 90 minutes or so without being offensive, crude, or selling out to a ton of typical contemporary comedy stunts. It is more grown up and moves along nicely. Good to see some growth too in some or our stars.
Tower Heist. This is nothing except a fun time.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Anonymous
In very limited release is this weeks Anonymous. It has long been speculated that William Shakespeare did not write all those classic plays, poets and sonnets. But actually another man, or a series of other men. But the political climate of the day demanded another be credited.
Well in this movie, they put out a strong case that the actual writer of all of the above was actually Edward De Vere, who at the time was the Earl of Oxford. They go so far as to paint the actual Shakespeare as a lying, cheating, actor and illiterate who came upon the title of being great by accident, and skulduggery. De Vere confides in another playwright of the era, Ben Johnson who becomes a messenger of sorts. Sort of taking credit for De Vere's plays in the late 1500's. Shakespeare then starts taking credit for Johnson's work, which is actually De Vere's. It sounds complicated, and at times it is.
Anonymous looks great. Wonderful sets depict the era magnificently, and the costuming is terrific too. Told in flashback form, at times it can be hard to follow, but as time goes on more and more becomes clear to it's credit. This movie does have a slow spot or two, but pacing gets better as time rolls on.
Rhys Ifans is great as De Vere, and remember the name Sebastian Armesto. He is fantastic as Johnson. He delivers one of the best, if not the best supporting performance of the year. His scenes near the end of this movie are the kind that win you Oscars at years end. He dominates this movie in the scenes where he is present.
Anonymous, with it's subject matter and movie making style will not find a big audience. But this might be the movie that will be shown more after the awards shows announce their nominations later this season. Very similar to The Kings Speech last year. As more people became aware of it, the better known it became. Anonymous certainly in the same regard will be in the awards conversation. It's the kind of movie Hollywood loves to pat itself on its own back over. An artsy movie-about art. But don't construe that as sarcasm. Anonymous very good.
Anonymous. If you are a movie goer it would be worth the drive to see this. If not, this will be the best movie this year that nobody sees.
Well in this movie, they put out a strong case that the actual writer of all of the above was actually Edward De Vere, who at the time was the Earl of Oxford. They go so far as to paint the actual Shakespeare as a lying, cheating, actor and illiterate who came upon the title of being great by accident, and skulduggery. De Vere confides in another playwright of the era, Ben Johnson who becomes a messenger of sorts. Sort of taking credit for De Vere's plays in the late 1500's. Shakespeare then starts taking credit for Johnson's work, which is actually De Vere's. It sounds complicated, and at times it is.
Anonymous looks great. Wonderful sets depict the era magnificently, and the costuming is terrific too. Told in flashback form, at times it can be hard to follow, but as time goes on more and more becomes clear to it's credit. This movie does have a slow spot or two, but pacing gets better as time rolls on.
Rhys Ifans is great as De Vere, and remember the name Sebastian Armesto. He is fantastic as Johnson. He delivers one of the best, if not the best supporting performance of the year. His scenes near the end of this movie are the kind that win you Oscars at years end. He dominates this movie in the scenes where he is present.
Anonymous, with it's subject matter and movie making style will not find a big audience. But this might be the movie that will be shown more after the awards shows announce their nominations later this season. Very similar to The Kings Speech last year. As more people became aware of it, the better known it became. Anonymous certainly in the same regard will be in the awards conversation. It's the kind of movie Hollywood loves to pat itself on its own back over. An artsy movie-about art. But don't construe that as sarcasm. Anonymous very good.
Anonymous. If you are a movie goer it would be worth the drive to see this. If not, this will be the best movie this year that nobody sees.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Puss In Boots
They make entirely too many animated movies. But every once in a while a gem pops up, and that's Puss In Boots that is out this week.
I love Dreamworks Animation. The are so my favorite. All the way back to Balto, I really like the way they do animated movies. As Pixar, and Disney has their feel, so does Dreamworks, and it just feels better. They have such a nice grown up movie feel, without forgetting about the kids. This movie is fantastic for so many reasons.
First the animation is great, but everyone does good animation. The story is just really fun, and is told in such a charming way, it's hard to resist. It's the story of course of Puss In Boots, a sword toting, boots wearing cat in a cavalier hat from Spain. Is he a hero, or a villain? He is incredibly voiced by Antonio Bandaras. This may be Bandaras' best performance ever. Simply fantastic. Puss is trying to find the Golden Goose who lays the golden eggs just like in the fable with the help of Kitty Softpaws (Selma Hayak) and Humpty Dumpty (Zach Galifianakis). And there are pitfalls along the way. But the story will tell itself when you go, and you should.
This movie is so well done, charming, lovely and flat out fun, more movies should be this way. Wonderfully written for kids and adults alike. Plenty of action, and fun. Wonderful character development, snappy dialogue, and enough zest to go around two or three time. This movie has one imaginative scene after another, with Bandaras leading the way.
This movie too, is blessed with one of the best musical soundtracks in years. A big, dramatic Spanish inspired salsa-samba orchestral score that is simply breathtaking. This is a great music to expose youngsters to, as many may never hear such incredible music in their I-pod or on their computer. What a great experience to give a young person, in addition to a fun time at the movies. If this soundtrack isn't nominated for an Oscar, they should stop handing out the award. Awesome. Enhances this movie from start to finish. Stay and watch the closing credits, and you'll get a sense of how wonderful this music really is.
Puss In Boots is great in very way. This is perfect for any viewer, and generation. The bar has been raised in technique, execution, and sophistication for this kind of movie. See it once, then see it again.
This is the new benchmark of animated movies.
I love Dreamworks Animation. The are so my favorite. All the way back to Balto, I really like the way they do animated movies. As Pixar, and Disney has their feel, so does Dreamworks, and it just feels better. They have such a nice grown up movie feel, without forgetting about the kids. This movie is fantastic for so many reasons.
First the animation is great, but everyone does good animation. The story is just really fun, and is told in such a charming way, it's hard to resist. It's the story of course of Puss In Boots, a sword toting, boots wearing cat in a cavalier hat from Spain. Is he a hero, or a villain? He is incredibly voiced by Antonio Bandaras. This may be Bandaras' best performance ever. Simply fantastic. Puss is trying to find the Golden Goose who lays the golden eggs just like in the fable with the help of Kitty Softpaws (Selma Hayak) and Humpty Dumpty (Zach Galifianakis). And there are pitfalls along the way. But the story will tell itself when you go, and you should.
This movie is so well done, charming, lovely and flat out fun, more movies should be this way. Wonderfully written for kids and adults alike. Plenty of action, and fun. Wonderful character development, snappy dialogue, and enough zest to go around two or three time. This movie has one imaginative scene after another, with Bandaras leading the way.
This movie too, is blessed with one of the best musical soundtracks in years. A big, dramatic Spanish inspired salsa-samba orchestral score that is simply breathtaking. This is a great music to expose youngsters to, as many may never hear such incredible music in their I-pod or on their computer. What a great experience to give a young person, in addition to a fun time at the movies. If this soundtrack isn't nominated for an Oscar, they should stop handing out the award. Awesome. Enhances this movie from start to finish. Stay and watch the closing credits, and you'll get a sense of how wonderful this music really is.
Puss In Boots is great in very way. This is perfect for any viewer, and generation. The bar has been raised in technique, execution, and sophistication for this kind of movie. See it once, then see it again.
This is the new benchmark of animated movies.
Monday, October 31, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - In Time
It's yet another look into the future at the movies and it's not a happy one. Justin Timberlake and Olivia Wilde star in In Time.
In this movie, humans are engineered to only live 25 years, plus one more. After 25 years, there's a clock on your left arm that starts running down to zero. If it reaches zero, you die. But by essentially shaking hands, you can exchange time with others. Time is now the new currency. It's how you are paid, and what you spend to survive. The key to survival is not to let your time expire. So you do what you gotta do to survive. You don't physically age one day past 25, but you can live way past that if you are savvy enough to acquire time and spend it wisely, even though you look 25.
Oh course, there are some who are stealing time. Hoarding it, and those who are in charge of it. This is supposed to be the dramatic part of this movie. But I have to say one thing right now. Make it stop! Please make this whole thing stop! My gosh man, are movies going to get any worse?
I'm not going to indict Timberlake, or Wilde. They do what they do best. Timberlake makes young women take notice, and Wilde looks great here for two hours running, toting guns, and being an action star all while wearing a short cocktail dress. But those are the highlights. This is just silly. Plain and simple - silly. It makes an attempt at a social commentary, and class warfare, but in the end, In Time says nothing of any worth.
This may be some of the worst acting and writing we've seen in a while. The script is putrid, and the movie makers vision of the far distant future is laughable. In what might be a couple hundred years in the future, cars somehow look like custom Dodge cars and trucks from the 1960's and 70's. Plus, the rest of this looks equally as silly. I'm guessing after spending on Timberlake and Wilde, there was not enough dough lefty of the rest of the picture.
In Time. There was no reason to actually make this movie. Hard core Timberlake fans may love this due to lack of perspective. But this is no better than a TNT weekend movie in 3 years.
In this movie, humans are engineered to only live 25 years, plus one more. After 25 years, there's a clock on your left arm that starts running down to zero. If it reaches zero, you die. But by essentially shaking hands, you can exchange time with others. Time is now the new currency. It's how you are paid, and what you spend to survive. The key to survival is not to let your time expire. So you do what you gotta do to survive. You don't physically age one day past 25, but you can live way past that if you are savvy enough to acquire time and spend it wisely, even though you look 25.
Oh course, there are some who are stealing time. Hoarding it, and those who are in charge of it. This is supposed to be the dramatic part of this movie. But I have to say one thing right now. Make it stop! Please make this whole thing stop! My gosh man, are movies going to get any worse?
I'm not going to indict Timberlake, or Wilde. They do what they do best. Timberlake makes young women take notice, and Wilde looks great here for two hours running, toting guns, and being an action star all while wearing a short cocktail dress. But those are the highlights. This is just silly. Plain and simple - silly. It makes an attempt at a social commentary, and class warfare, but in the end, In Time says nothing of any worth.
This may be some of the worst acting and writing we've seen in a while. The script is putrid, and the movie makers vision of the far distant future is laughable. In what might be a couple hundred years in the future, cars somehow look like custom Dodge cars and trucks from the 1960's and 70's. Plus, the rest of this looks equally as silly. I'm guessing after spending on Timberlake and Wilde, there was not enough dough lefty of the rest of the picture.
In Time. There was no reason to actually make this movie. Hard core Timberlake fans may love this due to lack of perspective. But this is no better than a TNT weekend movie in 3 years.
Friday, October 28, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Rum Diary
No surprise here. Johnny Depp stars again in a very strange, off the beaten path movie, The Rum Diary. Up front, this is not a movie that many young Depp fans are going to be impressed with. This is really grown up movie.
TRD takes place in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1960. Depp is Paul. Paul is a young writer that lands a job at San Juan's only newspaper. There he meets a bunch of very strange fellow writers, and co-workers at the paper, all from America too. They pretty much spend all of their time drinking entirely too much high powered rum and doing all kinds of recreational drugs, and stagger around the island aimlessly.
Somehow this band of drunks ends up spending time with some of the most vile people and some of the most successful people on the island. Paul even falls in with a bunch of crooks, bent on destroying the Caribbean beauty by developing beautiful, virgin islands with hotels and casinos. After all that goes wrong Paul decides to expose these criminals in the struggling paper, but will he get the chance?
Right now you are saying, "What kind of movie is this!?" And that's valid. This movie is very complicated to explain. But then again, it's a Depp movie. Casual movie goers may actually hate this movie. Serious movie goers may find some charm, and humor. There are some very quirky, funny scenes. But much of this will go unexplained to many, and some will feel like this is a waste of time. I am somewhere in between, but leaning towards a waste of time.
I did laugh out loud a few times, and I rather enjoyed the fantastic retro - Caribbean musical soundtrack. This did have the feel of a movie from the 1960's at times, and that was cool. Was also treated to one of the great supporting performances of the year in Michael Rispoli, who was splendid as Sala, Paul's good friend. He was great. But I don't think he can save this.
Depp again show great versatility. Depp can pull off the Pirates series for young fans and families, and he can make the formula flicks occasionally too to pay the bills. He is terrific in his animated performances like Rango, and still find time to be really "out there" like this one. He truly is gifted, and attacks all roles head on.
This is going to be just way too far out there for many. A story that is strange, and at times seemingly not connected. And in the end, it just seems to not really go anywhere worth going. But there are some giggles along the way.
The Rum Diary. Certainly not one of my favorites. But I've certainly spent worse afternoons.
TRD takes place in San Juan, Puerto Rico in 1960. Depp is Paul. Paul is a young writer that lands a job at San Juan's only newspaper. There he meets a bunch of very strange fellow writers, and co-workers at the paper, all from America too. They pretty much spend all of their time drinking entirely too much high powered rum and doing all kinds of recreational drugs, and stagger around the island aimlessly.
Somehow this band of drunks ends up spending time with some of the most vile people and some of the most successful people on the island. Paul even falls in with a bunch of crooks, bent on destroying the Caribbean beauty by developing beautiful, virgin islands with hotels and casinos. After all that goes wrong Paul decides to expose these criminals in the struggling paper, but will he get the chance?
Right now you are saying, "What kind of movie is this!?" And that's valid. This movie is very complicated to explain. But then again, it's a Depp movie. Casual movie goers may actually hate this movie. Serious movie goers may find some charm, and humor. There are some very quirky, funny scenes. But much of this will go unexplained to many, and some will feel like this is a waste of time. I am somewhere in between, but leaning towards a waste of time.
I did laugh out loud a few times, and I rather enjoyed the fantastic retro - Caribbean musical soundtrack. This did have the feel of a movie from the 1960's at times, and that was cool. Was also treated to one of the great supporting performances of the year in Michael Rispoli, who was splendid as Sala, Paul's good friend. He was great. But I don't think he can save this.
Depp again show great versatility. Depp can pull off the Pirates series for young fans and families, and he can make the formula flicks occasionally too to pay the bills. He is terrific in his animated performances like Rango, and still find time to be really "out there" like this one. He truly is gifted, and attacks all roles head on.
This is going to be just way too far out there for many. A story that is strange, and at times seemingly not connected. And in the end, it just seems to not really go anywhere worth going. But there are some giggles along the way.
The Rum Diary. Certainly not one of my favorites. But I've certainly spent worse afternoons.
Monday, October 24, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Johnny English Reborn
You know, Rowan Atkinson can be a funny man. He has a very distinct style that in the right setting can be pretty darn funny. His new movie, Johnny English Reborn may not be quite that setting.
JER is Atkinson's attempt at lampooning the "secret agent" genre. It is a spoof on British intelligence, James Bond and even a bit of Austin Powers. There in lies the trouble. How many spoofs of Bond are we going to have? And didn't the Austin Powers flicks kind of make the point? But in fairness, JER is skewing much older in it's appeal than Powers. The humor is simple, not offensive and pretty tame overall.
What this is, is a series of scene gags where Atkinson can show how funny he still is, an in some scenes... isn't. He plays Johnny English, a bumbling British agent who can't do a thing right, but somehow always gets the job done. I have always thought his understated humor, and fantastic facial expressions have always been his calling card. And they are here too. But one thing else has always dogged me about him. He is a much better side dish than main entree. The whole act, although funny at times, has a hard time carrying an entire movie.
But, in his defense, we all need movies to go to,. And for an older audience, it is getting tougher and tougher to go to a comedy and not be alarmed and offended at the new comedies that are out there. There is a whole new way of making comedies that some simply do not understand. There is a huge audience out there that thinks Hollywood has left them to rot by the box office by targeting every comedy at a 22 year old young adult. Let's face it, that's not everyone's comedy. This is a throwback to a simpler and purer comedy. And in moments, Atkinson is funny.
Johnny English Reborn. This is not going to be anyone's favorite movie, but it's out there for a laugh or two.
JER is Atkinson's attempt at lampooning the "secret agent" genre. It is a spoof on British intelligence, James Bond and even a bit of Austin Powers. There in lies the trouble. How many spoofs of Bond are we going to have? And didn't the Austin Powers flicks kind of make the point? But in fairness, JER is skewing much older in it's appeal than Powers. The humor is simple, not offensive and pretty tame overall.
What this is, is a series of scene gags where Atkinson can show how funny he still is, an in some scenes... isn't. He plays Johnny English, a bumbling British agent who can't do a thing right, but somehow always gets the job done. I have always thought his understated humor, and fantastic facial expressions have always been his calling card. And they are here too. But one thing else has always dogged me about him. He is a much better side dish than main entree. The whole act, although funny at times, has a hard time carrying an entire movie.
But, in his defense, we all need movies to go to,. And for an older audience, it is getting tougher and tougher to go to a comedy and not be alarmed and offended at the new comedies that are out there. There is a whole new way of making comedies that some simply do not understand. There is a huge audience out there that thinks Hollywood has left them to rot by the box office by targeting every comedy at a 22 year old young adult. Let's face it, that's not everyone's comedy. This is a throwback to a simpler and purer comedy. And in moments, Atkinson is funny.
Johnny English Reborn. This is not going to be anyone's favorite movie, but it's out there for a laugh or two.
Friday, October 21, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Paranormal Activity 3
OK, this is going to be short and sweet. There is yet another Paranormal Activity movie out this week just in time for Halloween. This is number three, and that's two too many.
I had a ton of respect for the original PA. It was filmed in the makers condo for about 15 grand, and it made hundreds of millions. It was really cool movie making, the whole point of view camera angles and it was a bit compelling. Asking the question, what really goes on in your house when you are sleeping? Pretty interesting. Good idea, executed very well, and wildly successful.
PA 2 was decent. Not as compelling, but with a few scarier scenes. But this? Junk! Just in case you have not seen enough middle of the night videotaping of sleeping people. Because that's what we have here. They keep trying to freshen up this whole project, all the while these makers should be making arrangements for a new idea. But wait. That's not the way we roll these days. We just beat a good idea to death in Hollywood, until we ruin the whole concept of the original good idea.
OK, there's a jolt or two, and there is a scene or two that is relatively new, and interesting. But moreover, it's the same old thing just happening to new people. I think even hard core PA fans would prefer something - ANYTHING except filming sleeping people. And don't believe the TV spots either. Theater audiences are not writhing around in fear during this flick. If they are somewhere, and that is actual, I would suggest a good "Man Up" session, or have their mommy's tuck them into bed and read them a story.
Paranormal Activity 3. It's time to move on!
I had a ton of respect for the original PA. It was filmed in the makers condo for about 15 grand, and it made hundreds of millions. It was really cool movie making, the whole point of view camera angles and it was a bit compelling. Asking the question, what really goes on in your house when you are sleeping? Pretty interesting. Good idea, executed very well, and wildly successful.
PA 2 was decent. Not as compelling, but with a few scarier scenes. But this? Junk! Just in case you have not seen enough middle of the night videotaping of sleeping people. Because that's what we have here. They keep trying to freshen up this whole project, all the while these makers should be making arrangements for a new idea. But wait. That's not the way we roll these days. We just beat a good idea to death in Hollywood, until we ruin the whole concept of the original good idea.
OK, there's a jolt or two, and there is a scene or two that is relatively new, and interesting. But moreover, it's the same old thing just happening to new people. I think even hard core PA fans would prefer something - ANYTHING except filming sleeping people. And don't believe the TV spots either. Theater audiences are not writhing around in fear during this flick. If they are somewhere, and that is actual, I would suggest a good "Man Up" session, or have their mommy's tuck them into bed and read them a story.
Paranormal Activity 3. It's time to move on!
MOVIE REVIEW - Footloose
It's thirty years later and there's a whole new generation or two of people that have never seen the original Footloose. So they decided to make a new version that will "wow" a younger crowd. You have to admit, the original does look a bit dated in about every regard. So the idea seems sound.
But it's really not. Footloose 2011 still has the same basic problem that the original has. It simply has no relevance whatsoever. Maybe even more so now because to the state of the world and the economy today. You may remember, we are supposed to feel badly that these teens in a South Georgia small town are not allowed to dance because of an overreacting city council that outlawed it after a terrible car accident that killed 5 teens on the way home from a dance.
But the sad reality is, you just don't care. You don't care about this uptight town, these teens that think they run the world, or any single character here. You don't like the people in charge, or the bratty teens. It was a bad formula then, and it's even more amplified in today's version. The story is still silly.
This version supposedly is a coming of age as an actress movie for Julianne Hough. And to be fair, she's OK. But I emphasize, OK. She holds up her end as well as the story will let her. But there is a fatal flaw in this performance that has nothing to do with her personally. She barely dances. In fact, there is not a whole lot of dancing in this movie till the end. And some of the dance scenes are so ridiculously silly, it's almost laughable. Especially a scene at a drive-in theater where about 1,000 teens all break into dance at once. Yeah, that happens. Works in musical theater, not here.
They also drag Dennis Quaid, and Andie MacDowell along for this ill-conceived remake. I like both of them usually, but Quaid is completely miscast as a southern pastor bent on making teens behave. And MacDowell? I think she says about 10 lines in the entire movie.
But there are a few things positive worth noting. They do keep it as much to the original as they can. And I'm good with that- shallow story and all. The soundtrack has been updated nicely and has some slick versions of some of the original songs. There is some really impressive dancing in the last 5 minutes or so. And overall this movie, although shallow and nonsensical is pretty tame and harmless. If you just have to go to a teen dance flick, could be your cup of tea. Although this pales in its dancing by a long shot to many of the more modern dance flicks of the past few years.
Footloose 2011. A a thuddy, dud.
But it's really not. Footloose 2011 still has the same basic problem that the original has. It simply has no relevance whatsoever. Maybe even more so now because to the state of the world and the economy today. You may remember, we are supposed to feel badly that these teens in a South Georgia small town are not allowed to dance because of an overreacting city council that outlawed it after a terrible car accident that killed 5 teens on the way home from a dance.
But the sad reality is, you just don't care. You don't care about this uptight town, these teens that think they run the world, or any single character here. You don't like the people in charge, or the bratty teens. It was a bad formula then, and it's even more amplified in today's version. The story is still silly.
This version supposedly is a coming of age as an actress movie for Julianne Hough. And to be fair, she's OK. But I emphasize, OK. She holds up her end as well as the story will let her. But there is a fatal flaw in this performance that has nothing to do with her personally. She barely dances. In fact, there is not a whole lot of dancing in this movie till the end. And some of the dance scenes are so ridiculously silly, it's almost laughable. Especially a scene at a drive-in theater where about 1,000 teens all break into dance at once. Yeah, that happens. Works in musical theater, not here.
They also drag Dennis Quaid, and Andie MacDowell along for this ill-conceived remake. I like both of them usually, but Quaid is completely miscast as a southern pastor bent on making teens behave. And MacDowell? I think she says about 10 lines in the entire movie.
But there are a few things positive worth noting. They do keep it as much to the original as they can. And I'm good with that- shallow story and all. The soundtrack has been updated nicely and has some slick versions of some of the original songs. There is some really impressive dancing in the last 5 minutes or so. And overall this movie, although shallow and nonsensical is pretty tame and harmless. If you just have to go to a teen dance flick, could be your cup of tea. Although this pales in its dancing by a long shot to many of the more modern dance flicks of the past few years.
Footloose 2011. A a thuddy, dud.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Way
Why is it that so many movies that are in limited release are such gems? That's the way of it this week with the new, The Way.
The Way stars Martin Sheen, and is directed by his son, Emilio Estevez. The Way is a simply astounding movie that all real movie goers ought to go see. It has all the key elements you need for a great experience, headlined by a story that you haven't seen before, and that is worth telling.
The Way is the story of Tom (Sheen). He is a very successful eye doctor from California whose wife has died, and he is at odds with his only child, his son, Daniel (Estevez). Daniel is almost 40 years old and is going to abandon his doctoral thesis to go to Europe and walk the Camino de Santiago. This is a spiritual 800 kilometer walk through France and Spain, ending up at the foot of St. James. It's a century old journey that has changed the lives of thousands looking for spirituality. Daniel then dies on his first night of the walk alone in an accident. So Tom goes to France to collect the remains.
While there, Tom decides to walk the journey for his son himself at 64 years old. So he strikes out too alone. Evntually meeting up with three other troubled walkers whom he eventually befriends, all walking for different and painful reasons. But what will it take for each of these four people, from four different countries share their stories with each other. And will they each find solace from the pain that follows them, and is this really a trek of healing?
This story is so well written and so well told, it really is a gem in a stack of really mediocre movies that have been out recently. Sheen is terrific, and so is the unknown supporting cast. Filmed magically in the European Spanish country side, it is simply breathtaking. You feel the pain in each step, and you feel like you are on the journey with them. But even though this is a movie where our characters are each trying to find comfort from anguish, you also feel the whole time they will find the answers they seek. You just don't know how each is going to reconcile their own case. Very skillfully made.
The Way. If you are seeking something, if you ever have, or if you just want to take two hours and find some joy, The Way is for you. A movie goers movie. Just flat out great!
The Way stars Martin Sheen, and is directed by his son, Emilio Estevez. The Way is a simply astounding movie that all real movie goers ought to go see. It has all the key elements you need for a great experience, headlined by a story that you haven't seen before, and that is worth telling.
The Way is the story of Tom (Sheen). He is a very successful eye doctor from California whose wife has died, and he is at odds with his only child, his son, Daniel (Estevez). Daniel is almost 40 years old and is going to abandon his doctoral thesis to go to Europe and walk the Camino de Santiago. This is a spiritual 800 kilometer walk through France and Spain, ending up at the foot of St. James. It's a century old journey that has changed the lives of thousands looking for spirituality. Daniel then dies on his first night of the walk alone in an accident. So Tom goes to France to collect the remains.
While there, Tom decides to walk the journey for his son himself at 64 years old. So he strikes out too alone. Evntually meeting up with three other troubled walkers whom he eventually befriends, all walking for different and painful reasons. But what will it take for each of these four people, from four different countries share their stories with each other. And will they each find solace from the pain that follows them, and is this really a trek of healing?
This story is so well written and so well told, it really is a gem in a stack of really mediocre movies that have been out recently. Sheen is terrific, and so is the unknown supporting cast. Filmed magically in the European Spanish country side, it is simply breathtaking. You feel the pain in each step, and you feel like you are on the journey with them. But even though this is a movie where our characters are each trying to find comfort from anguish, you also feel the whole time they will find the answers they seek. You just don't know how each is going to reconcile their own case. Very skillfully made.
The Way. If you are seeking something, if you ever have, or if you just want to take two hours and find some joy, The Way is for you. A movie goers movie. Just flat out great!
Saturday, October 15, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Thing
I'm not quite sure what number remake it is of this old story, but The Thing is back in theaters for the Halloween season.
You may know the basic story. This time a bunch of Norwegian scientists are down in the Antarctic, when they uncover seemingly a space alien frozen in the ice. They think that he may have been frozen there for 10,000 years or so. So in the name of science, they dig him up, and when he thaws out.....well that's not good.
The Thing has the ability to mimic human cells and replicate a complete person, and then go through a startling metamorphosis into "The Thing." And of course starts killing all of our now stranded friends deep in the Antarctic cold. Who will survive? Can they keep him contained so he doesn't wipe out the entire world? And who exactly is now disguised as The Thing?
First off, this is actually a lot better than I thought it would be. It's a slightly new "thing". It's quick and tidy, and says what it has to say and gets done. If this was any longer all would ahve been lost. This Thing, doesn't fall in love with itself and drag this out too long.
Also, the special effects are quite good, but a word of caution. There are some highly graphic, and gruesome sights in this flick, and some may not be quite ready for that. There is not a ton of what you would call violence, but there are some very strong scenes that some may be queasy over. The story still has a few holes, as these highly educated scientists are still making very stupid decisions all these decades later in this story, but it can be overlooked.
One major problem to speak of. This takes place at the deepest point of the South Pole. You really don't feel the cold like you should. At times, it seems our characters are in Vail, Colorado on a ski trip rather than in the coldest place on earth. Thought that was a big point missed as it seemed the cold was not a detriment to their struggle. Although there are some breathtaking shots of the country at the start of our movie.
Nice to see a new, and fresh face too, Mary Elizabeth Winstead cast as our heroine, Kate Lloyd. She is one of the scientists that was invited to go to the site to analyze the finding. You do pull for her to make it out alive. Winstead is well cast, and looks for part. Although this is not overly challenging acting, it's good to see a new face in an action role.
The Thing. Certainly not for everyone. But for those looking for a Halloween jolt, that holds your attention, The Thing could be for you.
You may know the basic story. This time a bunch of Norwegian scientists are down in the Antarctic, when they uncover seemingly a space alien frozen in the ice. They think that he may have been frozen there for 10,000 years or so. So in the name of science, they dig him up, and when he thaws out.....well that's not good.
The Thing has the ability to mimic human cells and replicate a complete person, and then go through a startling metamorphosis into "The Thing." And of course starts killing all of our now stranded friends deep in the Antarctic cold. Who will survive? Can they keep him contained so he doesn't wipe out the entire world? And who exactly is now disguised as The Thing?
First off, this is actually a lot better than I thought it would be. It's a slightly new "thing". It's quick and tidy, and says what it has to say and gets done. If this was any longer all would ahve been lost. This Thing, doesn't fall in love with itself and drag this out too long.
Also, the special effects are quite good, but a word of caution. There are some highly graphic, and gruesome sights in this flick, and some may not be quite ready for that. There is not a ton of what you would call violence, but there are some very strong scenes that some may be queasy over. The story still has a few holes, as these highly educated scientists are still making very stupid decisions all these decades later in this story, but it can be overlooked.
One major problem to speak of. This takes place at the deepest point of the South Pole. You really don't feel the cold like you should. At times, it seems our characters are in Vail, Colorado on a ski trip rather than in the coldest place on earth. Thought that was a big point missed as it seemed the cold was not a detriment to their struggle. Although there are some breathtaking shots of the country at the start of our movie.
Nice to see a new, and fresh face too, Mary Elizabeth Winstead cast as our heroine, Kate Lloyd. She is one of the scientists that was invited to go to the site to analyze the finding. You do pull for her to make it out alive. Winstead is well cast, and looks for part. Although this is not overly challenging acting, it's good to see a new face in an action role.
The Thing. Certainly not for everyone. But for those looking for a Halloween jolt, that holds your attention, The Thing could be for you.
Friday, October 14, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Big Year
What a cast! Steve Martin, Owen Wilson, Jack Black, Rachida Jones, Kevin Pollack, JoBeth Williams, Brian Dennehy, Angelica Houston and DianeWeist. So isn't it funny they all get together for such a below average movie?
Oh, there are worse flicks, and there isn't a mountain wrong with this, it's just average at best. This is being billed as a rip-roaringly funny adult comedy movie, and the truth is, it's just not that funny. There are some nice moments here, but this is not a real comedy.
It's the story of these three characters , Martin, Wilson, and Black. They are each trying to become the world champion bird watcher. So we have to travel around the country, watching these guys watch birds. Aren't you intrigued? Yeah, me either. And that's the main flaw. You just don't care about what they are doing, who they are, and what they risk, and give up to go all around the continent for a whole year watching birds, while their collective lives are put on hold.
Big crowd today at the movies, and no laughing to speak of. I walked in ready to hold my sides and really have a big laugh. None. I will say, this movie does grow a heart and becomes more of a light drama near the end, and does make you think a bit about your life and your priorities, but so do a lot of other flicks that are not supposed to be funny. If you think you are walking into big laughs...keep walking.
The Big Year. A big lead balloon.
Oh, there are worse flicks, and there isn't a mountain wrong with this, it's just average at best. This is being billed as a rip-roaringly funny adult comedy movie, and the truth is, it's just not that funny. There are some nice moments here, but this is not a real comedy.
It's the story of these three characters , Martin, Wilson, and Black. They are each trying to become the world champion bird watcher. So we have to travel around the country, watching these guys watch birds. Aren't you intrigued? Yeah, me either. And that's the main flaw. You just don't care about what they are doing, who they are, and what they risk, and give up to go all around the continent for a whole year watching birds, while their collective lives are put on hold.
Big crowd today at the movies, and no laughing to speak of. I walked in ready to hold my sides and really have a big laugh. None. I will say, this movie does grow a heart and becomes more of a light drama near the end, and does make you think a bit about your life and your priorities, but so do a lot of other flicks that are not supposed to be funny. If you think you are walking into big laughs...keep walking.
The Big Year. A big lead balloon.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Real Steel
Every once in a while you roll into a movie with little or love expectations. It's part of the fun of reviewing movies, especially when you are pleasantly surprised with a gem.
Hugh Jackman stars in Real Steel, and I think it's the years surprise hit so far. This is the movie that appears to be a cross between Rocky, Rock-Em Sock-Em Robots and possibly a cheesy dad-and-son sports flick. And once it is all mixed together, somehow it works. A bit of Steven Speilberg magic was dusted on this as well as the movies producer.
RS is a story set in the near future where boxing by humans is no longer violent enough for the publics taste. So robots are built to box, just as humans were in decades past. Jackman is Charlie, a former boxer himself, who now runs around building boxing robots, getting beat and generally owing shady people a lot of money. He is reunited with his 11 year son, Max (Dakota Goyo) that he has never known after the mother dies. The only thing they have in common is the intertest in robot boxing.
So they set out to build a robot that can maybe help them make a bit of cash to keep them afloat. They then run across Atom. Atom is a robot from 2014 never designed to actually box, but they try to make him a contender. With the help from Bailey (Evangeline Lilly) one of Charlie's former girlfriends and robot builder, they set out to see how far Atom can take them. And learn that Atom may be a bit more human than one might think.
This movie will make you laugh, cry and cheer. This story at first glance may look a bit silly, and maybe it is. But somehow this works wonderfully well. Very nicely crafted to make you a part of what's going on. You feel like you are on the journey with them. Terrific special effects that don't get ridiculous. Also, the robot action sequences are so well done. Not too long, not fatiguing, and not hard to watch or follow say like Transformers.
Kudos to Jackman and Coyo who develop a nice chemistry with a well written script that lets their relationship evolve at a nice pace, and never gets cheesy. Evangeline Lilly gives this a nice soft touch, and a great womanly presence it really needed. She was perfectly cast as the boxing savvy, but still feminine, Bailey. Well done.
Real Steel. This could have gone either way. It was either going to be really, really good, or a complete waste of time. This time, good wins out. Sleeper hit of the year so far.
Hugh Jackman stars in Real Steel, and I think it's the years surprise hit so far. This is the movie that appears to be a cross between Rocky, Rock-Em Sock-Em Robots and possibly a cheesy dad-and-son sports flick. And once it is all mixed together, somehow it works. A bit of Steven Speilberg magic was dusted on this as well as the movies producer.
RS is a story set in the near future where boxing by humans is no longer violent enough for the publics taste. So robots are built to box, just as humans were in decades past. Jackman is Charlie, a former boxer himself, who now runs around building boxing robots, getting beat and generally owing shady people a lot of money. He is reunited with his 11 year son, Max (Dakota Goyo) that he has never known after the mother dies. The only thing they have in common is the intertest in robot boxing.
So they set out to build a robot that can maybe help them make a bit of cash to keep them afloat. They then run across Atom. Atom is a robot from 2014 never designed to actually box, but they try to make him a contender. With the help from Bailey (Evangeline Lilly) one of Charlie's former girlfriends and robot builder, they set out to see how far Atom can take them. And learn that Atom may be a bit more human than one might think.
This movie will make you laugh, cry and cheer. This story at first glance may look a bit silly, and maybe it is. But somehow this works wonderfully well. Very nicely crafted to make you a part of what's going on. You feel like you are on the journey with them. Terrific special effects that don't get ridiculous. Also, the robot action sequences are so well done. Not too long, not fatiguing, and not hard to watch or follow say like Transformers.
Kudos to Jackman and Coyo who develop a nice chemistry with a well written script that lets their relationship evolve at a nice pace, and never gets cheesy. Evangeline Lilly gives this a nice soft touch, and a great womanly presence it really needed. She was perfectly cast as the boxing savvy, but still feminine, Bailey. Well done.
Real Steel. This could have gone either way. It was either going to be really, really good, or a complete waste of time. This time, good wins out. Sleeper hit of the year so far.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - The Ides Of March
The new political drama, The Ides Of March, strolls into the theaters this week full of stars and promise.
George Clooney written, and produced movie where he plays a presidential candidate in the latter stages of the Democratic primaries. He is Governor Morris from Pennsylvania, and is running against only one Democratic challenger left as this story takes place during the weeks of the Ohio primary. This is a key state as to who will win the Democratic nomination for President.
He has one of the best young media minds in the country working for him Stephen (Ryan Gosling). And one of the greatest political minds Paul (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) leading his campaign. Morris is perceived as "the real deal" by his staff who are working hard for his election. But there are a few very bad skeletons in his closet, and the passionate campaign leaders have to decide if they are willing to go to the mat with Morris knowing what they do.
Then the rival campaign chimes in lead by Tom (Paul Giamatti) trying to use politics to muddy the waters, and screw up the entire election. This is a complex drama that really shows the dirty side of politics. At least as much as Clooney knows how to show through his writing. There are many twist and turns. But one thing about this movie, I think it thinks it's really smarter than it is. Some of these plot twists are supposed to really make you go "WOW" when in fact most viewers are ahead of this movie.
But that's not a deal breaker here. This is a pretty good movie, that has a very nice cast and it's fun to see a few generations of good people make a good movie. Gosling is the star of this movie categorically. Hoffman is again great, as is Giamatti. Clooney, although central, does not have a huge screen time presence in this flick. Good lesson maybe learned. Maybe make a movie, and not a "George Clooney" movie. Great small performances too from Evan Rachel Wood, and Marisa Tomei give this movie a real nice ensemble.
The Ides Of March doesn't make some of the same mistakes that some other Clooney movies have. It's not too long. It has a story that stays on course and focus, and it doesn't have that "elite" stench that some others have had. One of the things haunting Clooney flicks is that they can bear the preception they think that they are saying something that no one has ever thought of before. And that can be insulting to some. Many times it seems they are making the movie for their own entertainment and not ours.
This is much shorter than the never ending Micheal Clayton, much better than the putrid The American. Where 2009's gem Up In The Air was relevant, so is this one. There is a reason to tell this story now. On target, and overall pretty entertaining.
The Ides Of March. Great cast, but only a good movie.
George Clooney written, and produced movie where he plays a presidential candidate in the latter stages of the Democratic primaries. He is Governor Morris from Pennsylvania, and is running against only one Democratic challenger left as this story takes place during the weeks of the Ohio primary. This is a key state as to who will win the Democratic nomination for President.
He has one of the best young media minds in the country working for him Stephen (Ryan Gosling). And one of the greatest political minds Paul (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) leading his campaign. Morris is perceived as "the real deal" by his staff who are working hard for his election. But there are a few very bad skeletons in his closet, and the passionate campaign leaders have to decide if they are willing to go to the mat with Morris knowing what they do.
Then the rival campaign chimes in lead by Tom (Paul Giamatti) trying to use politics to muddy the waters, and screw up the entire election. This is a complex drama that really shows the dirty side of politics. At least as much as Clooney knows how to show through his writing. There are many twist and turns. But one thing about this movie, I think it thinks it's really smarter than it is. Some of these plot twists are supposed to really make you go "WOW" when in fact most viewers are ahead of this movie.
But that's not a deal breaker here. This is a pretty good movie, that has a very nice cast and it's fun to see a few generations of good people make a good movie. Gosling is the star of this movie categorically. Hoffman is again great, as is Giamatti. Clooney, although central, does not have a huge screen time presence in this flick. Good lesson maybe learned. Maybe make a movie, and not a "George Clooney" movie. Great small performances too from Evan Rachel Wood, and Marisa Tomei give this movie a real nice ensemble.
The Ides Of March doesn't make some of the same mistakes that some other Clooney movies have. It's not too long. It has a story that stays on course and focus, and it doesn't have that "elite" stench that some others have had. One of the things haunting Clooney flicks is that they can bear the preception they think that they are saying something that no one has ever thought of before. And that can be insulting to some. Many times it seems they are making the movie for their own entertainment and not ours.
This is much shorter than the never ending Micheal Clayton, much better than the putrid The American. Where 2009's gem Up In The Air was relevant, so is this one. There is a reason to tell this story now. On target, and overall pretty entertaining.
The Ides Of March. Great cast, but only a good movie.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Dream House
Daniel Craig leaves James Bond and a bunch of other tough guy characters behind for his family man role in Dream House.
After seeing Dream House, I can't decide if it is supposed to be thrilling, scary or both. It is neither. I can't tell you this is a bad movie, but I can't sit here and tell you it's a good one. There are plenty of stars. Craig, Rachel Wiesz, and Naomi Watts. And seemingly the time of year is right for a movie like this. But in fairness, Dream House just lays there. It darn near sent me to Dream Land!
Craig stars as a family man with a lovely wife and two equally lovely young daughters. They buy this house that seems haunted. Come to learn that there was a family killed in this house years earlier, and the husband was the person thought to have killed his entire family. As they they set out to find out who it was that actually did the murders, who knows what they might find.
I think that is supposed to be the thrilling part, but I was completely underwhelmed. Dream House lost me right out of the gate with a super boring first 30 minutes. It does recover if you stick with it, but it can only come up to mediocre at best, before settling for poor at the end. It tries so hard to be smart, but it's not. Oh, they try to throw in this twist in the final few frames, but you're done. Long done. You go, "Yeah, yeah"..as you are walking out as the credits roll.
Craig is hard pressed to pull off the family man thing on screen. Good for him branching out, but this is poorly staged. When you see him with the little girls, he's holding some other persons kids. As he literally is, but the point is, he looks out of water. This role was a throw away role for him. This was a good waste of real star power in a movie that may have required a star, but shouldn't have gotten one. It's just not that good of a script.
Dream House. If you must. Otherwise this movie will be on TNT every weekend in a couple of years.
After seeing Dream House, I can't decide if it is supposed to be thrilling, scary or both. It is neither. I can't tell you this is a bad movie, but I can't sit here and tell you it's a good one. There are plenty of stars. Craig, Rachel Wiesz, and Naomi Watts. And seemingly the time of year is right for a movie like this. But in fairness, Dream House just lays there. It darn near sent me to Dream Land!
Craig stars as a family man with a lovely wife and two equally lovely young daughters. They buy this house that seems haunted. Come to learn that there was a family killed in this house years earlier, and the husband was the person thought to have killed his entire family. As they they set out to find out who it was that actually did the murders, who knows what they might find.
I think that is supposed to be the thrilling part, but I was completely underwhelmed. Dream House lost me right out of the gate with a super boring first 30 minutes. It does recover if you stick with it, but it can only come up to mediocre at best, before settling for poor at the end. It tries so hard to be smart, but it's not. Oh, they try to throw in this twist in the final few frames, but you're done. Long done. You go, "Yeah, yeah"..as you are walking out as the credits roll.
Craig is hard pressed to pull off the family man thing on screen. Good for him branching out, but this is poorly staged. When you see him with the little girls, he's holding some other persons kids. As he literally is, but the point is, he looks out of water. This role was a throw away role for him. This was a good waste of real star power in a movie that may have required a star, but shouldn't have gotten one. It's just not that good of a script.
Dream House. If you must. Otherwise this movie will be on TNT every weekend in a couple of years.
Monday, October 3, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Courageous
Not often that a new movie brings in a huge first week take, when debuting in roughly half the theaters that other movies do. But Courageous did.
Courageous is from the same people that made Fireproof from 2008. That was a big hit, this looks like a big hit too. Courageous is another Faith Challenging and Faith Affirming movie that will find an audience. This, like Fireproof is not mainstream movie making. It has a message, and is not ashamed of it. It is not the usual out of Hollywood.
Courageous is the story of four different families in Albany, New York. They are good people, and people of faith. Or so they thought. One of our families then has a terrible tragedy that melds them all closer together. The family fathers then take a "resolution" to be better than they are, and be the family leader they feel God wants them to be. But we learn that is not always an easy journey, and there are challenges. Are they courageous enough to see it through?
This movie will be hit and miss situation. There will be many who will dismiss this out-of-hand, and feel that this is not what they want in an experience at the movies, and that's fine. Movies are not one size fits all. But for those who are interested, or feel that there is nothing decent coming out to the movies these days, this will be right on the money. And I am frankly fine with either side. That's the beauty of the movies.
You may notice this does not even look like most movies, and that's in the design. There is not star power in this movie. Actors you don't know at all, allowing the message to cut through without seeing a movie star. Courageous also is told very simplistically, with carefully written dialogue that carries, and delivers a message. It is straightforward, and unapologetic. It has something to say, and says it right to you.
Movies like Courageous are hard to really review. It is pure, with a message that is crafted to be positive and uplifting. There are certainly better written, better acted movies with bigger budgets out there, but there's room for this too. And I am good with bringing everything to the theaters these days, instead of 20 identical movies in theaters at the same time.
Courageous. If it's not for you, then go to the movie next door. If this is your thing, enjoy.
Courageous is from the same people that made Fireproof from 2008. That was a big hit, this looks like a big hit too. Courageous is another Faith Challenging and Faith Affirming movie that will find an audience. This, like Fireproof is not mainstream movie making. It has a message, and is not ashamed of it. It is not the usual out of Hollywood.
Courageous is the story of four different families in Albany, New York. They are good people, and people of faith. Or so they thought. One of our families then has a terrible tragedy that melds them all closer together. The family fathers then take a "resolution" to be better than they are, and be the family leader they feel God wants them to be. But we learn that is not always an easy journey, and there are challenges. Are they courageous enough to see it through?
This movie will be hit and miss situation. There will be many who will dismiss this out-of-hand, and feel that this is not what they want in an experience at the movies, and that's fine. Movies are not one size fits all. But for those who are interested, or feel that there is nothing decent coming out to the movies these days, this will be right on the money. And I am frankly fine with either side. That's the beauty of the movies.
You may notice this does not even look like most movies, and that's in the design. There is not star power in this movie. Actors you don't know at all, allowing the message to cut through without seeing a movie star. Courageous also is told very simplistically, with carefully written dialogue that carries, and delivers a message. It is straightforward, and unapologetic. It has something to say, and says it right to you.
Movies like Courageous are hard to really review. It is pure, with a message that is crafted to be positive and uplifting. There are certainly better written, better acted movies with bigger budgets out there, but there's room for this too. And I am good with bringing everything to the theaters these days, instead of 20 identical movies in theaters at the same time.
Courageous. If it's not for you, then go to the movie next door. If this is your thing, enjoy.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - What's Your Number
Anna Faris has a new comedy out this week, What's Your Number. Seldom will you see a movie with about the same amount of good and bad in the same 100 minutes.
Faris, is a funny woman that I feel is way funnier than the projects that she gets tangled up in. I thought she was very funny in House Bunny, and a few others. Great movies? No. But she usually holds up her end of the bargain. That goes for What's Your Number. This is not a great movie, but thanks to Faris, it has some moments.
It's the story of a young woman in Boston named Ally (Faris). She has just been fired from her job she hated. Then she reads a magazine article that says the average woman has 10 lovers over the course of her life. She goes into a panic, because her number, while still single is almost double that. So at her younger sisters engagement party, Ally vows to not sleep with another man till she meets her future husband.
She then goes a step further by trying to contact her past lovers to see if there is still something there. She enlists her "dog" male neighbor from across the hall, Colin (Chris Evans) who has mad computer skills to track these men down. As they spend more time together you start to get the idea that Ally and Colin might end up together. What a surprise! So where will this whole thing go?
Let's clear out the bad first. Too predictable, too much of Faris trying too hard, and this needed another re-write. There are some really funny scenes and characters here. Too bad the lead characters aren't nearly as developed as the side ones. This idea, which is not great, could have been a lot better if some things were re-worked a bit. Would have helped too to write some snappier dialogue, and quit selling out to the constant references to body parts, and functions. That dialogue didn't add one thing to this story. And the theater didn't laugh at it. - Again.
But with that said, WYN does have some real good to it. Faris is wonderful at times, and funny, albeit she can be a bit fatiguing after a while. That is her Achilles heel. They do introduce us to characters that are highly representative of a whole lot of young adults today, in their lifestyle and interests. And a really up-to-date soundtrack is very well used at times that fits the movie like a glove. And yes, there area few real out loud laughs here. It's just a shame that a bit more care wasn't taken to really make an intelligent movie. With what they had in place, I'm not sure it would have been a whole lot of extra effort.
What's Your Number. Faris makes it pretty good, but the movie makers insisted on making it not as much so. Not a washout, just a wash. Looks and sounds like 20 other movies.
Faris, is a funny woman that I feel is way funnier than the projects that she gets tangled up in. I thought she was very funny in House Bunny, and a few others. Great movies? No. But she usually holds up her end of the bargain. That goes for What's Your Number. This is not a great movie, but thanks to Faris, it has some moments.
It's the story of a young woman in Boston named Ally (Faris). She has just been fired from her job she hated. Then she reads a magazine article that says the average woman has 10 lovers over the course of her life. She goes into a panic, because her number, while still single is almost double that. So at her younger sisters engagement party, Ally vows to not sleep with another man till she meets her future husband.
She then goes a step further by trying to contact her past lovers to see if there is still something there. She enlists her "dog" male neighbor from across the hall, Colin (Chris Evans) who has mad computer skills to track these men down. As they spend more time together you start to get the idea that Ally and Colin might end up together. What a surprise! So where will this whole thing go?
Let's clear out the bad first. Too predictable, too much of Faris trying too hard, and this needed another re-write. There are some really funny scenes and characters here. Too bad the lead characters aren't nearly as developed as the side ones. This idea, which is not great, could have been a lot better if some things were re-worked a bit. Would have helped too to write some snappier dialogue, and quit selling out to the constant references to body parts, and functions. That dialogue didn't add one thing to this story. And the theater didn't laugh at it. - Again.
But with that said, WYN does have some real good to it. Faris is wonderful at times, and funny, albeit she can be a bit fatiguing after a while. That is her Achilles heel. They do introduce us to characters that are highly representative of a whole lot of young adults today, in their lifestyle and interests. And a really up-to-date soundtrack is very well used at times that fits the movie like a glove. And yes, there area few real out loud laughs here. It's just a shame that a bit more care wasn't taken to really make an intelligent movie. With what they had in place, I'm not sure it would have been a whole lot of extra effort.
What's Your Number. Faris makes it pretty good, but the movie makers insisted on making it not as much so. Not a washout, just a wash. Looks and sounds like 20 other movies.
Friday, September 30, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - 50/50
It's not often that a drama comedy involves a young adult facing the challenges of cancer. But that's the plot of the new Seth Rogen flick, 50/50.
50/50 stars Rogen, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Anna Kendrick in this overall very well done story of 26 year-old Adam (Levitt) and his best friend Kyle (Rogen). Adam is diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer, and the outlook is marginal at best. Or 50/50 on survival. This basically is Adam's story as he weaves in and out of various phases of the disease. How he deals with it all, and how those around him deal with him too. It's tough at times, as his age is making it hard for his girlfriend, mother and others to try to be supportive.
This is an honest look at an illness that luckily we don't equate with young adults very often. They skillfully sew in some real nice humor, and some really heart touching moments. It accurately shows the difficulty people in their 20's would have coming to terms with this whole thing. Levitt is very good, Rogen may be a bit too "Rogeny" for me in this one. But Kendrick is simply fantastic. She is Adam's therapist in training Katherine, who takes a special interest in Adams sad case.
Kendrick is stunningly good in this movie, as she was in 2009's George Clooney flick, Up In The Air, where she was Oscar nominated. She may be a bit limited in her roles that she could really pull off. But she is the queen of screen vulnerability. She is so personal with her role, hard not to feel her emotions on screen. And feel them deep. She may be Hollywood's most underrated star. It's hard to put into words just how badly this movie needed her in it. As popular as our main stars are, this does not work without her. She is the element this movie needed to be better than it probably has a right to be.
50/50 does not skate away unscathed. There are a few horrible decisions made in this movie that prevent it from being totally above the fray. But they are not deal breakers. For some reason there are quick and "sore thumby" moments of really terrible profanity. And there's a scene or two that really don't work. This movie need none of this. But it's all OK. What Rogen screws up, Kendrick and the story smooth it over.
50/50. Thanks to Anna Kendrick......very good.
50/50 stars Rogen, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Anna Kendrick in this overall very well done story of 26 year-old Adam (Levitt) and his best friend Kyle (Rogen). Adam is diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer, and the outlook is marginal at best. Or 50/50 on survival. This basically is Adam's story as he weaves in and out of various phases of the disease. How he deals with it all, and how those around him deal with him too. It's tough at times, as his age is making it hard for his girlfriend, mother and others to try to be supportive.
This is an honest look at an illness that luckily we don't equate with young adults very often. They skillfully sew in some real nice humor, and some really heart touching moments. It accurately shows the difficulty people in their 20's would have coming to terms with this whole thing. Levitt is very good, Rogen may be a bit too "Rogeny" for me in this one. But Kendrick is simply fantastic. She is Adam's therapist in training Katherine, who takes a special interest in Adams sad case.
Kendrick is stunningly good in this movie, as she was in 2009's George Clooney flick, Up In The Air, where she was Oscar nominated. She may be a bit limited in her roles that she could really pull off. But she is the queen of screen vulnerability. She is so personal with her role, hard not to feel her emotions on screen. And feel them deep. She may be Hollywood's most underrated star. It's hard to put into words just how badly this movie needed her in it. As popular as our main stars are, this does not work without her. She is the element this movie needed to be better than it probably has a right to be.
50/50 does not skate away unscathed. There are a few horrible decisions made in this movie that prevent it from being totally above the fray. But they are not deal breakers. For some reason there are quick and "sore thumby" moments of really terrible profanity. And there's a scene or two that really don't work. This movie need none of this. But it's all OK. What Rogen screws up, Kendrick and the story smooth it over.
50/50. Thanks to Anna Kendrick......very good.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Killer Elite
It's another Jason Statham action flick, Killer Elite. This time they try to dress it up with a nice cast. But in the end, it's more of the same.
But that's alright for now. Statham is very popular for now, with a young set of young movie goers. And overall his movies, are violent, ut I've seen more intense, by a long shot. Killer Elite is based on a supposed true story, and on a 1990 book called The Featherman. The story this time is airing the dirty laundry of the secret SAS branch of British Intelligence.
Meet Danny (Statham). He is a rogue agent who is sort of hired, and sort of blackmailed into a killing contract by an Arabian Sheik. The contract is to kill three other British agents who killed the Sheiks sons a few years earlier. So Danny brings his team together to do the killings. But they soon learn that they may be being played for fools, and are being set up by someone. But who?
KE, also stars Clive Owen, Robert De Niro and a decent supporting cast that elevate this Statham flick a bit as compared to others. But I feel the clock is ticking. He needs a reinvention soon, because all of these action flicks are really starting to blend together big time. They all look the same, sound the same and are filmed he same. And the interest is starting to dry up.
KE really stumbles at times, and breaks a cardinal rule of these kinds of movies. It seems like it will never end. In fact, it kind of does a time or two, only to start back up in a new direction. Much seat fidgeting, and clock watching near the end. There is plenty of action. In fact, maybe too much, and it is fatiguing. Statham flicks can have a video game feel to them, and this one does. Lots of action scenes, both long and short. Long on action, short on interesting story.
Killer Elite. OK we get it. You're an action star. Now let's go in a new direction, before the jokes start flying. Just ask Stallone, Van Damme and Seagal.
But that's alright for now. Statham is very popular for now, with a young set of young movie goers. And overall his movies, are violent, ut I've seen more intense, by a long shot. Killer Elite is based on a supposed true story, and on a 1990 book called The Featherman. The story this time is airing the dirty laundry of the secret SAS branch of British Intelligence.
Meet Danny (Statham). He is a rogue agent who is sort of hired, and sort of blackmailed into a killing contract by an Arabian Sheik. The contract is to kill three other British agents who killed the Sheiks sons a few years earlier. So Danny brings his team together to do the killings. But they soon learn that they may be being played for fools, and are being set up by someone. But who?
KE, also stars Clive Owen, Robert De Niro and a decent supporting cast that elevate this Statham flick a bit as compared to others. But I feel the clock is ticking. He needs a reinvention soon, because all of these action flicks are really starting to blend together big time. They all look the same, sound the same and are filmed he same. And the interest is starting to dry up.
KE really stumbles at times, and breaks a cardinal rule of these kinds of movies. It seems like it will never end. In fact, it kind of does a time or two, only to start back up in a new direction. Much seat fidgeting, and clock watching near the end. There is plenty of action. In fact, maybe too much, and it is fatiguing. Statham flicks can have a video game feel to them, and this one does. Lots of action scenes, both long and short. Long on action, short on interesting story.
Killer Elite. OK we get it. You're an action star. Now let's go in a new direction, before the jokes start flying. Just ask Stallone, Van Damme and Seagal.
Monday, September 26, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Abduction
Taylor Lautner has put away his wolf fangs for an hour and a half, and stars in the new thriller, Abduction. Yes, the Twilight co-star has his own gig till the big cash starts rolling in from the next Twilight flick in November.
Abduction is the story of a high school senior named Nathan (Lautner). He is a typical kid or so it seems. He is on the wrestling team, he drinks himself silly and stays out all night on weekends, and has a crush on the girl across he street. But the one thing he doesn't have in common with all the other kids is his Hollywood good looks, and he is being chased by the CIA for some reason.
Nathan's parents are murdered in a home invasion, and before they die, they urge him to run and save himself. Along with the girl across the street who witnesses the whole thing. They soon find out that the CIA is in pursuit, but and so are the bad guys. But why? Why is this high school kid so important? Well, that's why you have to go see Abduction. Or maybe not.
I can see the eye rolling already. "I, as a grown adult am NOT going to see a Taylor Lautner flick!" I get it. But a few minutes into this movie that starts off halfway decent, you realize that
grownups are not supposed to be there. In its defense, this is a grown up movie for very young adults, and I'm good with that. Finally, a movie that targets a young audience that doesn't sell out to horrible language, rampant drug use, graphic violence, and over all tastelessness.
And I say, good for them. Up front for me, this is not a great movie. But it's not for me. It is full of predictable, cliche' and obligatory scenes, that a young audience will eat up with a gigantic spoon. The storyline is simple, but not babyish. It has some action, but overall it's not silly. Oh, granted there is a shade of "yeah right" to it, but it's not a deal breaker. This movie is only about 85 minutes, so it doesn't wear out it's welcome either.
Lautner has been convinced he is a hunk, and acts every bit of it here. It is hard not to see Jacob from Twilight here, but I think that's by design. He over acts and reacts at times. The surrounding cast is above average, and as a whole, good decisions are made here basically from start to finish. Am I going back to see this movie? No. But I do respect a movie that knows its audience, and serves it well without being a total sellout to the lowest common denominator.
Abduction. For who its for, good movie. For many others? Go see Moneyball.
Abduction is the story of a high school senior named Nathan (Lautner). He is a typical kid or so it seems. He is on the wrestling team, he drinks himself silly and stays out all night on weekends, and has a crush on the girl across he street. But the one thing he doesn't have in common with all the other kids is his Hollywood good looks, and he is being chased by the CIA for some reason.
Nathan's parents are murdered in a home invasion, and before they die, they urge him to run and save himself. Along with the girl across the street who witnesses the whole thing. They soon find out that the CIA is in pursuit, but and so are the bad guys. But why? Why is this high school kid so important? Well, that's why you have to go see Abduction. Or maybe not.
I can see the eye rolling already. "I, as a grown adult am NOT going to see a Taylor Lautner flick!" I get it. But a few minutes into this movie that starts off halfway decent, you realize that
grownups are not supposed to be there. In its defense, this is a grown up movie for very young adults, and I'm good with that. Finally, a movie that targets a young audience that doesn't sell out to horrible language, rampant drug use, graphic violence, and over all tastelessness.
And I say, good for them. Up front for me, this is not a great movie. But it's not for me. It is full of predictable, cliche' and obligatory scenes, that a young audience will eat up with a gigantic spoon. The storyline is simple, but not babyish. It has some action, but overall it's not silly. Oh, granted there is a shade of "yeah right" to it, but it's not a deal breaker. This movie is only about 85 minutes, so it doesn't wear out it's welcome either.
Lautner has been convinced he is a hunk, and acts every bit of it here. It is hard not to see Jacob from Twilight here, but I think that's by design. He over acts and reacts at times. The surrounding cast is above average, and as a whole, good decisions are made here basically from start to finish. Am I going back to see this movie? No. But I do respect a movie that knows its audience, and serves it well without being a total sellout to the lowest common denominator.
Abduction. For who its for, good movie. For many others? Go see Moneyball.
Friday, September 23, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Moneyball
Great to see some star power back in theaters, and some adult movies. Here comes Brad Pitt and the new true story dramatic baseball movie, Moneyball.
This is the true story of Billy Beane, (Pitt) the General Manager of the Oakland Athletics baseball team in the early 2000's. Oakland is a small baseball market, and as the game is changing, small market teams must try to invent new ways to stay competitive and not have a 100 million payroll. Beane "buys" this Ivy League whiz kid from the Cleveland Indians with no baseball experience fresh out of college, and brings him to the A's. The A's have no money in a baseball sense.
They two of them set out with the idea they must find the "right'" players for them based on some mathematical formula they have devised. This flies in the face of 150 years of baseball tradition, and his new way is resisted at every turn by most members of the baseball world, and his own organization. Will his new way to build a team work as they enter the 2002 season? That's Moneyball.
Sports movies have gotten so much better over the past 20 years. They have finally figured out that any good movie has to have a story worth telling. And for sports movies, they must have a story that is interesting to all movie fans, and not have the arrow pointing squarely at sports. Secretariat, Miracle, and even the new Warrior are proof positive. Have a great story, and you have a shot at a great movie. Good movies are story first. Sports movies must be even more story forward. the story shines first, and sports is somewhere down the list.
Moneyball is great. Pitt was born to play this eccentric, risk taking character, that puts everything on the line for his possibly ill-thought out beliefs. They let you get to know Beane inside and out, and but there's still a part of him that remains hard to reach. Pitt is terrific, and so is the supporting cast of Jonah Hill (the whiz kid) and Phillip Seymour Hoffman who plays the skeptical team Manager Art Howe.
This is a wonderful mix of actual team footage from the 2002 season, and staged scenes. This movie is splendidly filmed, perfectly cast, and edited together in a way that it is thrilling and exciting, but not hokey or cheesy. It shows you the underbelly of baseball operations that go to the human level and exposes some parts I'm sure many involved are not thrilled you are seeing. But Moneyball takes the time to develop characters that are interesting, and flawed all at the same time. Skillfully done.
It's hard not to love Pitt here, as he looks as comfortable in this role as he has in any role in a very long time. This is a bit of a risk for Pitt, but you can tell he believed in the project, just as his character believed in the risky venture of 2002. Good to see Hill again making a great decision to make a grown up movie, and Hoffman, is better every time out.
Moneyball. This is a story worth telling, and it's good to see some risk taking in Hollywood for a change. This is off the beaten path, but this is very, very good. Moneyball is one of the years best movies so far, and look for Pitt to be mentioned in the year end honors.
This is the true story of Billy Beane, (Pitt) the General Manager of the Oakland Athletics baseball team in the early 2000's. Oakland is a small baseball market, and as the game is changing, small market teams must try to invent new ways to stay competitive and not have a 100 million payroll. Beane "buys" this Ivy League whiz kid from the Cleveland Indians with no baseball experience fresh out of college, and brings him to the A's. The A's have no money in a baseball sense.
They two of them set out with the idea they must find the "right'" players for them based on some mathematical formula they have devised. This flies in the face of 150 years of baseball tradition, and his new way is resisted at every turn by most members of the baseball world, and his own organization. Will his new way to build a team work as they enter the 2002 season? That's Moneyball.
Sports movies have gotten so much better over the past 20 years. They have finally figured out that any good movie has to have a story worth telling. And for sports movies, they must have a story that is interesting to all movie fans, and not have the arrow pointing squarely at sports. Secretariat, Miracle, and even the new Warrior are proof positive. Have a great story, and you have a shot at a great movie. Good movies are story first. Sports movies must be even more story forward. the story shines first, and sports is somewhere down the list.
Moneyball is great. Pitt was born to play this eccentric, risk taking character, that puts everything on the line for his possibly ill-thought out beliefs. They let you get to know Beane inside and out, and but there's still a part of him that remains hard to reach. Pitt is terrific, and so is the supporting cast of Jonah Hill (the whiz kid) and Phillip Seymour Hoffman who plays the skeptical team Manager Art Howe.
This is a wonderful mix of actual team footage from the 2002 season, and staged scenes. This movie is splendidly filmed, perfectly cast, and edited together in a way that it is thrilling and exciting, but not hokey or cheesy. It shows you the underbelly of baseball operations that go to the human level and exposes some parts I'm sure many involved are not thrilled you are seeing. But Moneyball takes the time to develop characters that are interesting, and flawed all at the same time. Skillfully done.
It's hard not to love Pitt here, as he looks as comfortable in this role as he has in any role in a very long time. This is a bit of a risk for Pitt, but you can tell he believed in the project, just as his character believed in the risky venture of 2002. Good to see Hill again making a great decision to make a grown up movie, and Hoffman, is better every time out.
Moneyball. This is a story worth telling, and it's good to see some risk taking in Hollywood for a change. This is off the beaten path, but this is very, very good. Moneyball is one of the years best movies so far, and look for Pitt to be mentioned in the year end honors.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
MOVIE REVIEW - Straw Dogs
Straw Dogs is one powerful, hard to watch at times thriller.
Straw Dogs is the story of a young couple Amy and David. They are from Los Angeles and move back to her hometown deep in the heart of Mississippi. Amy has made it as an actress and David is a screenwriter. After the death of her father, they move back to her childhood home, but find out quickly they are not really welcome there.
This group of local thugs and bullies decide they don't like David, and are not thrilled with Amy anymore and her new life. They begin terrorizing the couple in every way they can. After these bullies kill the local sheriff on Amy's property, they decide the have to kill all witnesses. Namely Amy and David. Can they survive?
Straw Dogs is harsh. But it is also compelling and scary. I know it's Hollywood, but to be honest, it's not all that far fetched. They put you on a slow burn to the showdown you know is coming the whole time, but that's OK. They don't wear you out, or drag this out too long. I think they knew they had limitations, and made the best movie they could with what they had.
Straw Dogs is well cast and well directed. It is also borderline brutal at times, and many scenes may make some uncomfortable, so buyer beware. It is also highly adult. It's not for everyone.
Straw Dogs is the story of a young couple Amy and David. They are from Los Angeles and move back to her hometown deep in the heart of Mississippi. Amy has made it as an actress and David is a screenwriter. After the death of her father, they move back to her childhood home, but find out quickly they are not really welcome there.
This group of local thugs and bullies decide they don't like David, and are not thrilled with Amy anymore and her new life. They begin terrorizing the couple in every way they can. After these bullies kill the local sheriff on Amy's property, they decide the have to kill all witnesses. Namely Amy and David. Can they survive?
Straw Dogs is harsh. But it is also compelling and scary. I know it's Hollywood, but to be honest, it's not all that far fetched. They put you on a slow burn to the showdown you know is coming the whole time, but that's OK. They don't wear you out, or drag this out too long. I think they knew they had limitations, and made the best movie they could with what they had.
Straw Dogs is well cast and well directed. It is also borderline brutal at times, and many scenes may make some uncomfortable, so buyer beware. It is also highly adult. It's not for everyone.
MOVIE REVIEW - I Don't Know How She Does It
If you're planning on going to see the new I Don't Know How She Does It, you had better like Sarah Jessica Parker. Because you get a huge overdose of her here.
This movie is a good idea. Inventing a character that is an image of the young professional mother and her plight to keep her head above water. And see how she juggles is all and keeps it together. That would have been fine if you could have really related to her. If she had more than one thing in common with the audience she is supposed to be a mirror image of. But here she's not. The only thing she has in common, is that she is a mother. Her life is not most people's life.
Meet Kate (Parker). She is a mother of 2 young kids, and has a nice husband. She lives in Boston and works for a high powered finance company. She is working on a huge work project where she travels all over with Jack (Pierce Brosnan). He is the head of the finance company and together they are working on an ambitious project, and Kate is on the verge of having an entire Investment fund named after her. Along the way, she neglects her kids, takes advantage of her spineless husband (Greg Kinnear), and generally makes a mess of her personal life for professional gain. And this is a comedy. In the end of course she makes it all right, what a surprise.
This is after Jack of course makes a play for her, and she practically ruins all major relationships in her life. But that's not the real trouble here. This is just bad. Parker is hard to watch on screen. She's not really funny, or anything enjoyable. Plus she's still Carrie Bradshaw, where she was great. The reason she was so good in Sex And The City TV show, was that it was a fantasy. It was not really reality. She even narrates a bunch of this movie like Sex And The City, and it doesn't work. In fact, many characters in this movie do narration parts, and that's movie making gone by. It doesn't work.
This quite frankly is a painful 90 minutes. You have to like watching East Coasters talk on the cell phone, live in total chaos, trample over people, make a mess of it all, and put it all back together. If that's your thing, you're good. Even though you may see some similarities, many will not totally identify with Kate. She is above the audience. Big flaw.
This flick is a good idea, but you have to make characters that look like those going to see the movie. This may play well in New York, or Boston, but not most places. These characters just look selfish, self centered and ridiculous. Honest observation, there was one out loud laugh in the whole theater, and it was the last 2 seconds of the movie. True.
I Don't Know How She Does It. Nice try. Swing and miss.
This movie is a good idea. Inventing a character that is an image of the young professional mother and her plight to keep her head above water. And see how she juggles is all and keeps it together. That would have been fine if you could have really related to her. If she had more than one thing in common with the audience she is supposed to be a mirror image of. But here she's not. The only thing she has in common, is that she is a mother. Her life is not most people's life.
Meet Kate (Parker). She is a mother of 2 young kids, and has a nice husband. She lives in Boston and works for a high powered finance company. She is working on a huge work project where she travels all over with Jack (Pierce Brosnan). He is the head of the finance company and together they are working on an ambitious project, and Kate is on the verge of having an entire Investment fund named after her. Along the way, she neglects her kids, takes advantage of her spineless husband (Greg Kinnear), and generally makes a mess of her personal life for professional gain. And this is a comedy. In the end of course she makes it all right, what a surprise.
This is after Jack of course makes a play for her, and she practically ruins all major relationships in her life. But that's not the real trouble here. This is just bad. Parker is hard to watch on screen. She's not really funny, or anything enjoyable. Plus she's still Carrie Bradshaw, where she was great. The reason she was so good in Sex And The City TV show, was that it was a fantasy. It was not really reality. She even narrates a bunch of this movie like Sex And The City, and it doesn't work. In fact, many characters in this movie do narration parts, and that's movie making gone by. It doesn't work.
This quite frankly is a painful 90 minutes. You have to like watching East Coasters talk on the cell phone, live in total chaos, trample over people, make a mess of it all, and put it all back together. If that's your thing, you're good. Even though you may see some similarities, many will not totally identify with Kate. She is above the audience. Big flaw.
This flick is a good idea, but you have to make characters that look like those going to see the movie. This may play well in New York, or Boston, but not most places. These characters just look selfish, self centered and ridiculous. Honest observation, there was one out loud laugh in the whole theater, and it was the last 2 seconds of the movie. True.
I Don't Know How She Does It. Nice try. Swing and miss.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
