Jason Statham has a new movie seemingly every mid-winter, and this year Jennifer Lopez tags along for the new action flick, Parker.
Parker is certainly an action movie, but to its and Statham's credit, this is more than many of his movies. Parker has a bunch of action sequences, but it also takes the time to develop a character or two, including Parker who is a very enigmatic action figure.
Parker (Statham) is a very bad guy on the outside, making his living masterminding elaborate robbery schemes, the take of which is in the many hundreds of thousands of dollars. He also has a heart. Underneath his sometimes brutal exterior, he is a real softy most of the time, and always seems to make good on those who help him along the way. Even it's for diabolical reasons.
Parker and his band of not so nice men stage a large rip-off of the Ohio State Fair's box office. On their getaway there is a huge disagreement between the gang, and they throw Parker out of a moving car. They then belly back and shoot him. Thinking he was dead they run off with his share of the take. Although Parker does not die, and he recovers to get back his money, and to make things right. He sets his sights on the gang's next big job they have planned in Florida. He's going to kill these guys and get on with his life.
He befriends a local realtor Leslie (Lopez), and needs her expertise of the area. She is desperately in debt, and needs something good to happen to her. So Parker cuts her in on the possible deal. If he lives through this, he will make her a rich woman. That is his promise.
Statham is certainly a likable actor, and he fills up the screen nicely in these kinds of movies. Here Statham shows a whole lot more versatility and does a whole lot more here than just shoot people. I have called him out a few times asking him to quit making the same movie over and over again. Last years, Safe was a step in the right direction, and the journey continues here in the right direction. This is written far better than many projects past for Statham, all the while not forgetting what his bread and butter is. Action. Lopez is fun here in this small role, and it's good to see her back on screen.
This story is a bit unclear a times, but it seems to catch up with itself. There are also a few holes here and there, but it's not a deal breaker. Over all this is pretty fair for a late January release, and is certainly better than most anything else that has been dished out in the past two weekends. Sometimes you have to judge a movie on what it is. This is a actiony winter movie. And it that's what it delivers
Parker. It's not Citizen Kane, or Titanic. But it's a whole lot better than Movie 43, or Hansal And Gretel. Forgettable in a year? Yes, but OK today.
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Monday, January 28, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Hansel And Gretel Witch Hunters
I gotta ask. What are we doing? What on earth are we doing? Here comes Hansel And Gretel Witch Hunters. This release has been delayed a number of times and you're about to find out why.
The famous children's fable comes to life..sort of in this Rated R blood fest. They say it's the classic tale with a new twist. This just shows that some film makers are completely out of any new ideas. So let's do this. Let's cast two incredibly attractive young actors and put them in tight leather. Then we'll equip them with really goofy looking weapons, and have them blow up, gut, decapitate and rip apart a bunch of witches on screen. Sound fun?
What the heck is Jeremy Renner (Hansal) thinking? After starring in the Oscar Winning best picture The Hurt Locker a couple years ago (where he was great) he ends up here. With stops along the way with the Avengers, shooting arrows and really not having any real part in that movie. He stars in this with Gemma Arterton (Gretel). She is an up and coming British actress. Together on screen this is a very interesting dynamic. If they are supposed to look like brother and sister, they fail. They certainly look more like lovers than siblings. The little bit of chemistry they have together looks more like the should be sleeping together than fighting witches. Like I said, these are attractive people.
The story here doesn't really matter at all. They go around for about 90 minutes and kill witches. There is no real acting in this movie. It basically is a series of action scenes where they are running through the woods. Some of this looks like a bunch of people playing dress up. The action sequences are long, tired, unoriginal and tedious.
Bad writing too. Gretel basically ends up getting the crap beat out of her for much of this movie, while Hansel is off doing what he's doing. But don't despair. Gretel does look very good doing it, as there are plenty of very tight leather pants scenes while she's getting thrown around, and stomped on. And yes, Hansal does end up shirtless in the pond with a naked blonde witch that is trying to be his friend. A good friend obviously. And that's what we got. This is as deep and predictable as we get.
Oh yeah, and to make sure that it's a very cool action children's fairy tale made for adults, Hansal and Gretel say the F-word a lot. Funny, I don't remember that from the fable. See, that's how you make it a cool movie. People exploding in bloody heaps, and young men and women saying the
F-word. Look, no one here is so uptight that this actually bothers us, what it troubling is that this is this is all the have. That's it. This is bad. - BAD.
Hansal And Gretel. BAD!
The famous children's fable comes to life..sort of in this Rated R blood fest. They say it's the classic tale with a new twist. This just shows that some film makers are completely out of any new ideas. So let's do this. Let's cast two incredibly attractive young actors and put them in tight leather. Then we'll equip them with really goofy looking weapons, and have them blow up, gut, decapitate and rip apart a bunch of witches on screen. Sound fun?
What the heck is Jeremy Renner (Hansal) thinking? After starring in the Oscar Winning best picture The Hurt Locker a couple years ago (where he was great) he ends up here. With stops along the way with the Avengers, shooting arrows and really not having any real part in that movie. He stars in this with Gemma Arterton (Gretel). She is an up and coming British actress. Together on screen this is a very interesting dynamic. If they are supposed to look like brother and sister, they fail. They certainly look more like lovers than siblings. The little bit of chemistry they have together looks more like the should be sleeping together than fighting witches. Like I said, these are attractive people.
The story here doesn't really matter at all. They go around for about 90 minutes and kill witches. There is no real acting in this movie. It basically is a series of action scenes where they are running through the woods. Some of this looks like a bunch of people playing dress up. The action sequences are long, tired, unoriginal and tedious.
Bad writing too. Gretel basically ends up getting the crap beat out of her for much of this movie, while Hansel is off doing what he's doing. But don't despair. Gretel does look very good doing it, as there are plenty of very tight leather pants scenes while she's getting thrown around, and stomped on. And yes, Hansal does end up shirtless in the pond with a naked blonde witch that is trying to be his friend. A good friend obviously. And that's what we got. This is as deep and predictable as we get.
Oh yeah, and to make sure that it's a very cool action children's fairy tale made for adults, Hansal and Gretel say the F-word a lot. Funny, I don't remember that from the fable. See, that's how you make it a cool movie. People exploding in bloody heaps, and young men and women saying the
F-word. Look, no one here is so uptight that this actually bothers us, what it troubling is that this is this is all the have. That's it. This is bad. - BAD.
Hansal And Gretel. BAD!
Friday, January 25, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Movie 43
It is amazing what some Hollywood "stars" are willing to do on screen. And the new Movie 43 is certainly proof positive of that.
For those who are running out this weekend to see this thinking that this is some kind of edgy, groundbreaking style of movie, slow down a bit. They have been making movies like this for 30 years or so, but seldom this tasteless. This is one of those short vignette movies that stages a series of unconnected stories. All are designed to be more edgy and provocative than the last one. Or in this case, tasteless and really just gross. The intent is to lampoon many things in our society. Big business, dating, superheroes, race, education, venereal disease, sex, animation, and the movie business in general
The difference with this one is this. In decades past the actors that starred in these things were unknowns, or unknowns at the time. All willing to do things on screen that were exceedingly degrading, and embarrassing to them I'm sure. But Movie 43 will have non of that. The cast includes, Kate Winslet, Emma Stone, Dennis Quaid, Greg Kinnear, Naomi Watts, Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Elizabeth Banks and a bunch more. This is almost unbelievable.
This year alone, Jackman is up for an Oscar for Les Miserables (first time.) So is Watts for The Impossible. Kinnear is a former Oscar nominee, and Winslet has won a bunch of awards throughout her career. Plus, let's not forget that Berry is an Oscar winner. How sad is this. We are supposed to take these people seriously as real actors, when they choose to star in junk like this. They may think this shows a side of them that makes them hip, or cool. When the reality is, it makes them look small, and attention starved.
There is a laugh or two, but I noticed that the laughing that started out at the beginning in the theater sounded forced, quickly faded, and then there was just tumbleweeds. The vulgarity got old very fast. What is really sad is our movie makers are probably thinking this is envelope pushing or offensive. Truth is, you can't even give it that merit. This was such a bad idea, it's not even offensive. It's pathetic that there was this much effort put into this.
Truth is, many of the people that choose to go see this, will think this is the funniest movie ever. I have little doubt that this will make it's money back and then some. This is one of those movies that people will think is hilarious before they even walk in. What this really is, is a sad commentary on how far many of our most honored "stars" are willing to go for a buck, or to be excepted as fun, or just to show how bad their decision making really is.
Movie 43. Not for everyone for sure. Buyer beware. Horrible idea.
For those who are running out this weekend to see this thinking that this is some kind of edgy, groundbreaking style of movie, slow down a bit. They have been making movies like this for 30 years or so, but seldom this tasteless. This is one of those short vignette movies that stages a series of unconnected stories. All are designed to be more edgy and provocative than the last one. Or in this case, tasteless and really just gross. The intent is to lampoon many things in our society. Big business, dating, superheroes, race, education, venereal disease, sex, animation, and the movie business in general
The difference with this one is this. In decades past the actors that starred in these things were unknowns, or unknowns at the time. All willing to do things on screen that were exceedingly degrading, and embarrassing to them I'm sure. But Movie 43 will have non of that. The cast includes, Kate Winslet, Emma Stone, Dennis Quaid, Greg Kinnear, Naomi Watts, Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Elizabeth Banks and a bunch more. This is almost unbelievable.
This year alone, Jackman is up for an Oscar for Les Miserables (first time.) So is Watts for The Impossible. Kinnear is a former Oscar nominee, and Winslet has won a bunch of awards throughout her career. Plus, let's not forget that Berry is an Oscar winner. How sad is this. We are supposed to take these people seriously as real actors, when they choose to star in junk like this. They may think this shows a side of them that makes them hip, or cool. When the reality is, it makes them look small, and attention starved.
There is a laugh or two, but I noticed that the laughing that started out at the beginning in the theater sounded forced, quickly faded, and then there was just tumbleweeds. The vulgarity got old very fast. What is really sad is our movie makers are probably thinking this is envelope pushing or offensive. Truth is, you can't even give it that merit. This was such a bad idea, it's not even offensive. It's pathetic that there was this much effort put into this.
Truth is, many of the people that choose to go see this, will think this is the funniest movie ever. I have little doubt that this will make it's money back and then some. This is one of those movies that people will think is hilarious before they even walk in. What this really is, is a sad commentary on how far many of our most honored "stars" are willing to go for a buck, or to be excepted as fun, or just to show how bad their decision making really is.
Movie 43. Not for everyone for sure. Buyer beware. Horrible idea.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - The Last Stand
It's been a while since Arnold Schwarzenegger has made a feature movie. So The Last Stand is his first starring role since his stint as Governor of California ended.
The Last Stand actually has a real nice cast that not only includes Arnold, but Oscar winner Forest Whitaker and others. Arnold is back in an action role that is the classic underdog story of good versus extreme evil. I know, Arnold is well into his 60's now, but these aging action heroes still making movies have developed a nice sense of humor about themselves, and help to give these movies a bit of tongue and cheek.
TLS is the story of a Mexican Drug Lord and his escape from the FBI in the deep southwest of the United States. His elaborate run-for-the-border story starts with him driving a hopped up Corvette at speeds of 200 mph from Las Vegas to the Mexican line in Southern Arizona. His plan is to cross the border and evade trial in America. After leaving a trail of carnage in his wake, the final challenge is to make it through a sleepy border town where Sheriff Ray Owens (Schwarzenegger) is in charge.
Owens is a former highly decorated Los Angeles cop who became fed up with the death and corruption of LA, so he moved to this little Arizona town to be the law. Owens finds out that this kingpin in coming through his town, so he assembles a loyal small town squad made of those not used to this kind of action to stop this drug lord from coming through this town. The happens after one of their own deputy's is killed by one of the drug lords men. Owens, a man of honor, vows revenge and to stop him for the FBI.
First, this is a typical high violence action movie. There is a ton over the top violence, with gun play really in the lead. But, even though there is a bunch of it, I would not call it gratuitous, I would call it heavy, but there are not an unending supply of fresh bad guys to kill like in many movies. This is a movie that is being released at a very interesting time, as this showcases a ton of private weaponry, and ammunition.
There is a bunch of killing in this movie, and an exceptionally long gun battle scene near the end that probably could have been compacted some. Plus, there is some humor here. Some of it works and some does not. Less would probably have been more in this case. And there is the typical silly character or two, that adds little. But the character of Owens and Arnold's handling of this character embracing his advanced age is pretty fun. And, you like this sheriff. You would want him in your town.
There are some fun, very well done scenes in this movie and this moves along pretty well. It could have been edited a bit tighter and shortened down some, and a few better decisions could have been made along the way. But overall, this is what it is. It's a guys movie where there is lots going on at virtually all times. It's loud and crass at times. But it's saving grace is the story. Behind all the explosions and gun play, I liked the story. Plus, for me it was good to see Schwarzenegger back on the screen, especially when he doesn't run from who he really is.
The Last Stand. Classic story formula, classic action hero with some new bells and whistles. Guy fun.
The Last Stand actually has a real nice cast that not only includes Arnold, but Oscar winner Forest Whitaker and others. Arnold is back in an action role that is the classic underdog story of good versus extreme evil. I know, Arnold is well into his 60's now, but these aging action heroes still making movies have developed a nice sense of humor about themselves, and help to give these movies a bit of tongue and cheek.
TLS is the story of a Mexican Drug Lord and his escape from the FBI in the deep southwest of the United States. His elaborate run-for-the-border story starts with him driving a hopped up Corvette at speeds of 200 mph from Las Vegas to the Mexican line in Southern Arizona. His plan is to cross the border and evade trial in America. After leaving a trail of carnage in his wake, the final challenge is to make it through a sleepy border town where Sheriff Ray Owens (Schwarzenegger) is in charge.
Owens is a former highly decorated Los Angeles cop who became fed up with the death and corruption of LA, so he moved to this little Arizona town to be the law. Owens finds out that this kingpin in coming through his town, so he assembles a loyal small town squad made of those not used to this kind of action to stop this drug lord from coming through this town. The happens after one of their own deputy's is killed by one of the drug lords men. Owens, a man of honor, vows revenge and to stop him for the FBI.
First, this is a typical high violence action movie. There is a ton over the top violence, with gun play really in the lead. But, even though there is a bunch of it, I would not call it gratuitous, I would call it heavy, but there are not an unending supply of fresh bad guys to kill like in many movies. This is a movie that is being released at a very interesting time, as this showcases a ton of private weaponry, and ammunition.
There is a bunch of killing in this movie, and an exceptionally long gun battle scene near the end that probably could have been compacted some. Plus, there is some humor here. Some of it works and some does not. Less would probably have been more in this case. And there is the typical silly character or two, that adds little. But the character of Owens and Arnold's handling of this character embracing his advanced age is pretty fun. And, you like this sheriff. You would want him in your town.
There are some fun, very well done scenes in this movie and this moves along pretty well. It could have been edited a bit tighter and shortened down some, and a few better decisions could have been made along the way. But overall, this is what it is. It's a guys movie where there is lots going on at virtually all times. It's loud and crass at times. But it's saving grace is the story. Behind all the explosions and gun play, I liked the story. Plus, for me it was good to see Schwarzenegger back on the screen, especially when he doesn't run from who he really is.
The Last Stand. Classic story formula, classic action hero with some new bells and whistles. Guy fun.
MOVIE REVIEW - Mama
Jessica Chastain has the top two movies at the box office, and Mama is leading the way with a big opening weekend.
Up front, this movie is creepy. Finally a movie that is supposed to be scary, actually is. There is also a certain higher level to this movie. This is not attempted bloody, violent flick. I think it's the combination of superior writing, the lack of any real violence, and the presence of Chastain.
Mama is the story of two young girls ages 3 and 1. They are abandoned in a very remote cabin in the woods after their father kills their mother in 2008. Their father drives them to this cabin and is going to kill them, until he meets his won demise at the hands of a supernatural power inside the cabin. That spirit is Mama.
Flash forward 5 years, and the cabin is discovered and so are the little girls, alive in the cabin and in deplorable condition. How have they survived all this time? They were protected by this spirit for all those years. They then are rescued from this terrible situation, and reunited with their uncle and his girlfriend Annabel (Chastain). After a string of strange events, Annabel finds herself an unqualified single mom of sorts, trying to raise these two troubled little girls.
Problem begin a jealous ghost, Mama, has followed the girls and is bent on killing or at least terrorizing anyone who would come to try to love the girls. Mama is a cunning entity who lurks in the shadows, and makes herself present only when she feels the need. She wants to protect the girls and eliminate everyone else. But who is Mama? And why all this?
This movie is extremely well done, and has a great story to tell. I know, there have been tons of ghost movies and how is this different? It's written better, and it wasn't handled like a typical young audience slasher flick. It is not a slasher flick, in fact the violence is more implied than anything else. Mama puts you on a slow burn for many scenes that are highly compelling. There are also a side story that really adds to this movie and it's not just a ghost scaring a bunch of nit-wits in a house like most movies.
Chastain is very good in this role as an over-matched single mom of sorts, with virtually no maternal instinct. You can feel her terror as she tries to come to some kind of understanding of these strange little girls, and this horrible ghost within the walls of her home. This movie does have some good special effects, but is not reliant on them. They add to, no make the movie. What makes this movie good, is the story, some star power, and the willingness to be above the easy way out. This is certainly no sell out.
Mama. I liked a whole lot of this movie. Well done, scary, and a real jolt.
Up front, this movie is creepy. Finally a movie that is supposed to be scary, actually is. There is also a certain higher level to this movie. This is not attempted bloody, violent flick. I think it's the combination of superior writing, the lack of any real violence, and the presence of Chastain.
Mama is the story of two young girls ages 3 and 1. They are abandoned in a very remote cabin in the woods after their father kills their mother in 2008. Their father drives them to this cabin and is going to kill them, until he meets his won demise at the hands of a supernatural power inside the cabin. That spirit is Mama.
Flash forward 5 years, and the cabin is discovered and so are the little girls, alive in the cabin and in deplorable condition. How have they survived all this time? They were protected by this spirit for all those years. They then are rescued from this terrible situation, and reunited with their uncle and his girlfriend Annabel (Chastain). After a string of strange events, Annabel finds herself an unqualified single mom of sorts, trying to raise these two troubled little girls.
Problem begin a jealous ghost, Mama, has followed the girls and is bent on killing or at least terrorizing anyone who would come to try to love the girls. Mama is a cunning entity who lurks in the shadows, and makes herself present only when she feels the need. She wants to protect the girls and eliminate everyone else. But who is Mama? And why all this?
This movie is extremely well done, and has a great story to tell. I know, there have been tons of ghost movies and how is this different? It's written better, and it wasn't handled like a typical young audience slasher flick. It is not a slasher flick, in fact the violence is more implied than anything else. Mama puts you on a slow burn for many scenes that are highly compelling. There are also a side story that really adds to this movie and it's not just a ghost scaring a bunch of nit-wits in a house like most movies.
Chastain is very good in this role as an over-matched single mom of sorts, with virtually no maternal instinct. You can feel her terror as she tries to come to some kind of understanding of these strange little girls, and this horrible ghost within the walls of her home. This movie does have some good special effects, but is not reliant on them. They add to, no make the movie. What makes this movie good, is the story, some star power, and the willingness to be above the easy way out. This is certainly no sell out.
Mama. I liked a whole lot of this movie. Well done, scary, and a real jolt.
Friday, January 18, 2013
The Five Best Movies Of 2012
This year I saw and reviewed over 130 movies here. And now that the
calender has flipped, it's time for all kinds of best and worst
lists. This week we've posted the Five Worst Movies, and the Five Most Surprising Movies, The Five Most Disappointing Movies And now it's time for The Five Best Movies of 2012. The best movies of the year.
There overall were not those one or two runaway best movies like most years. There were some great movies, but the big takeaway for me from 2012 was the sheer amount of average movies. There were some that did separate and go on to be great. The race this year for me was as close as any year. Especially the distance between number one and number two. Almost a dead heat. So let's go!
The Five Best Movies Of 2012
1/ Django Unchained - I never thought that Quentin Tarantino would actually top my list of great movies, although he has been on it before with Inglourious Basterds a couple years ago. Of course this is very violent, and overly harsh at times. But behind all of that, this is a great story told exceptionally well. Amazing character development as Christoph Waltz has one of the best performances of the year again, and should win his second Oscar. The cast of Waltz, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Samuel L. Jackson is brilliant. Fun cameos, a terrific script, and inventive movie making. Tarantino is obviously an acquired taste. But this, at its core is great.
2/ Zero Dark Thirty - This is amazing movie making. Kathryn Bigelow has become such an incredible film maker it's hard to overstate. This movie, about the CIA's ten year manhunt for Osama Bin Laden is riveting stuff. This has a great cast, and is brilliantly written, produced and directed. This is a story that you don't know, and will never see told this well again when Hollywood tries at some point. Brave, strong and first class movie making from the very first frame. Depending on Hollywood politics surrounding some of the subject matter of this movie, more than likely this will win the Oscar for Best Picture.
3/ Silver Linings Playbook - This movie gets great marks for incredibly original storytelling, and a totally inventive idea. Two young people, with serious mental illness and issues trying to have a normal relationship somehow. Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, and Robert DeNiro all Oscar nominated for this. This is a great mixture of drama, art, and razor sharp humor. Wonderfully written and done directed with real care. Jennifer Lawrence is a way long way from The Hunger Games here, and she's better off for it. She deserves the Oscar for this. She is the gas in the engine of this movie. Somehow, see this.
4/ Lincoln - Daniel Day Lewis is about a lock for another Oscar for his portrayal of President Lincoln here. It would and should be his third. Yes, there are many nice things about this movie, with Tommy Lee Jones and Sally Field each nominated for an Oscar as well. Wonderful story, and fantastic sets and costuming. But let's be honest, Lewis makes this great. Without his truly unbelievable performance this is simply very good and not great. He elevates this to another level. It's a performance for the ages in an enormous role that had a lot riding on it.
5/ The Words - Again, a ton of originality points here. Bradley Cooper stars in this story of plagiarism, honesty and love. This has a real nice cast, and a very strong story that keeps you with it the whole time. The Words is also very smart, with intricate and deep performances working off a really intelligent script. This is one of those movies where he star of the movie is...the movie. Even though this was not a box office blockbuster, everyone I have every talked with that saw this, loved it. Well done. Great ensemble movie.
There has to be an honorable mention or two
Argo - I didn't love this as much as many, but it is still an upper tier movie. Ben Affleck is great.
Salmon Fishing In The Yemen - A true gem. Emily Blunt needs to make more movies like this. She can be a big star in great movies if she wants to be. Choose wisely.
The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel - Wonderfully charming movie.
Feel Free to e-mail me your thoughts and opinions to scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap my list of The Best Five Movies From 2011 as well.
There overall were not those one or two runaway best movies like most years. There were some great movies, but the big takeaway for me from 2012 was the sheer amount of average movies. There were some that did separate and go on to be great. The race this year for me was as close as any year. Especially the distance between number one and number two. Almost a dead heat. So let's go!
The Five Best Movies Of 2012
1/ Django Unchained - I never thought that Quentin Tarantino would actually top my list of great movies, although he has been on it before with Inglourious Basterds a couple years ago. Of course this is very violent, and overly harsh at times. But behind all of that, this is a great story told exceptionally well. Amazing character development as Christoph Waltz has one of the best performances of the year again, and should win his second Oscar. The cast of Waltz, Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Samuel L. Jackson is brilliant. Fun cameos, a terrific script, and inventive movie making. Tarantino is obviously an acquired taste. But this, at its core is great.
2/ Zero Dark Thirty - This is amazing movie making. Kathryn Bigelow has become such an incredible film maker it's hard to overstate. This movie, about the CIA's ten year manhunt for Osama Bin Laden is riveting stuff. This has a great cast, and is brilliantly written, produced and directed. This is a story that you don't know, and will never see told this well again when Hollywood tries at some point. Brave, strong and first class movie making from the very first frame. Depending on Hollywood politics surrounding some of the subject matter of this movie, more than likely this will win the Oscar for Best Picture.
3/ Silver Linings Playbook - This movie gets great marks for incredibly original storytelling, and a totally inventive idea. Two young people, with serious mental illness and issues trying to have a normal relationship somehow. Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, and Robert DeNiro all Oscar nominated for this. This is a great mixture of drama, art, and razor sharp humor. Wonderfully written and done directed with real care. Jennifer Lawrence is a way long way from The Hunger Games here, and she's better off for it. She deserves the Oscar for this. She is the gas in the engine of this movie. Somehow, see this.
4/ Lincoln - Daniel Day Lewis is about a lock for another Oscar for his portrayal of President Lincoln here. It would and should be his third. Yes, there are many nice things about this movie, with Tommy Lee Jones and Sally Field each nominated for an Oscar as well. Wonderful story, and fantastic sets and costuming. But let's be honest, Lewis makes this great. Without his truly unbelievable performance this is simply very good and not great. He elevates this to another level. It's a performance for the ages in an enormous role that had a lot riding on it.
5/ The Words - Again, a ton of originality points here. Bradley Cooper stars in this story of plagiarism, honesty and love. This has a real nice cast, and a very strong story that keeps you with it the whole time. The Words is also very smart, with intricate and deep performances working off a really intelligent script. This is one of those movies where he star of the movie is...the movie. Even though this was not a box office blockbuster, everyone I have every talked with that saw this, loved it. Well done. Great ensemble movie.
There has to be an honorable mention or two
Argo - I didn't love this as much as many, but it is still an upper tier movie. Ben Affleck is great.
Salmon Fishing In The Yemen - A true gem. Emily Blunt needs to make more movies like this. She can be a big star in great movies if she wants to be. Choose wisely.
The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel - Wonderfully charming movie.
Feel Free to e-mail me your thoughts and opinions to scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap my list of The Best Five Movies From 2011 as well.
MOVIE REVIEW - Broken City
A pretty big cast was called together for the new thriller, Broken City.
BC stars Mark Wahlberg, Russell Crowe, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and Barry Pepper in this movie about dirty New York City cops, elections and politicians. Wahlberg on his own has become a pretty big box office draw over the past few years, and his movies generally find a younger and loyal audience.
This is the story of a disgraced ex-cop Billy (Wahlberg) who now is a cut-rate private detective. He is hired by the mayor of NYC (Crowe) to find out who is having and affair with this wife, (Zeta-Jones.) So Billy and his trusty assistant Katy (Alona Tal) go to work and quickly nail the case down, and it all seems too easy. Reason is, that he really had been hired to find something else out. And unknown to Billy, actually becomes the fall guy in the whole ordeal.
Enter then the Chief Of Police, and a boat load of other city officials and this quickly becomes a thriller that has twists and turns a plenty. And in the end, this is actually a decent movie. Although with this cast assembled, you may be expecting more. I know I was.
Wahlberg produced, and starred in movies are always rather entertaining. The trouble that is brewing is that they all are starting to have the same style, look, and swagger. It almost feels at times like he's wearing the same costumes as the last movie he was in, and might be using the same music too. Of course he's not, but there is a sense of sameness that is taking over these movies. Lucky for him, the new Pain And Gain which is due out soon, looks to be a vastly different project with a new story line, and seems to be blazing a new trail and that's good news.
Wahlberg and Crowe deliver nice performances although Crowe seems over casted here, as does Zeta-Jones. She especially has minimal screen time, and Crowe, although in a leading role seems unchallenged here. I really liked Alona Tal though in her small role as the trusted and loyal Katy. She was incredibly charming, and added a nice soft touch this movie desperately needed. I think in the end, the real limits of this movie are created by the script. There just is not enough here. This story seems more suited for a Law And Order episode than a feature length movie.
Broken City. For January, it's fine.
BC stars Mark Wahlberg, Russell Crowe, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and Barry Pepper in this movie about dirty New York City cops, elections and politicians. Wahlberg on his own has become a pretty big box office draw over the past few years, and his movies generally find a younger and loyal audience.
This is the story of a disgraced ex-cop Billy (Wahlberg) who now is a cut-rate private detective. He is hired by the mayor of NYC (Crowe) to find out who is having and affair with this wife, (Zeta-Jones.) So Billy and his trusty assistant Katy (Alona Tal) go to work and quickly nail the case down, and it all seems too easy. Reason is, that he really had been hired to find something else out. And unknown to Billy, actually becomes the fall guy in the whole ordeal.
Enter then the Chief Of Police, and a boat load of other city officials and this quickly becomes a thriller that has twists and turns a plenty. And in the end, this is actually a decent movie. Although with this cast assembled, you may be expecting more. I know I was.
Wahlberg produced, and starred in movies are always rather entertaining. The trouble that is brewing is that they all are starting to have the same style, look, and swagger. It almost feels at times like he's wearing the same costumes as the last movie he was in, and might be using the same music too. Of course he's not, but there is a sense of sameness that is taking over these movies. Lucky for him, the new Pain And Gain which is due out soon, looks to be a vastly different project with a new story line, and seems to be blazing a new trail and that's good news.
Wahlberg and Crowe deliver nice performances although Crowe seems over casted here, as does Zeta-Jones. She especially has minimal screen time, and Crowe, although in a leading role seems unchallenged here. I really liked Alona Tal though in her small role as the trusted and loyal Katy. She was incredibly charming, and added a nice soft touch this movie desperately needed. I think in the end, the real limits of this movie are created by the script. There just is not enough here. This story seems more suited for a Law And Order episode than a feature length movie.
Broken City. For January, it's fine.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - The Impossible
The Impossible has been out for a week or two, a true story of a single family's story of survival of the horrific Tsunami December 26, 2004.
This movie has been reviewed well, and has received a few award nominations, but has a had a tough time getting traction at the box office. And after seeing it, this fact does come sharply into focus. As good as this movie is, it's just so incredibly tragic, sad, and is simply about 100 minutes of real human suffering. In short, this may do way better in video than at theaters. Besides the somewhat limited release, it's asking a lot of the general movie going public today, to put down big money for this subject matter. This is a real movie goers movie.
This is a highly dramatic movie as this young family of 5 is hit head on by the tragic tsunami and is essentially swept away, somewhat separately. The bulk of this movie is the journey they go through trying to find each other after the disaster. This movie shows, the panic, the chaos, and the total confusion caused by this horrible event graphically We have to remember that this tsunami struck deep in Southern Asia, way out in the Pacific, and not in a hugely populous country or area.
This really is a remarkable story of reunification, and survival and this is certainly a story worth telling. The tsunami scene is stunningly real and does a great job of putting you in the middle of it. It is terrifying and there is no question that you can sense the danger, and the horror that was this event. Although this is not an action movie, this scene is plenty action enough. One thing I found fascinating about that scene. It is so real, you are ready for it to be over, as you become as fatigued as the players on screen.
This stars Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor. Watts is nominated for an Oscar for this, and that may be a bit of a reach. She is certainly good here, but the majority of this role, is action based at the start, and the rest is essentially her in horrible pain and suffering the remainder of the movie. But I always like her choice in roles as I do McGregor. They generally don't make bad projects, and this certainly is not. This is solid, good, and painfully sad for the majority of it. But, you will know the whole time, that a decent ending is more than likely on the way.
The Impossible. Inspiring story. This is heavy drama, and gut wrenching stuff at times. But if you are in, this is really a very good emotional movie.
This movie has been reviewed well, and has received a few award nominations, but has a had a tough time getting traction at the box office. And after seeing it, this fact does come sharply into focus. As good as this movie is, it's just so incredibly tragic, sad, and is simply about 100 minutes of real human suffering. In short, this may do way better in video than at theaters. Besides the somewhat limited release, it's asking a lot of the general movie going public today, to put down big money for this subject matter. This is a real movie goers movie.
This is a highly dramatic movie as this young family of 5 is hit head on by the tragic tsunami and is essentially swept away, somewhat separately. The bulk of this movie is the journey they go through trying to find each other after the disaster. This movie shows, the panic, the chaos, and the total confusion caused by this horrible event graphically We have to remember that this tsunami struck deep in Southern Asia, way out in the Pacific, and not in a hugely populous country or area.
This really is a remarkable story of reunification, and survival and this is certainly a story worth telling. The tsunami scene is stunningly real and does a great job of putting you in the middle of it. It is terrifying and there is no question that you can sense the danger, and the horror that was this event. Although this is not an action movie, this scene is plenty action enough. One thing I found fascinating about that scene. It is so real, you are ready for it to be over, as you become as fatigued as the players on screen.
This stars Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor. Watts is nominated for an Oscar for this, and that may be a bit of a reach. She is certainly good here, but the majority of this role, is action based at the start, and the rest is essentially her in horrible pain and suffering the remainder of the movie. But I always like her choice in roles as I do McGregor. They generally don't make bad projects, and this certainly is not. This is solid, good, and painfully sad for the majority of it. But, you will know the whole time, that a decent ending is more than likely on the way.
The Impossible. Inspiring story. This is heavy drama, and gut wrenching stuff at times. But if you are in, this is really a very good emotional movie.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - A Haunted House
WOW, the new A Haunted House is pretty vile, so I'll keep this tidy.
AHH is the new parody movie of the Paranormal Activity series, and a few other supposedly scary movies. There are some laughs, a few really big laughs and some other guilty pleasure laughs But that's all the fun and games this can muster. Overall this is really not very funny.
What this movie does is take the PG-13 rated Paranormal series and turns it dramatically rated R. This is flat out gross at times with things that no one really wants to see. This is also very sexual in nature from the first frame to the last. That of course is fine if that's the direction they want to go. But this is amazingly inappropriate for kids. And I saw a bunch of them there with their parents. I saw kids as young as 8 there today and I was shocked the adults would sit through this with them eating popcorn.
If you are late teen or young adult, then this is fine as far as the appropriateness is concerned, but that's about the cut off. The language all the way through this is laced with profanity, and worse. And many of the things on screen seen, are envelope pushing to say the least. This was actually a funny idea since the Paranormal movies have been so big, but it is a complete sell out to the lowest and I mean the lowest common denominator.
I also find little humor with watching and hearing the family dog get smashed by a car, but they seem to think this is funny. Because it's right up front, first 5 minutes of the movie. Gets to ball rolling I guess. Then it goes on more to offend most groups of people rather than lampoon Paranormal effectively, and that's the real crime here. It doesn't even do what it set out to do.
A Haunted House. Adults and young adults only. Don't let the kids talk you into it. Not kid friendly.
AHH is the new parody movie of the Paranormal Activity series, and a few other supposedly scary movies. There are some laughs, a few really big laughs and some other guilty pleasure laughs But that's all the fun and games this can muster. Overall this is really not very funny.
What this movie does is take the PG-13 rated Paranormal series and turns it dramatically rated R. This is flat out gross at times with things that no one really wants to see. This is also very sexual in nature from the first frame to the last. That of course is fine if that's the direction they want to go. But this is amazingly inappropriate for kids. And I saw a bunch of them there with their parents. I saw kids as young as 8 there today and I was shocked the adults would sit through this with them eating popcorn.
If you are late teen or young adult, then this is fine as far as the appropriateness is concerned, but that's about the cut off. The language all the way through this is laced with profanity, and worse. And many of the things on screen seen, are envelope pushing to say the least. This was actually a funny idea since the Paranormal movies have been so big, but it is a complete sell out to the lowest and I mean the lowest common denominator.
I also find little humor with watching and hearing the family dog get smashed by a car, but they seem to think this is funny. Because it's right up front, first 5 minutes of the movie. Gets to ball rolling I guess. Then it goes on more to offend most groups of people rather than lampoon Paranormal effectively, and that's the real crime here. It doesn't even do what it set out to do.
A Haunted House. Adults and young adults only. Don't let the kids talk you into it. Not kid friendly.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Gangster Squad
An all-star cast is assembled for the new Gangster Squad.
This movie was supposed to be released in October, and be a serious Oscar contender. Then this movie ran into real life and was delayed a few times, till finally its January release which takes it out of Oscar consideration for 2012. More on that in a minute.
This is the story, based on a true events to a degree of the Gangland Wars in Los Angeles that began 1949. An east coast mobster named Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) came to Southern California and started killing off other organized crime organizations. His goal was to "own" L.A., controlling prostitution, gambling, drug trafficking, and all kinds of gaming. His presence was called "enemy occupation" by the remaining L.A. police officers and government officials that still were not being paid off by Cohen. Corruption was rampant, and the city was begin lost.
Police Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) silently declares war on Cohen, and assembles an off-the-books small group of big men called the Gangster Squad. Their job is to do whatever it takes to smash the whole Cohen operation. It's all off the record, and led by a police Sgt. John O'Mara (Josh Brolin). He then recruits 5 others who basically turn in their badges and go after Cohen. The cast also includes Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Giovanni Ribisi, Michael Pena, Anthony Mackie and Robert Patrick.
This was a very good idea for a movie. Part Untouchables (1987) , part L.A. Confidential (1997), and part new 21st century film making. They put a great cast together, and there are some really good moments in this basically entertaining movie. But Gangster Squad suffers from a few ails that are hard to overcome. The writing is not very good at all, and there could have been far more character development, and a whole lot less shooting. There is a whole lot of shooting in this movie. In fact so much of it, it makes it all a bit cartoonish after a while, and that's a shame. With a little more care, and the cast they assembled, this could have been really great. Something tells me that the movie they set out to make, and the one they did make where two different things.
First off, this is not a bad movie at all. I do think this is an underachieving movie. The sets, costuming and acting by our principles are really great. It's just written badly, and doesn't go near deep enough to be something special. They do set the stage in 1949 L.A. wonderfully, and give this movie a terrific backdrop. But this movie with all the sets, costumes, cast, fantastic music, and idea, sadly is shallow and spends way too much time avoiding the deep end of the pool. With a real sell out to lengthy gun battle machine gun scenes by those on both sides being the worst shots in the world, and missing 1000's of times at short range. It's a bit silly after a while.
Gangster Squad though does get a bit of a pass. This movie was done and set to go, when the real-life Aurora, Colorado theater shootings took place. The original script was for one of the centerpieces to be a gang-style theater shooting sequence. Film makers had to rewrite most of this script, and call back all of the actors and re-shoot a whole bunch of this movie. Much of the direction of this had to be changed. Again, I don't think this was the movie they were hoping to make.
Gangster Squad. It is a wonderful idea that looks great, sounds good, acted well, but is written poorly. Should have been better. This is not a wash-out, but not what it should have been.
This movie was supposed to be released in October, and be a serious Oscar contender. Then this movie ran into real life and was delayed a few times, till finally its January release which takes it out of Oscar consideration for 2012. More on that in a minute.
This is the story, based on a true events to a degree of the Gangland Wars in Los Angeles that began 1949. An east coast mobster named Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) came to Southern California and started killing off other organized crime organizations. His goal was to "own" L.A., controlling prostitution, gambling, drug trafficking, and all kinds of gaming. His presence was called "enemy occupation" by the remaining L.A. police officers and government officials that still were not being paid off by Cohen. Corruption was rampant, and the city was begin lost.
Police Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) silently declares war on Cohen, and assembles an off-the-books small group of big men called the Gangster Squad. Their job is to do whatever it takes to smash the whole Cohen operation. It's all off the record, and led by a police Sgt. John O'Mara (Josh Brolin). He then recruits 5 others who basically turn in their badges and go after Cohen. The cast also includes Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Giovanni Ribisi, Michael Pena, Anthony Mackie and Robert Patrick.
This was a very good idea for a movie. Part Untouchables (1987) , part L.A. Confidential (1997), and part new 21st century film making. They put a great cast together, and there are some really good moments in this basically entertaining movie. But Gangster Squad suffers from a few ails that are hard to overcome. The writing is not very good at all, and there could have been far more character development, and a whole lot less shooting. There is a whole lot of shooting in this movie. In fact so much of it, it makes it all a bit cartoonish after a while, and that's a shame. With a little more care, and the cast they assembled, this could have been really great. Something tells me that the movie they set out to make, and the one they did make where two different things.
First off, this is not a bad movie at all. I do think this is an underachieving movie. The sets, costuming and acting by our principles are really great. It's just written badly, and doesn't go near deep enough to be something special. They do set the stage in 1949 L.A. wonderfully, and give this movie a terrific backdrop. But this movie with all the sets, costumes, cast, fantastic music, and idea, sadly is shallow and spends way too much time avoiding the deep end of the pool. With a real sell out to lengthy gun battle machine gun scenes by those on both sides being the worst shots in the world, and missing 1000's of times at short range. It's a bit silly after a while.
Gangster Squad though does get a bit of a pass. This movie was done and set to go, when the real-life Aurora, Colorado theater shootings took place. The original script was for one of the centerpieces to be a gang-style theater shooting sequence. Film makers had to rewrite most of this script, and call back all of the actors and re-shoot a whole bunch of this movie. Much of the direction of this had to be changed. Again, I don't think this was the movie they were hoping to make.
Gangster Squad. It is a wonderful idea that looks great, sounds good, acted well, but is written poorly. Should have been better. This is not a wash-out, but not what it should have been.
Friday, January 11, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Zero Dark Thirty
There has been a ton of chatter about the new Kathryn Bigelow directed Zero Dark Thirty, finally opening up nationwide this weekend.
This is astoundingly good. Bigelow was the same woman that gave us The Hurt Locker a couple years ago, which won the Oscar for Best Picture. As good and as intense as that was, this is better. Zero Dark Thirty is about everything that is good about movie making.
This is the story of the CIA's ten year manhunt for Osama Bin Laden. This real star of this movie is its supreme storytelling, and it's singular focus on the people that really did the work to find Bin Laden. It begins in 2001 right after 9-11, and ends with the Seal Team 6 raid on the compound where Bin Laden was killed. More directly, this centers round a CIA Agent "Maya" and her obsession to follow her leads all around the world, to bring him to justice.
What ZDT really does that separates itself from many other movies is its central focus. It allows the movie to tell the story. There are no printed story boards to read, no character narration, and no real graphics to tell you who characters are. In fact, one thing I found very intriguing. In the scenes in Washington D.C., there is never any mention of any politicians name in any fashion, including the president past and current. And this movie doesn't go one yard to give anyone affiliated with any administration, or agency in Washington D.C. any of the credit. But rather the people that really did the job. The spotlight stays squarely on them. That helps keep the story on focus and moving in one direction.
War of any kind is messy stuff. And this war of course has been a different kind of war, and The Hurt Locker showed that, and so does this. ZDT, is taking some heat by many for showing the "enhanced interrogation techniques" that the CIA at one time used against the captured terrorists. And there is a fair amount of it in this movie. So, if that is something that offends you, or are extremely uncomfortable with than a different movie may be in store for you. This pulls no punches, it's direct, straight forward and tells the story in all of it's raw form.
This movie was given unprecedented access to information by the agencies of the Federal Government. And at the movies inception, they do tell you this story is based on actual eyewitness accounts of these events around the world. Is this a true story? Because we're dealing with the CIA more than likely literally no. But it certainly feels like you are there every step of the way. But this is not a stand up and cheer rah, rah movie. It is intense, and serious in every frame of it's 2 hours and 30 minutes. ZDT is incredibly intelligent in very facet. It's writing, filming, brilliant acting and it's ability to keep you engaged even when the subject on screen is difficult to understand, or watch.
This movie is beautifully crafted with fine actors, sets, locations, and music. You can tell that they were making something they thought would be important, a movie to stand up over time. One thing that ZDT will be known for, there will never be another movie made about this subject that will ever measure up to this, or be taken as seriously.
Zero Dark Thirty. Great is not a big enough word.
This is astoundingly good. Bigelow was the same woman that gave us The Hurt Locker a couple years ago, which won the Oscar for Best Picture. As good and as intense as that was, this is better. Zero Dark Thirty is about everything that is good about movie making.
This is the story of the CIA's ten year manhunt for Osama Bin Laden. This real star of this movie is its supreme storytelling, and it's singular focus on the people that really did the work to find Bin Laden. It begins in 2001 right after 9-11, and ends with the Seal Team 6 raid on the compound where Bin Laden was killed. More directly, this centers round a CIA Agent "Maya" and her obsession to follow her leads all around the world, to bring him to justice.
What ZDT really does that separates itself from many other movies is its central focus. It allows the movie to tell the story. There are no printed story boards to read, no character narration, and no real graphics to tell you who characters are. In fact, one thing I found very intriguing. In the scenes in Washington D.C., there is never any mention of any politicians name in any fashion, including the president past and current. And this movie doesn't go one yard to give anyone affiliated with any administration, or agency in Washington D.C. any of the credit. But rather the people that really did the job. The spotlight stays squarely on them. That helps keep the story on focus and moving in one direction.
War of any kind is messy stuff. And this war of course has been a different kind of war, and The Hurt Locker showed that, and so does this. ZDT, is taking some heat by many for showing the "enhanced interrogation techniques" that the CIA at one time used against the captured terrorists. And there is a fair amount of it in this movie. So, if that is something that offends you, or are extremely uncomfortable with than a different movie may be in store for you. This pulls no punches, it's direct, straight forward and tells the story in all of it's raw form.
This movie was given unprecedented access to information by the agencies of the Federal Government. And at the movies inception, they do tell you this story is based on actual eyewitness accounts of these events around the world. Is this a true story? Because we're dealing with the CIA more than likely literally no. But it certainly feels like you are there every step of the way. But this is not a stand up and cheer rah, rah movie. It is intense, and serious in every frame of it's 2 hours and 30 minutes. ZDT is incredibly intelligent in very facet. It's writing, filming, brilliant acting and it's ability to keep you engaged even when the subject on screen is difficult to understand, or watch.
This movie is beautifully crafted with fine actors, sets, locations, and music. You can tell that they were making something they thought would be important, a movie to stand up over time. One thing that ZDT will be known for, there will never be another movie made about this subject that will ever measure up to this, or be taken as seriously.
Zero Dark Thirty. Great is not a big enough word.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
The Five Most Disappointing Movies Of 2012
This year I saw and reviewed over 130 movies here. And now that the
calender has flipped, it's time for all kinds of best and worst
lists. This week we've posted the Five Worst Movies, and the Five Most Surprising Movies. And now it's time for The Five Most Disappointing Movies of 2012. Movies that fell short, way short of expectations or flat out bombed.
2012 was not overly memorable at the movies. Yes, revenues were way up but so were ticket prices. And sadly, there were some real disappointing flicks this year, as there are every year. There were a ton of extremely average movies made last year. That to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. To qualify for this list, it's based on when they were released to local theaters.
The Five Most Disappointing Movies Of 2012
1/ Cloud Atlas - Tom Hanks and Halle Berry star in this adaptation of a huge and popular book. This is the poster child of why not all books come to the movies effectively. Long, boring, complicated, and tedious. Laden with special effects, and intersecting stories that will leave you dizzy and sick to your stomach. I hate putting Hanks on a list like this, but his projects lately have a bit to be desired. This was also a tremendous financial flop. Gigantic budget, and no one went.
2/ Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close - This was released nationwide in January after a soft and delayed opening in late 2011. Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock star in this 9-11 movie. Again, a big and moving book. There are those that really loved this movie and were really moved by it. But overall this suffered from false advertising. Hanks and Bullock are barely in this movie time-wise, and overall this is entirely too long. Not all books transfer well. This misses badly all the way around. I can't even say I liked the kid who was in every single scene, when Hanks and Bullock were not.
3/ John Carter - Tons of hype. Then tons of yawns. Huge budget and again, no one went. Lots of computer generated stuff that 20 years ago would have been awesome. This movie looks "late to the party." There is nothing special about any of this including the special effects. Plus, the movies signature scene, the one on the trailers and the posters, lasts about 60 seconds. This sadly, was a disaster. Should have been made early 1990's. The effects would have been more inspired then. Now it's just old news.
4/ The Master - Great cast led by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, and Joaquin Phoenix both who may be up for Oscars for this movie. Very strange, they are both way better in this movie than this pointless, go nowhere movie. For such a good lead and supporting cast, this is a total snoozer. Let Hollywood pat itself all it wants to on their collective backs, steer clear with Netflix.
5/ This is 40 - They ran trailers in theaters for 6 months for this Christmas comedy. The trailers looked pretty funny, and entertaining. What we got was 10 minutes of fun, spread out over a 2 hour and 20 minute movie. Much of this is 6th grade mentality, and nothing really new. Even the lovely, and quirky Leslie Mann can save her husbands Judd Apatow's ill-advised and unoriginal movie. Judd, it's time to grow up.
There's the Five Most Disappointing Movies of 2012. Next are the Five Best Movies Of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap too the Five Most Disappointing Movies of 2011, and see how they match up.
2012 was not overly memorable at the movies. Yes, revenues were way up but so were ticket prices. And sadly, there were some real disappointing flicks this year, as there are every year. There were a ton of extremely average movies made last year. That to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. To qualify for this list, it's based on when they were released to local theaters.
The Five Most Disappointing Movies Of 2012
1/ Cloud Atlas - Tom Hanks and Halle Berry star in this adaptation of a huge and popular book. This is the poster child of why not all books come to the movies effectively. Long, boring, complicated, and tedious. Laden with special effects, and intersecting stories that will leave you dizzy and sick to your stomach. I hate putting Hanks on a list like this, but his projects lately have a bit to be desired. This was also a tremendous financial flop. Gigantic budget, and no one went.
2/ Extremely Loud And Incredibly Close - This was released nationwide in January after a soft and delayed opening in late 2011. Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock star in this 9-11 movie. Again, a big and moving book. There are those that really loved this movie and were really moved by it. But overall this suffered from false advertising. Hanks and Bullock are barely in this movie time-wise, and overall this is entirely too long. Not all books transfer well. This misses badly all the way around. I can't even say I liked the kid who was in every single scene, when Hanks and Bullock were not.
3/ John Carter - Tons of hype. Then tons of yawns. Huge budget and again, no one went. Lots of computer generated stuff that 20 years ago would have been awesome. This movie looks "late to the party." There is nothing special about any of this including the special effects. Plus, the movies signature scene, the one on the trailers and the posters, lasts about 60 seconds. This sadly, was a disaster. Should have been made early 1990's. The effects would have been more inspired then. Now it's just old news.
4/ The Master - Great cast led by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, and Joaquin Phoenix both who may be up for Oscars for this movie. Very strange, they are both way better in this movie than this pointless, go nowhere movie. For such a good lead and supporting cast, this is a total snoozer. Let Hollywood pat itself all it wants to on their collective backs, steer clear with Netflix.
5/ This is 40 - They ran trailers in theaters for 6 months for this Christmas comedy. The trailers looked pretty funny, and entertaining. What we got was 10 minutes of fun, spread out over a 2 hour and 20 minute movie. Much of this is 6th grade mentality, and nothing really new. Even the lovely, and quirky Leslie Mann can save her husbands Judd Apatow's ill-advised and unoriginal movie. Judd, it's time to grow up.
There's the Five Most Disappointing Movies of 2012. Next are the Five Best Movies Of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap too the Five Most Disappointing Movies of 2011, and see how they match up.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
The Five Most Surprising Movies Of 2012
This year I saw and reviewed over 130 movies here. And now that the
calender has flipped over, it's time for all kinds of best and worst
lists. This week we've posted the Five Worst Movies, and now it's time for The Five Most Surprising Movies of 2012. And we are using "surprising" to the positive.
2012 was not overly memorable at the movies. Yes, revenues were way up but so were ticket prices. I think it's always fun to go to the movies with low expectations and have a gem play out right there in front of you. Sadly, this doesn't happen near enough. There were a ton of extremely average movies made last year. That to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. But there were some real fun surprises too! To qualify for this list, it's based on when they were released to local theaters.
The Five Most Surprising Movies Of 2012
1/ Salmon Fishing In The Yemen - Strange title, great little movie. This very original story with Ewan McGregor, and Emily Blunt. This is kind of a few movies rolled into one. Very funny at times, emotional at times, makes a nice statement, and doesn't take itself too seriously. McGregor picks his projects wisely and Blunt is so charming, she's tough not to love. Very nice little movie. Don't let the title scare you away from the Red Box.
2/ Man On A Ledge - This came and went without any fanfare at all. Very cool story with a great cast featuring new and old schoolers. Story gets huge originality points, and builds nicely to a great crescendo. Funny at times, and enough action to keep you riveted. This was very well done. Sam Worthington, Elizabeth Banks, Ed Harris, and Ed Burns. This is worth a rental. You will not be blown away, but you will be entertained.
3/ People Like Us - This movie looked so average in the trailers, and was so entertaining in it's release. Chris Pine, Elizabeth Banks, Michelle Pfeiffer and Olivia Wilde. A very compelling story and characters that you know, and you grow to really care about. Pfeiffer hasn't been this good in a long time in her supporting role. I loved Banks. She was great, and drove this movie to be more than it would have been without her. Rent this, great date night movie.
4/ Ghost Rider 2 - Released in February and in the end, just flat out fun. This was panned by some critics, and I liked it more than many. But this is the "surprising" section, and I was surprised by this. Yeah, Nicolas Cage overacts again at times, but it sort of worked for me in this role. I think this falls under the "mindless fun" category. Short, tidy, and yes, good wins over evil. The door is open for more and that may not be the best idea. But for me, this was surprising.
5/ Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - The title alone is ridiculous, but this was not done as fact. It was done on folklore, legend, and outright fiction. This is surprising in the sense that I expected so little, and in the end, this was a bunch of fun. This did not take itself too seriously, and was handled fairly well. Please no more, one and done. More mindless fun.
There's the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2012. Next is the Five Most Disappointing Movies Of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap too the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2011, and see how they match up.
2012 was not overly memorable at the movies. Yes, revenues were way up but so were ticket prices. I think it's always fun to go to the movies with low expectations and have a gem play out right there in front of you. Sadly, this doesn't happen near enough. There were a ton of extremely average movies made last year. That to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. But there were some real fun surprises too! To qualify for this list, it's based on when they were released to local theaters.
The Five Most Surprising Movies Of 2012
1/ Salmon Fishing In The Yemen - Strange title, great little movie. This very original story with Ewan McGregor, and Emily Blunt. This is kind of a few movies rolled into one. Very funny at times, emotional at times, makes a nice statement, and doesn't take itself too seriously. McGregor picks his projects wisely and Blunt is so charming, she's tough not to love. Very nice little movie. Don't let the title scare you away from the Red Box.
2/ Man On A Ledge - This came and went without any fanfare at all. Very cool story with a great cast featuring new and old schoolers. Story gets huge originality points, and builds nicely to a great crescendo. Funny at times, and enough action to keep you riveted. This was very well done. Sam Worthington, Elizabeth Banks, Ed Harris, and Ed Burns. This is worth a rental. You will not be blown away, but you will be entertained.
3/ People Like Us - This movie looked so average in the trailers, and was so entertaining in it's release. Chris Pine, Elizabeth Banks, Michelle Pfeiffer and Olivia Wilde. A very compelling story and characters that you know, and you grow to really care about. Pfeiffer hasn't been this good in a long time in her supporting role. I loved Banks. She was great, and drove this movie to be more than it would have been without her. Rent this, great date night movie.
4/ Ghost Rider 2 - Released in February and in the end, just flat out fun. This was panned by some critics, and I liked it more than many. But this is the "surprising" section, and I was surprised by this. Yeah, Nicolas Cage overacts again at times, but it sort of worked for me in this role. I think this falls under the "mindless fun" category. Short, tidy, and yes, good wins over evil. The door is open for more and that may not be the best idea. But for me, this was surprising.
5/ Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter - The title alone is ridiculous, but this was not done as fact. It was done on folklore, legend, and outright fiction. This is surprising in the sense that I expected so little, and in the end, this was a bunch of fun. This did not take itself too seriously, and was handled fairly well. Please no more, one and done. More mindless fun.
There's the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2012. Next is the Five Most Disappointing Movies Of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
Let's recap too the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2011, and see how they match up.
MOVIE REVIEW - Hyde Park On Hudson
Try this on for size. There is a new 94 minute movie out that stars Bill Murray as President Franklyn D. Roosevelt. Hyde Park On Hudson. You heard me right...Bill Murray!
This is based on the notes and diaries discovered after Margaret Suckleys's death in 1991. She was a distant cousin to the former president and she was also one of his mistresses. And there were many. But she kept her secrets all those years.
It was a different time, and that is the main point of this little independent movie. There were so many secrets around the president in those days. Most of the nation did not know that FDR had polio and could not walk. No one really knew that he and his strong, and determined wife Eleanor had little use for each other. And certainly, no one knew (except Eleanor) that he had all these lovers right under her nose. This movie takes place over a few year period, and really focuses on the historic weekend in 1939 when King George and wife came to Hyde Park (Roosevelts country home) to ask for the United States help on the brink of World War II.
This is a small, charming movie that is really a movie goers movie. This is a real nice alternative and escape from the big budget action flicks currently filling theaters. This also has an older adult feel to it. History buffs will get a kick out of seeing Roosevelt in a light not normally seen. Bill Murray is flat out great and very believable as FDR. He looks amazingly like him, and clearly studied him intently preparing for this role. There is nothing "Bill Murray-ey" about this performance. It is a role very well done. Brave casting really paid off.
Laura Linney plays Daisey (Suckley) and much of this is told through her eyes, with her narrating much of it. They are surrounded by a nice, but little known cast that support them very well. Overall, this is a real interesting movie. It's quick and tidy, and doesn't belabor the point. It has a little story to tell, tells it and moves on. It even feels like a video diary. Its a nice mix of real emotion, and a spritz of humor throughout.
Hyde Park On Hudson. Quaint, charming, and a very nice little movie. Clearly, not for everyone but a nice distraction. Well done.
This is based on the notes and diaries discovered after Margaret Suckleys's death in 1991. She was a distant cousin to the former president and she was also one of his mistresses. And there were many. But she kept her secrets all those years.
It was a different time, and that is the main point of this little independent movie. There were so many secrets around the president in those days. Most of the nation did not know that FDR had polio and could not walk. No one really knew that he and his strong, and determined wife Eleanor had little use for each other. And certainly, no one knew (except Eleanor) that he had all these lovers right under her nose. This movie takes place over a few year period, and really focuses on the historic weekend in 1939 when King George and wife came to Hyde Park (Roosevelts country home) to ask for the United States help on the brink of World War II.
This is a small, charming movie that is really a movie goers movie. This is a real nice alternative and escape from the big budget action flicks currently filling theaters. This also has an older adult feel to it. History buffs will get a kick out of seeing Roosevelt in a light not normally seen. Bill Murray is flat out great and very believable as FDR. He looks amazingly like him, and clearly studied him intently preparing for this role. There is nothing "Bill Murray-ey" about this performance. It is a role very well done. Brave casting really paid off.
Laura Linney plays Daisey (Suckley) and much of this is told through her eyes, with her narrating much of it. They are surrounded by a nice, but little known cast that support them very well. Overall, this is a real interesting movie. It's quick and tidy, and doesn't belabor the point. It has a little story to tell, tells it and moves on. It even feels like a video diary. Its a nice mix of real emotion, and a spritz of humor throughout.
Hyde Park On Hudson. Quaint, charming, and a very nice little movie. Clearly, not for everyone but a nice distraction. Well done.
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
The Five Worst Movies of 2012
This year I saw and reviewed over 130 movies here. And now that the calender has flipped over, it's time for all kinds of best and worst lists. This week, we'll post the Five Worst, Five Biggest Disappointing, Five Most Surprising, and the Five Best Movies of 2012. Today, we'll start with the five worst.
2012 was not a very memorable year with the movies. Yes revenues were way up but so were tickets prices. The swing between the very good and average was small, and to it's credit, Hollywood didn't make as many horrible flicks as normal. There were a ton of extremely average movies made, that to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. But there were some real dogs, so here we go!
The Five Worst Movies Of 2012
1/ Won't Back Down - This is a horrible idea for a movie. Parents supposedly taking over a school
because the school was bad. Based "on actual events" is always a wimpy
way out, translation - not true. Story stinks, acting stinks, writing
stinks, and is insulting to your intelligence. Goes in 20 directions and
not one is worth following. Almost unwatchable.
2/ What To Expect, When You're Expecting - This challenged for the coveted worst movie spot
for me. This is a look at having children and is supposed to be funny. And
as wonderful as Elizabeth Banks is, it is possibly the worst performance of
the year for an actress. Horrible in every single regard. Walk-outable.
3/ One For The Money - Katherine Heigl has been tanking beyond anyone's belief recently.
And for someone so likable, her movies are not. This is not funny, charming,
or anything except Heigl in tight jeans. In fact, this is hopefully the movie that
makes her change direction of her career. Better side dish than main course. It
takes more than tight jeans to make people want to pay 12 dollars to show up.
4/ The Collection - Complete Saw series rip-off made by some of the same people. This silly gore
and blood fest has a huge problem outside of being tasteless and ridiculous. It's
amazingly unoriginal. I know it's a sequel, but there is nothing about this that
is anywhere near inventive. Not scary, not compelling, just gross and bloody.
5/ House At The End Of The Street - Sorry Jennifer Lawrence fans, of which I am one this stinks.
There is not one moment of this worth watching. Supposedly scary, but ends up
being predictable, and hokey. Lawrence is joined in this cesspool by Elisabeth
Shue, and a forgettable cast. Steer clear. No Red Box for you! Luckily, JLaw
will be back on our Five Best list later.
There's the Five Worst list. Next up is the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
2012 was not a very memorable year with the movies. Yes revenues were way up but so were tickets prices. The swing between the very good and average was small, and to it's credit, Hollywood didn't make as many horrible flicks as normal. There were a ton of extremely average movies made, that to me was the prevailing takeaway from 2012. But there were some real dogs, so here we go!
The Five Worst Movies Of 2012
1/ Won't Back Down - This is a horrible idea for a movie. Parents supposedly taking over a school
because the school was bad. Based "on actual events" is always a wimpy
way out, translation - not true. Story stinks, acting stinks, writing
stinks, and is insulting to your intelligence. Goes in 20 directions and
not one is worth following. Almost unwatchable.
2/ What To Expect, When You're Expecting - This challenged for the coveted worst movie spot
for me. This is a look at having children and is supposed to be funny. And
as wonderful as Elizabeth Banks is, it is possibly the worst performance of
the year for an actress. Horrible in every single regard. Walk-outable.
3/ One For The Money - Katherine Heigl has been tanking beyond anyone's belief recently.
And for someone so likable, her movies are not. This is not funny, charming,
or anything except Heigl in tight jeans. In fact, this is hopefully the movie that
makes her change direction of her career. Better side dish than main course. It
takes more than tight jeans to make people want to pay 12 dollars to show up.
4/ The Collection - Complete Saw series rip-off made by some of the same people. This silly gore
and blood fest has a huge problem outside of being tasteless and ridiculous. It's
amazingly unoriginal. I know it's a sequel, but there is nothing about this that
is anywhere near inventive. Not scary, not compelling, just gross and bloody.
5/ House At The End Of The Street - Sorry Jennifer Lawrence fans, of which I am one this stinks.
There is not one moment of this worth watching. Supposedly scary, but ends up
being predictable, and hokey. Lawrence is joined in this cesspool by Elisabeth
Shue, and a forgettable cast. Steer clear. No Red Box for you! Luckily, JLaw
will be back on our Five Best list later.
There's the Five Worst list. Next up is the Five Most Surprising Movies of 2012. It'll be up this week. If you have an opinion or thought, feel free to email me, scott@wqmx.com
Monday, January 7, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Texas Chainsaw 3-D
Clearly, Hollywood is now officially out of new ideas. Here comes Texas Chainsaw 3-D.
The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre debuted in the theaters in October 1974. At the time, it was a mortifying movie where this nut from deep in Texas, chainsaws a group of college aged kids on his property. Including one in a wheelchair. If you see it on video today, you have to go back in your mind to 1974 and realize this really had not been shown in movies until then. It is tame by today's standards. But it ushered in a new era, for good or worse in movie making. There has always been a bit of urban legend that it was based on some form of truth. But it is not true, that was a marketing ploy for the original movie.
There have been a ton of knock-offs since then, and now we have Texas Chainsaw 3-D. This movie picks up exactly where the 1974 movie leaves off. I mean in the next hour in the story. This is after a 5 minute recap of the original, with the original footage, and a montage of that actual story. Then it flashes forward to modern day, and our story moves on. And there lies the beginning of the trouble. The characters with connections to the original story are bout 22 years old. And the story was 39 years ago. OK, we'll give them a pass on that. Then it gets really stupid.
This group of young adults, led by two really hot women (a shocker) again end up on this families ranch in Texas, and guess what? The same guy, thought dead from 1974, starts to carve up this group of young people. Plus, he pulls out a hammer, and an hatchet and other implements to add a bit of flair I guess. Only this time it's not 1974, it's 2012, and it's a lot more gruesome. And, it's in 3-D. And there lies another problem, the 3-D here is really not very good. It rarely really comes into play. Oh, there's a few times the blades seem near you, but it adds nothing. For most of this movie, the 3-D is not even a factor. In fast, it makes this movie look a bit more silly then it is.
So let's add this up so far. Silly remake with huge story holes, and a touted 3-D that is really a dud. And a price per ticket that is about 30 percent more than regular movies. In the end there was no real reason to make yet another Texas Chainsaw movie. But here we are.
Texas Chainsaw 3-D. Silly.
The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre debuted in the theaters in October 1974. At the time, it was a mortifying movie where this nut from deep in Texas, chainsaws a group of college aged kids on his property. Including one in a wheelchair. If you see it on video today, you have to go back in your mind to 1974 and realize this really had not been shown in movies until then. It is tame by today's standards. But it ushered in a new era, for good or worse in movie making. There has always been a bit of urban legend that it was based on some form of truth. But it is not true, that was a marketing ploy for the original movie.
There have been a ton of knock-offs since then, and now we have Texas Chainsaw 3-D. This movie picks up exactly where the 1974 movie leaves off. I mean in the next hour in the story. This is after a 5 minute recap of the original, with the original footage, and a montage of that actual story. Then it flashes forward to modern day, and our story moves on. And there lies the beginning of the trouble. The characters with connections to the original story are bout 22 years old. And the story was 39 years ago. OK, we'll give them a pass on that. Then it gets really stupid.
This group of young adults, led by two really hot women (a shocker) again end up on this families ranch in Texas, and guess what? The same guy, thought dead from 1974, starts to carve up this group of young people. Plus, he pulls out a hammer, and an hatchet and other implements to add a bit of flair I guess. Only this time it's not 1974, it's 2012, and it's a lot more gruesome. And, it's in 3-D. And there lies another problem, the 3-D here is really not very good. It rarely really comes into play. Oh, there's a few times the blades seem near you, but it adds nothing. For most of this movie, the 3-D is not even a factor. In fast, it makes this movie look a bit more silly then it is.
So let's add this up so far. Silly remake with huge story holes, and a touted 3-D that is really a dud. And a price per ticket that is about 30 percent more than regular movies. In the end there was no real reason to make yet another Texas Chainsaw movie. But here we are.
Texas Chainsaw 3-D. Silly.
Friday, January 4, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - The Promised Land
Occasionally a movie comes out with tons of TV hype, and supposed critical acclaim that almost seems forced. And that is the new Matt Damon movie, The Promised Land.
It's not often we get a good old fashioned anti-fracking movie for our entertainment but that is exactly what this is. It's anti-fracking, and overall anti-big business and energy. I know this can be an emotional issue for many, as passions potentially fire high on each side. Too bad they made such a boring movie about such an impassioned issue.
Damon stars as Steve, who works for a fictional natural gas energy company. His job along with Sue, (Francis MacDormand) is to go to small, dying farm towns and sell gas drilling leases to those who need the money. There they meet some friendly greetings, and some resistance. Some of the push-back is from the educated locals, and of course a supposed small environmental group gets involved to try to discourage people from signing these leases. Sound exciting? Well, it's about as exciting as it sounds.
To it's credit. TPL does not get overly preachy about statistics on fracking, and how bad it can be in certain cases for the land. It does not go deeply into how much money this company will make, and how bad it can be potentially in some cases for those who do sign. It also does not make statistical cases for the other side either about how safe it is, and the like. And although it does in the end demonize big energy, it doesn't go as far as they could have.
Here's the trouble. This is the most boring movie of the year. Do not get sucked in to the TV ads about how The Oscars should take notice. What Oscar should take is No-Doze. This is a total snoozer. Nothing about this movie really works. The story is short on any real substance. The musical soundtrack sound like an unending sleepy Enja ballad, and the performances are completely uninspired.
This stars not only Damon,. but John Krasinsky and a completely forgettable supporting cast. I am a fan of much of Damon's work. He wrote this along with Krasinsky, and they are billing this as the same people who brought you Good Will Hunting. Be advised. This is NO Good Will Hunting. Regardless on where you fall on the whole fracking issue, this whole thing is just tired. There's a reason this has been released now and not over the holidays in wide release. They've got a dog on their hands, and they know it. It's borderline brutal.
The Promised Land. The Nyquil of movies. You may be asleep before your head hits the back of your theater chair.
It's not often we get a good old fashioned anti-fracking movie for our entertainment but that is exactly what this is. It's anti-fracking, and overall anti-big business and energy. I know this can be an emotional issue for many, as passions potentially fire high on each side. Too bad they made such a boring movie about such an impassioned issue.
Damon stars as Steve, who works for a fictional natural gas energy company. His job along with Sue, (Francis MacDormand) is to go to small, dying farm towns and sell gas drilling leases to those who need the money. There they meet some friendly greetings, and some resistance. Some of the push-back is from the educated locals, and of course a supposed small environmental group gets involved to try to discourage people from signing these leases. Sound exciting? Well, it's about as exciting as it sounds.
To it's credit. TPL does not get overly preachy about statistics on fracking, and how bad it can be in certain cases for the land. It does not go deeply into how much money this company will make, and how bad it can be potentially in some cases for those who do sign. It also does not make statistical cases for the other side either about how safe it is, and the like. And although it does in the end demonize big energy, it doesn't go as far as they could have.
Here's the trouble. This is the most boring movie of the year. Do not get sucked in to the TV ads about how The Oscars should take notice. What Oscar should take is No-Doze. This is a total snoozer. Nothing about this movie really works. The story is short on any real substance. The musical soundtrack sound like an unending sleepy Enja ballad, and the performances are completely uninspired.
This stars not only Damon,. but John Krasinsky and a completely forgettable supporting cast. I am a fan of much of Damon's work. He wrote this along with Krasinsky, and they are billing this as the same people who brought you Good Will Hunting. Be advised. This is NO Good Will Hunting. Regardless on where you fall on the whole fracking issue, this whole thing is just tired. There's a reason this has been released now and not over the holidays in wide release. They've got a dog on their hands, and they know it. It's borderline brutal.
The Promised Land. The Nyquil of movies. You may be asleep before your head hits the back of your theater chair.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
MOVIE REVIEW - Les Miserables
After 25 years of huge stage play success, Les Miserables has come to the big screen in this 2 hour and 40 minute 100 percent musical for 2012.
This of course has been decorated in about every fashion possible as a play, but now it's the movies turn. So far, this has been a huge success financially, and has picked up numerous award show nominations. But I think it's time to slow down and catch our breath a bit, and recognize this is the kind of movie that Hollywood loves to pat itself on the back over. It's art, becoming a new kind of art. And they just can't help but honor themselves for this.
First off, if you really want to see Les Mis, go see it on the stage. It is are more powerful and works far better in about every regard. I seldom think that it's a great idea to adapt these kind of monster shows into movies. In an attempt to gain much, much more is lost. It is simply more moving to see live players on stage sing this powerful music, than a list of Hollywood A and B-listers. The story is told better in that forum.
This stars Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, and Amanda Seyfried. Simply put, this is a complicated, and heavy story told over about a 20 year period during the French Revolution in the early 1500's, dealing with class warfare and those wanting freedom and equality. It's told exclusively with singing dialogue. But this version is getting far more attention for the groundbreaking way the movie was constructed. The actors (all of them) did their own singing, and did it live as the movie was being filmed, virtually unheard of in Hollywood. Usually all of the singing is done months in advance and later dubbed in.
It is a very revolutionary way to do it, and it has been met with good industry chatter. The singing is not always polished, and that's OK. It adds to the realism of the whole thing, and overall is effective. The sets are fantastic and the costuming is amazing. This film is edited very skillfully, and the beauty of the orchestral arrangements at times are breathtaking. This film will win a bunch awards somewhere, and these are the areas that are worthy. To the public, the "who cares" categories.
But the trouble with Le Mis is this. No matter what kind of bells and whistles they toss at you, you still see Russell Crowe, and Hugh Jackman singing show tunes..be it good ones. They do a ton of singing, and it's not their fault they are not polished vocalists. Their star power, especially Crowe's gets in the way. You spend as much time wondering how they are getting through the songs, as opposed to seeing them totally in character. There is an awful lot of these two singing in this movie and they are not hacks by any means. But seasoned stage actors can bring more power and emotion to these large roles and in the end make them far more believable.
Hathaway is very good and steals the show with her amazing performance of I Dreamed A Dream. Trouble is, that climax is about at the 30 minute mark. Seyfreid, who is the best vocalist here, along with Samantha Barks are both stunningly good, sadly in roles that are crucial just smaller. Should be mentioned too that there have been new songs added to this rendition in addition to the original score.
Also keep in mind this will feel very long at times. No intermission here, which could actually pick up the pace of your experience. This for many, will get fatiguing with this format and length. Les Mis, is a far, and I mean far better show on stage than can be caught in the movies. This is a different experience to be sure, but this is an not mainstream.
Les Miserables. Sometimes a fantastic stage play should stay exactly that. This for me, in the grand total of all works is not very effective. And now sadly, and possibly the biggest shame of all, this will be the only way the majority of the public will every know this show.
This of course has been decorated in about every fashion possible as a play, but now it's the movies turn. So far, this has been a huge success financially, and has picked up numerous award show nominations. But I think it's time to slow down and catch our breath a bit, and recognize this is the kind of movie that Hollywood loves to pat itself on the back over. It's art, becoming a new kind of art. And they just can't help but honor themselves for this.
First off, if you really want to see Les Mis, go see it on the stage. It is are more powerful and works far better in about every regard. I seldom think that it's a great idea to adapt these kind of monster shows into movies. In an attempt to gain much, much more is lost. It is simply more moving to see live players on stage sing this powerful music, than a list of Hollywood A and B-listers. The story is told better in that forum.
This stars Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, and Amanda Seyfried. Simply put, this is a complicated, and heavy story told over about a 20 year period during the French Revolution in the early 1500's, dealing with class warfare and those wanting freedom and equality. It's told exclusively with singing dialogue. But this version is getting far more attention for the groundbreaking way the movie was constructed. The actors (all of them) did their own singing, and did it live as the movie was being filmed, virtually unheard of in Hollywood. Usually all of the singing is done months in advance and later dubbed in.
It is a very revolutionary way to do it, and it has been met with good industry chatter. The singing is not always polished, and that's OK. It adds to the realism of the whole thing, and overall is effective. The sets are fantastic and the costuming is amazing. This film is edited very skillfully, and the beauty of the orchestral arrangements at times are breathtaking. This film will win a bunch awards somewhere, and these are the areas that are worthy. To the public, the "who cares" categories.
But the trouble with Le Mis is this. No matter what kind of bells and whistles they toss at you, you still see Russell Crowe, and Hugh Jackman singing show tunes..be it good ones. They do a ton of singing, and it's not their fault they are not polished vocalists. Their star power, especially Crowe's gets in the way. You spend as much time wondering how they are getting through the songs, as opposed to seeing them totally in character. There is an awful lot of these two singing in this movie and they are not hacks by any means. But seasoned stage actors can bring more power and emotion to these large roles and in the end make them far more believable.
Hathaway is very good and steals the show with her amazing performance of I Dreamed A Dream. Trouble is, that climax is about at the 30 minute mark. Seyfreid, who is the best vocalist here, along with Samantha Barks are both stunningly good, sadly in roles that are crucial just smaller. Should be mentioned too that there have been new songs added to this rendition in addition to the original score.
Also keep in mind this will feel very long at times. No intermission here, which could actually pick up the pace of your experience. This for many, will get fatiguing with this format and length. Les Mis, is a far, and I mean far better show on stage than can be caught in the movies. This is a different experience to be sure, but this is an not mainstream.
Les Miserables. Sometimes a fantastic stage play should stay exactly that. This for me, in the grand total of all works is not very effective. And now sadly, and possibly the biggest shame of all, this will be the only way the majority of the public will every know this show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
