Same thing as last year. Just a list of the films I'm looking forward to for next year. The ones closer to the top are the ones I'm looking forward too most. Made a list of 20 entries like last time too. I didn't include include the films I was looking forward to last year (To the Wonder, Place Beyond The Pines, Only God Forgives, Stoker, Gravity, World War Z) that I was unable to see for various reasons. (excuse the repeat Untitled terrence Malick Project, it's a different film). Also left off The Hobbit sequel, seemed like a waste of space since the series obviously be there until 2014. Here we go.
- Untitled Terrence Malick Project / Knights of Cup (two films, same project, not sure which will be out first)
- Pacific Rim
- The Counseler
- An Enemy
- The World's End
- Her
- Trance
- Twelve Years a Slave
- The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby: His/Hers (actually it's two films, same project, counting as one)
- Maps to the Stars
- Oblivion
- Can a Song Save a Life?
- Don Jon's Addiction
- Blood Ties
- Elysium
- The Zero Theorem
- Prisoners
- Man of Steel
- Inside Llewyn Davis
- White Bird in a Blizzard
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Anna Karenina (*** out of ****)
I have never seen a movie like Anna Karenina before and I don't think I would like too again either. Don't get me wrong, I found the film worthwhile and often enticing, but the concept of the film is an better idea on paper rather than execution. To set the stage, much of the film takes place in a single large room. It's a large theater and serves as different locations for the film, so it's as if Anna Karenina is a play. Yet the characters never show any acknowledgment of this and carry about their lives as if this setting was normal. This style of filmmaking sets up for lavish and wonderful scenes. Filled with flamboyant choreography and dazzling costumes, the film is never boring to look at. However this concept often can distract from the story and as the film progresses the theater scenes become erratic in usage (going long stretches without them). Still this original take on the classic novel is welcomed and makes for some lovely cinema.
Keira Knightly strongly plays the title character in this Joe Wright adaption. Married to minister Karenin (Jude Law), Anna is in the spotlight of Russian social life. She however becomes fascinated by Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a "rich good looking calvary officer". The two begin a an affair that will shock all of the country. Meanwhile Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) begins his journey in life looking for marriage and a place in the world.
Joe Wright's has brought a lot to this much adapted novel with his theater oriented concept. The actors do a terrific job with such a challenging film. It's not all that it could've been but I appreciate what it attempted.
*** out of ****
Keira Knightly strongly plays the title character in this Joe Wright adaption. Married to minister Karenin (Jude Law), Anna is in the spotlight of Russian social life. She however becomes fascinated by Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a "rich good looking calvary officer". The two begin a an affair that will shock all of the country. Meanwhile Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) begins his journey in life looking for marriage and a place in the world.
Joe Wright's has brought a lot to this much adapted novel with his theater oriented concept. The actors do a terrific job with such a challenging film. It's not all that it could've been but I appreciate what it attempted.
*** out of ****
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Red Dawn (*1/2 out of ****)
Red Dawn is a remake that does next to nothing right. Patrick Swayze's 1984 original wasn't a great movie by any means, but there was nothing really wrong with it. The first version worked as a patriotic propaganda message in a time where invasion of the United States was a concern on some minds. The remake substitutes the Russians for North Koreans. So instead of making a movie about some what relevant fear, they decided to introduce a laughable enemy. A country that as around 1/15 of the United States population occupying land in in this gun crazy country seems absolutely ludicrous. The choice of introducing North Koreans was done after post production as the original enemy was the Chinese, but they will more likely see this film so the change was done to make foreign money. So much for strong american ideas when the producers are worried about the concerns of the Chinese. Enough ranting, time to look at the actual film.
Much like last time a foreign country invades a small town surrounded by wildness. Several high schoolers and a few older siblings escape into the woods and decide to use guerrilla tactics to make occupation impossible for the North Koreans. Instead of going into depth of what it would be like to learn a guerrilla fighter, they mastered the process in two minute montage over a undisclosed period of time. Calling themselves Wolverines, the young adults run around town in action scene after action scene. They outsmart the experienced soldiers at every turn as well as make full sprints while holding large automatic machine guns. It would have been interesting to see how inexperienced youngsters show concern and debated over what would be the best way to tackle this fight. Discussing key places in their town and talking about the details on how they could tackle this large opposition. Of course as I said before it's simply just the hero's jumping from ambush to ambush for the most part. This all leading to a un-climatic conclusion.
The cast is largely young and good looking people who have some basic acting talent. They don't really add to the problems of the film since they aren't told do much talking anyway (I swear Isabel Lucas maybe has two lines for 90% of the time she's on screen). Chris Hemsworth and Josh Hutcherson are working below their talent but I'm sure they and the other actors are happy enough to collect a pay check. Some of the action scenes aren't half bad but most suffer from shaky camera work (Bourne style) that make it hard to follow the sequence of events. If your going to make a movie, let alone remake one, don't phone it in.
*1/2 out of ****
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Silver Lining Playbook (***1/2 out of ****)
Director David O. Russell often knows how to breath life into a stale genre. Three Kings was a fresh take on War films, Flirting with Disaster felt like a bigger movie than just a typical comedy, and The Fighter was one of the few great Sport movies in recent memory. It's not an unusual choice for O. Russell to want to do a romantic comedy with his track record. The director always decides to film difficult and challenging characters and Silver Lining Playbook is no exception to that trend. It's a mini wonder of a film that does something that seems easy in theory but harder in practice. The film gets better as it goes along.
Pat (Bradley Cooper in his best performance to date) has just been released from a mental institution. He was sent here after a violent outburst which led to the court/doctors label him with a form Bipolar Disorder. He's feeling positive now and is looking to get his wife back. Pat's father (Robert De Niro's best performance in years) is an Philadelphia Eagles fanatic who pressures his son do make the decisions he wants. His mother (Jacki Weaver) of course just wants her son to not get in trouble. Pat may be a free man again but his behavior is still erratic. These actions along with the actions of nearly all the characters is off putting at first. Of course it will be a struggle for the characters to reach their full potential, but the initial impression of these people makes it seem like it will be impossible. Yet maybe that's part of the point. This is a film about average people trying to get some victory in an otherwise punishing life. The characters do become more likable as the film progresses and thus the story become more personal. The story progress when Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) who may just be as messed up as him. They form and odd friendship as Pat helps Tiffany with a dance competition in exchange she will get a message to Pat's wife whom will not see him in person yet.
This rather simple movie is made kind of great by the people involved. David O. Russell has a strange kinetic nature to his film making here that keeps things flowing every so lovely. He works his magic on a few scenes that turn them from standard romantic comedy dribble to satisfying filmmaking. The actors all do great work but the show is stolen by Jennifer Lawrence. Only two years ago the young actress broke out with a tour de force performance in Winter's Bone. Such a different performance from her here but equally as mesmerizing. Silver Lining Playbook isn't joining the trend of ambitious or groundbreaking movie list this year. However it does nearly everything right for the kind of film it's trying to be.
***1/2 out of ****
Pat (Bradley Cooper in his best performance to date) has just been released from a mental institution. He was sent here after a violent outburst which led to the court/doctors label him with a form Bipolar Disorder. He's feeling positive now and is looking to get his wife back. Pat's father (Robert De Niro's best performance in years) is an Philadelphia Eagles fanatic who pressures his son do make the decisions he wants. His mother (Jacki Weaver) of course just wants her son to not get in trouble. Pat may be a free man again but his behavior is still erratic. These actions along with the actions of nearly all the characters is off putting at first. Of course it will be a struggle for the characters to reach their full potential, but the initial impression of these people makes it seem like it will be impossible. Yet maybe that's part of the point. This is a film about average people trying to get some victory in an otherwise punishing life. The characters do become more likable as the film progresses and thus the story become more personal. The story progress when Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) who may just be as messed up as him. They form and odd friendship as Pat helps Tiffany with a dance competition in exchange she will get a message to Pat's wife whom will not see him in person yet.
This rather simple movie is made kind of great by the people involved. David O. Russell has a strange kinetic nature to his film making here that keeps things flowing every so lovely. He works his magic on a few scenes that turn them from standard romantic comedy dribble to satisfying filmmaking. The actors all do great work but the show is stolen by Jennifer Lawrence. Only two years ago the young actress broke out with a tour de force performance in Winter's Bone. Such a different performance from her here but equally as mesmerizing. Silver Lining Playbook isn't joining the trend of ambitious or groundbreaking movie list this year. However it does nearly everything right for the kind of film it's trying to be.
***1/2 out of ****
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Skyfall (***1/2 out of ****)
James Bond is back after the disappointing Quantum of Solace with one of the best Bond films ever. Skyfall dives deep into Bond's past and troubles while not coming up short with the material that made the series so beloved. Cool, suave, action packed but rarely compromising in quality makes this something Bond films have been waiting for.
Daniel Craig returns for his third trip as Bond and while his age is beginning to slightly show, that doesn't make him any less capable of being of of the better Bonds. Skyfall has our hero dealing with a villian that close to his own personal home. Silva (Javier Bardem) has mastered the manipulation of information. He uses technology to his own advantage and whim, this most likely leads to the misery of mankind. What's interesting is Silva is a former MI6 agent in the mold of Bond. I dare not see anymore, the film should be enjoyed in person.
Skyfall does many things new while bringing up points that made many Bond films in the past work. Returning characters (notably Q played by Ben Whishaw, and some that need to be seen in person), gadgets, vehicles and a style of action (not entirely science fiction like certain Bond film) make the film work extremely well. Unlike many other films in the series, this film gives the best and more interesting idea of who Bond is as a person beyond the super agent exterior. Yes there are a few unbelievable moments and lazy writing bits, but the overall product is too strong to ignore. Skyfall is photographed by Roger Deakins who has made perhaps the best looking Bond film to date. Creating a balance of light in shadow that has not been seen in the series before is thrilling. Skyfall is made to be emotional and action heavy, and succeeds often widely. Maybe the film is not is as strong as Daniel Craig's Casino Royale, but it's still grand, one of the top ten Bonds ever.
***1/2 out of ****
Daniel Craig returns for his third trip as Bond and while his age is beginning to slightly show, that doesn't make him any less capable of being of of the better Bonds. Skyfall has our hero dealing with a villian that close to his own personal home. Silva (Javier Bardem) has mastered the manipulation of information. He uses technology to his own advantage and whim, this most likely leads to the misery of mankind. What's interesting is Silva is a former MI6 agent in the mold of Bond. I dare not see anymore, the film should be enjoyed in person.
Skyfall does many things new while bringing up points that made many Bond films in the past work. Returning characters (notably Q played by Ben Whishaw, and some that need to be seen in person), gadgets, vehicles and a style of action (not entirely science fiction like certain Bond film) make the film work extremely well. Unlike many other films in the series, this film gives the best and more interesting idea of who Bond is as a person beyond the super agent exterior. Yes there are a few unbelievable moments and lazy writing bits, but the overall product is too strong to ignore. Skyfall is photographed by Roger Deakins who has made perhaps the best looking Bond film to date. Creating a balance of light in shadow that has not been seen in the series before is thrilling. Skyfall is made to be emotional and action heavy, and succeeds often widely. Maybe the film is not is as strong as Daniel Craig's Casino Royale, but it's still grand, one of the top ten Bonds ever.
***1/2 out of ****
Holy Motors (**** out of ****)
Director Leos Carax both infuriates and excites me. What is important is that he always interests me. A french New Wave director in the modern era of cinema, the man has made a working claim to keep cinema alive. Holy Motors had it's world premiere early this year at the Cannes Film Festival. After it ended the audience applauded (which is common), but instead of a token of respect, the audience cheered like it was the second coming. It was as if they had seen either or even both the rebirth of cinema and a last ditch effort to save it. Holy Motors is bizarre, funny, moving, confusing, interesting and magical.
One thing the audience will learn about the film is that the message is muddled. The film's themes may come across in many different ways. However there is a grand plot. Denis Lavant in a chameleon like way plays 11 characters. The central one would appear to be a business man named Oscar. He is picked up in the morning by a stretch limousine driven by his assistant Celine (Edith Scob). He has nine appointments to keep throughout the day. However these appointments are not of a normal variety. Going to each location Oscar dresses up and acts a role. He acts as a gypsy woman, a motion capture worker, a goblin of sorts (seen in Carax's Tokyo! segment), a working father, a musician (in perhaps the most joyous scene I've seen all year) an assassin, a dying uncle etc. Each character is unique and might not even be tied thematically to the next story at all. What's important is that all of in fact does happen on screen. It may be true or it may be just a film that a man (played by director Leos Carax) dreamily stumbled upon one night.
Many will come to their own conclusions on what the film is about and so I will simply offer mine. Oscar is a movie a character. He plays a many different movie characters when there are simply no cameras to be found. He is not so much an actor as an essence of film. This may be completely wrong but it doesn't matter for it is what I felt. Holy Motors challenges and invigorates the audience to behold a story that shifts and changes at it goes along. Changing from drama, to comedy to musical (with Kylie Minogue supplying a song) Any meaning for the film can be perhaps correct. No, I've not seen a movie like this before (maybe I never will again) and yet it felt like I was waiting for it for years. A compilation of the weird and strange that makes the art form impossible to turn away from. Hypnotic and alluring the film may grow on some nerves, but probably always curious of what will occur next. Holy Motors is a love letter to cinema. It is perhaps the best film of the year.
**** out of ****
One thing the audience will learn about the film is that the message is muddled. The film's themes may come across in many different ways. However there is a grand plot. Denis Lavant in a chameleon like way plays 11 characters. The central one would appear to be a business man named Oscar. He is picked up in the morning by a stretch limousine driven by his assistant Celine (Edith Scob). He has nine appointments to keep throughout the day. However these appointments are not of a normal variety. Going to each location Oscar dresses up and acts a role. He acts as a gypsy woman, a motion capture worker, a goblin of sorts (seen in Carax's Tokyo! segment), a working father, a musician (in perhaps the most joyous scene I've seen all year) an assassin, a dying uncle etc. Each character is unique and might not even be tied thematically to the next story at all. What's important is that all of in fact does happen on screen. It may be true or it may be just a film that a man (played by director Leos Carax) dreamily stumbled upon one night.
Many will come to their own conclusions on what the film is about and so I will simply offer mine. Oscar is a movie a character. He plays a many different movie characters when there are simply no cameras to be found. He is not so much an actor as an essence of film. This may be completely wrong but it doesn't matter for it is what I felt. Holy Motors challenges and invigorates the audience to behold a story that shifts and changes at it goes along. Changing from drama, to comedy to musical (with Kylie Minogue supplying a song) Any meaning for the film can be perhaps correct. No, I've not seen a movie like this before (maybe I never will again) and yet it felt like I was waiting for it for years. A compilation of the weird and strange that makes the art form impossible to turn away from. Hypnotic and alluring the film may grow on some nerves, but probably always curious of what will occur next. Holy Motors is a love letter to cinema. It is perhaps the best film of the year.
**** out of ****
Lincoln (***1/2 out of ****)
Lincoln is one of those movies that comes out exactly when it was suppose too. Shortly after a presidential election gives the film some weight and the audience gains a better understanding of how democracy in the USA works. Lincoln is a film that Americans should see.
Daniel Day Lewis plays the president in what may be a more historically accurate portrait. He's soft spoken, kind, and was a warm aura. Lincoln as a film focuses not on the great leader's life, but almost entirely around the ratification of the 13th amendment, the one that would end slavery in the county. The president and his advisors worry about what the amendment will mean to the closing stages of the war as well as how they can get the majority vote. Characters played by Tommy Lee Jones, James Spader, John Hawkes, Tim Blake nelson, Hal Holbrook and David Starthain will due the persuading on the president's behalf most the time.
It's a film that is long and heavy handed. Day dream for a minute and the meaning a conversation will pass you by. This is a intellectual movie that aims to teach and show the importance of these historical events. Focusing on one aspect of the president's life was the best way to approach this movie. Lincoln's life is historical common knowledge but the methods on which the 13th amendment was passed is not so clear. The film is contains great, sets, acting, pacing and conversation that is worth hearing. It's on the strongest films about politics in years.
***1/2 out of ****
Daniel Day Lewis plays the president in what may be a more historically accurate portrait. He's soft spoken, kind, and was a warm aura. Lincoln as a film focuses not on the great leader's life, but almost entirely around the ratification of the 13th amendment, the one that would end slavery in the county. The president and his advisors worry about what the amendment will mean to the closing stages of the war as well as how they can get the majority vote. Characters played by Tommy Lee Jones, James Spader, John Hawkes, Tim Blake nelson, Hal Holbrook and David Starthain will due the persuading on the president's behalf most the time.
It's a film that is long and heavy handed. Day dream for a minute and the meaning a conversation will pass you by. This is a intellectual movie that aims to teach and show the importance of these historical events. Focusing on one aspect of the president's life was the best way to approach this movie. Lincoln's life is historical common knowledge but the methods on which the 13th amendment was passed is not so clear. The film is contains great, sets, acting, pacing and conversation that is worth hearing. It's on the strongest films about politics in years.
***1/2 out of ****
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Flight (*** out of ****)
This is a return to form for two particular individuals. Denzel Washington playing Whip Whitaker gives his first great performance since American Gangster. Also director Robert Zemeckis makes his first live action movie since Cast Away (the guy sure does love plane crashes) which was over a decade ago. Both actor and director do some of their finest work of their careers (at moments), but in the end Flight doesn't all add up.
Whip Whitaker abuses alcohol. The film opens with him waking up, still drunk and needing to do cocaine to get up for work. He is a pilot and while good at his job, he has terrible qualities as a person. Early in the film comes the event that shapes what exactly this film will be about. The plane Whip captains is nose diving and ready to crash. Through some miracle work he manages to pull a maneuver and save the vast majority of the souls on board. The flight scene may be the most thrilling work Zemeckis has done as a director. After the crash they find in a blood test that Whip had alcohol in his system. If the root of the crash isn't determined to be a mechanical error, Whip faces life in prison. Much of the focus of the film is on Whip's alcohol problems and the people in his life. His problem affects his lawyer (Don Cheadle), his union representative (Bruce Greenwood), a former heroin addict (Kelly Reilly) he strikes a friendship with, his family, and of course his drug dealer (John Goodman).
The film is unapologetic look at a man battling his inner demons as his life falls apart. Washington plays Whip so convincingly that his struggle is hard to look away from, even though the audience rather not witness such turmoil. At two and a half hours, Flight tells a strong story, but a complicated one. Due to its run time there are scenes that are included that seem puzzling. Many scenes (more than what should usual) come off as funny when the situation probably shouldn't be. I wasn't sure if this was Zemeckis' intent, but it throws off the pacing of the film. I shouldn't be feeling anger while trying to understand Whip to only a few minutes latter see a scene that might be included in a dark comedy. A particular scene featuring James Badge Dale as a cancer patient is confusing, it could have been completely cut and the film would've have the same effect. There are several scenes that don't seem all too important and somewhat useless (I hate saying it but the thought crossed my mind) Whip also by films end makes a decision/realization that seems logical but his character didn't seem to develop there just yet. Still Flight is very good, even great for the most part. It' just confused on what it's trying to be.
*** out of ****
Whip Whitaker abuses alcohol. The film opens with him waking up, still drunk and needing to do cocaine to get up for work. He is a pilot and while good at his job, he has terrible qualities as a person. Early in the film comes the event that shapes what exactly this film will be about. The plane Whip captains is nose diving and ready to crash. Through some miracle work he manages to pull a maneuver and save the vast majority of the souls on board. The flight scene may be the most thrilling work Zemeckis has done as a director. After the crash they find in a blood test that Whip had alcohol in his system. If the root of the crash isn't determined to be a mechanical error, Whip faces life in prison. Much of the focus of the film is on Whip's alcohol problems and the people in his life. His problem affects his lawyer (Don Cheadle), his union representative (Bruce Greenwood), a former heroin addict (Kelly Reilly) he strikes a friendship with, his family, and of course his drug dealer (John Goodman).
The film is unapologetic look at a man battling his inner demons as his life falls apart. Washington plays Whip so convincingly that his struggle is hard to look away from, even though the audience rather not witness such turmoil. At two and a half hours, Flight tells a strong story, but a complicated one. Due to its run time there are scenes that are included that seem puzzling. Many scenes (more than what should usual) come off as funny when the situation probably shouldn't be. I wasn't sure if this was Zemeckis' intent, but it throws off the pacing of the film. I shouldn't be feeling anger while trying to understand Whip to only a few minutes latter see a scene that might be included in a dark comedy. A particular scene featuring James Badge Dale as a cancer patient is confusing, it could have been completely cut and the film would've have the same effect. There are several scenes that don't seem all too important and somewhat useless (I hate saying it but the thought crossed my mind) Whip also by films end makes a decision/realization that seems logical but his character didn't seem to develop there just yet. Still Flight is very good, even great for the most part. It' just confused on what it's trying to be.
*** out of ****
Silent Hill: Revelation (*1/2 out of ****)
I retain the notion that Silent Hill is the best movie based directly off a video game movie to date. That's not really a great title since the majority of video game movies are woeful. Silent Hill is a decent movie with a great movie hidden underneath all the silliness. Those great moments will never be made whole and thus the film will never be all that it could've been. So here a few years too late is a sequel that had the chance to fix the mistakes of the first one. In adapting a video game get rid of the feel of a video game and capture the themes that were presented in the original medium. Silent Hill at points fantastically captured the intended dreadful atmosphere. All the sequel had to do was keep the atmosphere but make the movie feel like what it was... a movie. Silent Hill: Revelation went the other way and made some instances of the film even more video game like. It is a massive disappointment to the source material.
Taking plot elements from the third Silent Hill game this film follows Heather (Adelaide Clemens). She and her father (Sean Bean) are running from an evil order that want Heather to come to Silent Hill for sinister purposes (being able to stop the darkness and what not). This order kidnaps Heather's father and she must go to Silent Hill to rescue him. Up until the film actually gets to the town is nearly unwatchable. Characters behave oddly, the horror scenes are painful and the pacing is all over the place. I don't blame the actors, they did the best they could with bad directing, writing, and editing which made scenes feel all over the place. It's a wonder the actors didn't (for the most part) add to the problems. Once heather and her companion Vincent (Kit Harrington) reach the eerie town things do pick up a bit. Of course going from poor to mediocre isn't really praise worthy. I wanted to like the movie, but that was nearly impossible to do. One day or maybe in some other reality, Silent Hill was or will be made to live up to its potential. Silent Hill: Revelation comes nowhere close.
*1/2 out of ****
Taking plot elements from the third Silent Hill game this film follows Heather (Adelaide Clemens). She and her father (Sean Bean) are running from an evil order that want Heather to come to Silent Hill for sinister purposes (being able to stop the darkness and what not). This order kidnaps Heather's father and she must go to Silent Hill to rescue him. Up until the film actually gets to the town is nearly unwatchable. Characters behave oddly, the horror scenes are painful and the pacing is all over the place. I don't blame the actors, they did the best they could with bad directing, writing, and editing which made scenes feel all over the place. It's a wonder the actors didn't (for the most part) add to the problems. Once heather and her companion Vincent (Kit Harrington) reach the eerie town things do pick up a bit. Of course going from poor to mediocre isn't really praise worthy. I wanted to like the movie, but that was nearly impossible to do. One day or maybe in some other reality, Silent Hill was or will be made to live up to its potential. Silent Hill: Revelation comes nowhere close.
*1/2 out of ****
The Man with the Iron Fists (**1/2 out of ****)
RZA's directing career has begun and the man is not half bad at the job. Him and Eli Roth have succeeded in making a mad rump of action with a wide variety of interesting characters. Every actor has something to bring to the table and so quite well in this tribute to kung fu movies.
Ages past in China there lived The Blacksmith (RZA). he lived in a small village and crafted masterful weapons. One day he is approached by two rival clans to craft some specific weapons. One of these clan is in a state of rebellion and looks to steal a shipment of the Emperor's gold to wipe out all their rivals. Every one nearby is gunning for a piece of this fortune and the last one left alive will claim the prize.
As said before the strength of the movie lies in it's many unique characters. Each with a specific fighting style or gimmick. When the action is going all is right with the film. However the action isn't the sole centerpiece of the film. There is a examination on class struggle and Buddhism etc. Problem there is the ideas presented aren't very compelling, instead they seem to interrupt the action. It's a strange thing complaining about mixing story and action, but when the story is lacking the action looks all so much better. Also perhaps the film would have benefitted from a grind-house feeling. Only certain parts of the film feel like a throw back to the kung fu movies RZA apparently so admires. Still for what its worth the film can pack quite a punch.
**1/2 out of ****
Ages past in China there lived The Blacksmith (RZA). he lived in a small village and crafted masterful weapons. One day he is approached by two rival clans to craft some specific weapons. One of these clan is in a state of rebellion and looks to steal a shipment of the Emperor's gold to wipe out all their rivals. Every one nearby is gunning for a piece of this fortune and the last one left alive will claim the prize.
As said before the strength of the movie lies in it's many unique characters. Each with a specific fighting style or gimmick. When the action is going all is right with the film. However the action isn't the sole centerpiece of the film. There is a examination on class struggle and Buddhism etc. Problem there is the ideas presented aren't very compelling, instead they seem to interrupt the action. It's a strange thing complaining about mixing story and action, but when the story is lacking the action looks all so much better. Also perhaps the film would have benefitted from a grind-house feeling. Only certain parts of the film feel like a throw back to the kung fu movies RZA apparently so admires. Still for what its worth the film can pack quite a punch.
**1/2 out of ****
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Sound of My Voice (*** out of ****)
Minimalist science-fiction films aren't too common, but often hauntingly lovely. Instead of huge special affects, they focus on a core concept and the emotions surrounding it. It's not necessarily better but I personally find myself less let down by this smaller films. Brit Marling has written and starred now in two films of such a genre. it's refreshing take science-fiction films.
Peter (Christopher Denham) and Lorna (Nicole Vicius) drive into a garage following a set of instructions. They are met by a man who brings them in to the house and tells them to wash and change. From there they are blindfolded and transported to a secret location. Peter, Lorna, and several other blind folded people are led into standards home basement where Maggie awaits. Brit Marling plays Maggie very convincingly. Dressing in all white, creating an ethereal aura she tells them who she is. Maggie claims to be from the year 2054 and doesn't how she got here, but she knows these people's future. Peter and Lora are not here to believe Maggie's tale, but to secretly record her story for journalist reasons.
Besides a simplistic time travel story, the film addresses the theme of individualism and what that means when in a cult. Can one enlighten themselves but remain an individual.? What stories are worth believing? Sound of My Voice is like a combination of two indie hits from last year, Another Earth, and Martha Marcy May Marlene. Both of those films being strong productions, so enjoying or at least finding myself curious of how Sound of My Voice would unfold was rather easy. Is Maggie lying, telling a distorted truth, or sincere? It's a puzzle that deserves some analysis.
*** out of ****
Peter (Christopher Denham) and Lorna (Nicole Vicius) drive into a garage following a set of instructions. They are met by a man who brings them in to the house and tells them to wash and change. From there they are blindfolded and transported to a secret location. Peter, Lorna, and several other blind folded people are led into standards home basement where Maggie awaits. Brit Marling plays Maggie very convincingly. Dressing in all white, creating an ethereal aura she tells them who she is. Maggie claims to be from the year 2054 and doesn't how she got here, but she knows these people's future. Peter and Lora are not here to believe Maggie's tale, but to secretly record her story for journalist reasons.
Besides a simplistic time travel story, the film addresses the theme of individualism and what that means when in a cult. Can one enlighten themselves but remain an individual.? What stories are worth believing? Sound of My Voice is like a combination of two indie hits from last year, Another Earth, and Martha Marcy May Marlene. Both of those films being strong productions, so enjoying or at least finding myself curious of how Sound of My Voice would unfold was rather easy. Is Maggie lying, telling a distorted truth, or sincere? It's a puzzle that deserves some analysis.
*** out of ****
Smashed (*** out of ****)
Smashed is quite the frustrating movie and I'm thankful it was. For the most part the film plays out in such a natural way that every ounce of one's attention will be fixated on the events on screen. The heartbreaks and obstacles feel real or at least not Hollywood dribble. Smashed is a serious movie about alcoholism, but not overly dramatic, often the film is darkly light hearted. This combination makes it easy (or perhaps simply "easier") to sympathize with some character on screen. They don't have to be likable or make the happy choices, much more like actual life.
A married couple, Kate (A fantastic Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and Charlie (Aaron Paul), relish in their drinking. They share the joy it brings them and are quick to forgive each other for their drunken mistakes. Kate has several terrible nights that started from alcohol consumption that has lead her to try to get sober. Perhaps the worst mistake she made was vomiting in front of her students at her job, then lying about being pregnant. She's supported by the vice principal (Nick Offerman) who discovers the true reason for her embarrassment. Kate tries to bring some honesty and control to her life, but how does this affect Charlie. I was reminded of the film Candy, a brutal love story of two young herion addicts who would discover the drug is what kept them together. Charlie is not wrong for wanting to continue drinking when Kate decides to quit, but how does it affect their relationship? Love for a person comes from certain ideals in most cases, without that mutual belief it is only a matter of time before the love is put to test.
A rich supporting cast supports Mary Elizabeth Winstead in her first truly great performance of her career. She plays her character as warm, strong, and above all interesting. Winstead turns a still otherwise good movie until something memorable.
*** out of ****
A married couple, Kate (A fantastic Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and Charlie (Aaron Paul), relish in their drinking. They share the joy it brings them and are quick to forgive each other for their drunken mistakes. Kate has several terrible nights that started from alcohol consumption that has lead her to try to get sober. Perhaps the worst mistake she made was vomiting in front of her students at her job, then lying about being pregnant. She's supported by the vice principal (Nick Offerman) who discovers the true reason for her embarrassment. Kate tries to bring some honesty and control to her life, but how does this affect Charlie. I was reminded of the film Candy, a brutal love story of two young herion addicts who would discover the drug is what kept them together. Charlie is not wrong for wanting to continue drinking when Kate decides to quit, but how does it affect their relationship? Love for a person comes from certain ideals in most cases, without that mutual belief it is only a matter of time before the love is put to test.
A rich supporting cast supports Mary Elizabeth Winstead in her first truly great performance of her career. She plays her character as warm, strong, and above all interesting. Winstead turns a still otherwise good movie until something memorable.
*** out of ****
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Sinister (*** out of ****)
I've said it before and I will say it again, Horror films are in a strange point in their history. Torture porn, remakes, and franchises are what make money now a days. So it's oddly refreshing to see a horror film like Sinister come along. It is most certainly original, but uses familiar scary movie mechanics. Whether that is a positive for individuals is up for debate. Sinister however works very well with what it set out to be.
Ethan Hawke brings weight to a role of Ellison, a one hit wonder crime novelist. He plans on writing a new novel based on the murder that occurred in the house he and his family just moved into. In the attic he finds a box with several "home videos" a projector in it. He soon finds out that the videos are of several murders cause through a malice entity.
Sinister operates in a world darkness, loud noises, startling images and so on. The jump scares are pretty effective, but it's not too hard to create such a scare. The film does create a rather dangerous atmosphere however. Tension builds wisely in some scenes that do realize how maddening the events have become. One major positive is the music. It is sickeningly disturbing and is fully enjoyable in all the wrong ways. Sinister has fresh mechanics (the super 8 reels being the highlight) but perhaps a more terrifying creature would've been better. Up close it looks like a metal head has been up for too many nights. Still for what it's worth, Sinister might be the scariest mainstream film of the year.
*** out of ****
Ethan Hawke brings weight to a role of Ellison, a one hit wonder crime novelist. He plans on writing a new novel based on the murder that occurred in the house he and his family just moved into. In the attic he finds a box with several "home videos" a projector in it. He soon finds out that the videos are of several murders cause through a malice entity.
Sinister operates in a world darkness, loud noises, startling images and so on. The jump scares are pretty effective, but it's not too hard to create such a scare. The film does create a rather dangerous atmosphere however. Tension builds wisely in some scenes that do realize how maddening the events have become. One major positive is the music. It is sickeningly disturbing and is fully enjoyable in all the wrong ways. Sinister has fresh mechanics (the super 8 reels being the highlight) but perhaps a more terrifying creature would've been better. Up close it looks like a metal head has been up for too many nights. Still for what it's worth, Sinister might be the scariest mainstream film of the year.
*** out of ****
Cloud Atlas (**** out of ****)
Cloud Atlas could be viewed as pretentious, strangely paced with at least three climaxs, three hours long, confusing and perhaps impossible to decipher every truth... and I loved every second of it. I anticipate eagerly my next viewing which isn't far off. This will not be an easy film. It will bruise, inspire, invoke thought and requires patience. Yet on the other end of the unimaginable tract is a something wondrous. A film like no other, one that will perhaps never been seen in such mannerism again. Cloud Atlas is art in it's most striking form.
To describe a plot would be the journey of a mad man, yet here I sit and will try to do honor to this film the best way I can. What if in one film could be the tales of a sea faring notary, an inspiring composer, a journalist being chased by an assassin, a clone awakening to be a rebel prophet, a man ruining his life through simple acts, and a future filled with cannibal marauders? What if the actors played many roles crossing gender and race? What if they had a unique way of telling each story (action, comedy drama, mystery etc.)? what if every tale had a connection? What if the story ranged centuries? Are you following? It's ok otherwise, some of it must be seen to believe and what a sight it is to behold.
Cloud Atlas is beautiful in just about every sense of the word. There are scenes of illuminating love, dazzling chases, tense suspense deep philosophical thought, invigorating life and a myriad more of wondrous acts. It was euphoric to take in such events. Genres blended before my eyes like never before. It's indisputable that Cloud Atlas is ambitious. However it is plausible to say it is an undertaking that can cause debate for years to come.
In the three hours, none of which I was bored through out, I knew I saw something different. A film that challenged the idea of being a film. The Wachoski siblings and Tom Tykwer have collaborated on a what seems to be an impossible work. A risk by the directors and actors (Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Ben Whishaw, Jim Sturgess, Jim Broadbent, Susan Sarandon, Hugh Grant and more) alike. Adapting Dave Mitchell's novel didn't seem like it could be done, but the three directors managed to compress the novel while keeping the theme and narratives alive. Those ideas being dreamlike qualities.
I feel awakened now. Like I've seen something important (paraphrasing quotes now). More than just a film but a work of art that enchanted me into a state a bliss. Cloud Atlas will divide people, but an ambitious films always will. They are in no way wrong in their opinion for those who don't care for it, but they aren't exactly right either. This is a film that can create different opinions, all of which being correct. I came out of the theater in love. Cloud Atlas is a siren song with reward like nothing else.
**** out of ****
(I chose a picture from Robert Frobisher's story since it was my favorite from the book, for the film I still haven't decided on a favorite segment, that will be deduced on a second viewing)
To describe a plot would be the journey of a mad man, yet here I sit and will try to do honor to this film the best way I can. What if in one film could be the tales of a sea faring notary, an inspiring composer, a journalist being chased by an assassin, a clone awakening to be a rebel prophet, a man ruining his life through simple acts, and a future filled with cannibal marauders? What if the actors played many roles crossing gender and race? What if they had a unique way of telling each story (action, comedy drama, mystery etc.)? what if every tale had a connection? What if the story ranged centuries? Are you following? It's ok otherwise, some of it must be seen to believe and what a sight it is to behold.
Cloud Atlas is beautiful in just about every sense of the word. There are scenes of illuminating love, dazzling chases, tense suspense deep philosophical thought, invigorating life and a myriad more of wondrous acts. It was euphoric to take in such events. Genres blended before my eyes like never before. It's indisputable that Cloud Atlas is ambitious. However it is plausible to say it is an undertaking that can cause debate for years to come.
In the three hours, none of which I was bored through out, I knew I saw something different. A film that challenged the idea of being a film. The Wachoski siblings and Tom Tykwer have collaborated on a what seems to be an impossible work. A risk by the directors and actors (Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Ben Whishaw, Jim Sturgess, Jim Broadbent, Susan Sarandon, Hugh Grant and more) alike. Adapting Dave Mitchell's novel didn't seem like it could be done, but the three directors managed to compress the novel while keeping the theme and narratives alive. Those ideas being dreamlike qualities.
I feel awakened now. Like I've seen something important (paraphrasing quotes now). More than just a film but a work of art that enchanted me into a state a bliss. Cloud Atlas will divide people, but an ambitious films always will. They are in no way wrong in their opinion for those who don't care for it, but they aren't exactly right either. This is a film that can create different opinions, all of which being correct. I came out of the theater in love. Cloud Atlas is a siren song with reward like nothing else.
**** out of ****
(I chose a picture from Robert Frobisher's story since it was my favorite from the book, for the film I still haven't decided on a favorite segment, that will be deduced on a second viewing)
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Argo (***1/2 out of ****)
Ben Affleck has now established himself as a director of remarkable talent. Take for example the opening of Argo. An american embassy is stormed by Iranian protesters and all but six americans are taken captive. The scene shows both rage and understanding. It intercuts scenes from handheld footage fitting of the time. So few "based on a true story" movies fully occupy the era within they live in. The opening of Argo is tense and engaging. If the film was nothing but white noise after that, I'd still list have put this film on the positive side. However much of Argo holds up and to it's stellar first ten minutes, making it a wonderful for nearly the whole at the end.
Argo is the telling of six Americans who fled the taking of the USA embassy in Iran and then hid out at the Canadian Ambassador's house for months. If they were found, they would be labeled spies for fleeing and hanged publicly. The CIA has no idea how to get them out. Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) is the guy to come up with the "best bad plan" they could get. He plans on faking a movie in the vein of Star Wars and wants to scout Iran as a possible location for shooting. It's so crazy that it could work. Life seems to stop for movie making. People are in awe of what may come and treat any little information they get like a child would being told a fantasy story. Tony plans on flying in Iran, forge documents and take the six americans out under the guise of a canadian film crew.
This is a tight and well made thriller on all fronts. John Goodman, Alan Arkin, Chris Messina, Bryan Cranston Kyle Chandler, Scoot McNairy, Tate Donovan and others all create and all star cast. Affleck as a director delivers on suspense, history and an occasional laugh. It's an overwhelming crowd pleaser. Yet it isn't one of those silly kinds, Argo is about as intelligent as a one can make without alienating the audience. If it weren't for the last fifteen minutes and it's Hollywood style feel good joy, it might have been as strong as film as it could have been. However the ending doesn't weigh down the film enough to make it any less than fantastic. It's a film that could and is partially deserving of reaping in Oscar gold.
***1/2 out of ****
Argo is the telling of six Americans who fled the taking of the USA embassy in Iran and then hid out at the Canadian Ambassador's house for months. If they were found, they would be labeled spies for fleeing and hanged publicly. The CIA has no idea how to get them out. Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) is the guy to come up with the "best bad plan" they could get. He plans on faking a movie in the vein of Star Wars and wants to scout Iran as a possible location for shooting. It's so crazy that it could work. Life seems to stop for movie making. People are in awe of what may come and treat any little information they get like a child would being told a fantasy story. Tony plans on flying in Iran, forge documents and take the six americans out under the guise of a canadian film crew.
This is a tight and well made thriller on all fronts. John Goodman, Alan Arkin, Chris Messina, Bryan Cranston Kyle Chandler, Scoot McNairy, Tate Donovan and others all create and all star cast. Affleck as a director delivers on suspense, history and an occasional laugh. It's an overwhelming crowd pleaser. Yet it isn't one of those silly kinds, Argo is about as intelligent as a one can make without alienating the audience. If it weren't for the last fifteen minutes and it's Hollywood style feel good joy, it might have been as strong as film as it could have been. However the ending doesn't weigh down the film enough to make it any less than fantastic. It's a film that could and is partially deserving of reaping in Oscar gold.
***1/2 out of ****
Seven Psyhcopaths (***1/2 out of ****)
You don't see them too often, but when you get a completely self aware film like Seven Psychopaths it's a real blessing. Here is a film that is funny,goofing, sometimes moving, and gets the audience involved. I expected nothing short of good from director Martin Mcdonagh. His previous film In Bruges, is perhaps the best dark comedy of last decade. So the director returns with the genre and his leading man Colin Farrell and works some movie magic once again.
Marty (Colin Farrell) is a screen writer stuck on writing a new script. He has a title and a idea, but nothing else. The plan is to make a movie filled with psychopaths that are unique and unseen before in Hollywood. He gets a little help from his friend Billy (Sam Rockwell stealing the show), a dog kidnapper. Billy and his friend Hans (Christopher Walken) look for rich people in parks, steal their dog, wait for a reward to be offered for the dog's return, then give the dog back and make some money. This plan goes well until they steal from crime boss Charlie (Woody Harrelson).
Seven Psychopaths is completely aware that it's a movie. Some of scenes would not be possible otherwise. However that's the fun of it. Characters discuss Marty's script which they have been written into and look to tell their own story. Seven Psychopaths is a wild ride and a vanity project in the style of Charlie Kaufman/Spike Jonze's Adaptaton. The film plays with the audience and rewards it by playing things smart and entertaining. Some movies are grounded in reality. This is a movie to bewilder literally everyone involved. Any movie where Harry Dean Stanton plays a vengeful Quaker is bound to be intriguing.
***1/2 out of ****
Marty (Colin Farrell) is a screen writer stuck on writing a new script. He has a title and a idea, but nothing else. The plan is to make a movie filled with psychopaths that are unique and unseen before in Hollywood. He gets a little help from his friend Billy (Sam Rockwell stealing the show), a dog kidnapper. Billy and his friend Hans (Christopher Walken) look for rich people in parks, steal their dog, wait for a reward to be offered for the dog's return, then give the dog back and make some money. This plan goes well until they steal from crime boss Charlie (Woody Harrelson).
Seven Psychopaths is completely aware that it's a movie. Some of scenes would not be possible otherwise. However that's the fun of it. Characters discuss Marty's script which they have been written into and look to tell their own story. Seven Psychopaths is a wild ride and a vanity project in the style of Charlie Kaufman/Spike Jonze's Adaptaton. The film plays with the audience and rewards it by playing things smart and entertaining. Some movies are grounded in reality. This is a movie to bewilder literally everyone involved. Any movie where Harry Dean Stanton plays a vengeful Quaker is bound to be intriguing.
***1/2 out of ****
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Perks of Being a Wallflower (***1/2 out of ****)
While watching Perks of Being a Wallflower I was reminded of a John Keats's "Endymoin" I probably quote far too often. The first stanza is the following:
A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never
Pass into nothingness; but still will keep
A bower quiet for us, and a sleep
Full of sweet dreams, and health, and quiet breathing.
The passage can apply to more than one kind of love. To me I thought of this poem because of my love for coming of age stories where I can identify something with the lead character. Major details are always changed, but for a few brief instances, I understand more about the character on screen than I do my self proclaimed hectic life. Wallflower is the story of growing up about many people, but namely Charlie (Logan Lerman). Starting high school this year Charlie is completely lost on what to do. His best friend committed suicide a few months ago and Charlie is alone but not by choice. He fortunately comes across "the island of misfit toys", a group of mostly seniors who operate on a different track. Not really an outcast group in their high school, more just kids who won't compromise popularity with their taste. Charlie's life is changed namely by two members of the group. The first is Sam (Emma Watson), a lovable and kind girl. Charlie understandably forms a crush on her but she instead spends her love life with boyfriends who mistreat her. "Accepting the love we think we deserve". The film isn't so simple that the audience is justing hoping Charlie gets his chance with Sam, all of his new friends are entertaining and fulfilling. The second life changer is Patrick (a great Ezra Miller), a gay live wire of a person. While Charlie deals with the demons of his past, Sam works work to improve her life, and Patrick deals with his closeted boy friend (Johnny Simmons).
Going to the film I wasn't sure how I thought things were going to turn out. Personal experience in high school told me that the events of the film seem like a wild world of fiction. However as the film went the more I fell in love with it. For 103 minutes, I got to see characters lives I genuinely cared something for. The film feels sincere in it's actions. It's warm and inviting but doesn't shy away from the darker fears of adolescence. Wallflower was adapted from a book by non other than the author himself, he's bound to get the point across. Coming of age stories are a dime a dozen, but when you find a good one, it's mesmerizing. This is one of the best high school stories I've seen in years.
***1/2 out of ****
A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never
Pass into nothingness; but still will keep
A bower quiet for us, and a sleep
Full of sweet dreams, and health, and quiet breathing.
The passage can apply to more than one kind of love. To me I thought of this poem because of my love for coming of age stories where I can identify something with the lead character. Major details are always changed, but for a few brief instances, I understand more about the character on screen than I do my self proclaimed hectic life. Wallflower is the story of growing up about many people, but namely Charlie (Logan Lerman). Starting high school this year Charlie is completely lost on what to do. His best friend committed suicide a few months ago and Charlie is alone but not by choice. He fortunately comes across "the island of misfit toys", a group of mostly seniors who operate on a different track. Not really an outcast group in their high school, more just kids who won't compromise popularity with their taste. Charlie's life is changed namely by two members of the group. The first is Sam (Emma Watson), a lovable and kind girl. Charlie understandably forms a crush on her but she instead spends her love life with boyfriends who mistreat her. "Accepting the love we think we deserve". The film isn't so simple that the audience is justing hoping Charlie gets his chance with Sam, all of his new friends are entertaining and fulfilling. The second life changer is Patrick (a great Ezra Miller), a gay live wire of a person. While Charlie deals with the demons of his past, Sam works work to improve her life, and Patrick deals with his closeted boy friend (Johnny Simmons).
Going to the film I wasn't sure how I thought things were going to turn out. Personal experience in high school told me that the events of the film seem like a wild world of fiction. However as the film went the more I fell in love with it. For 103 minutes, I got to see characters lives I genuinely cared something for. The film feels sincere in it's actions. It's warm and inviting but doesn't shy away from the darker fears of adolescence. Wallflower was adapted from a book by non other than the author himself, he's bound to get the point across. Coming of age stories are a dime a dozen, but when you find a good one, it's mesmerizing. This is one of the best high school stories I've seen in years.
***1/2 out of ****
Looper (***1/2 out of ****)
"Do something new." The crime boss character played by Jeff Daniels sits in his sleezy personal throne and says this to lead character. This some what meta wink is both a wonderful statement of the type of film that is being watched and part of a well executed story. Looper feels new, it's not a film made to simply enjoy the ride, but something to keep you guessing and involved with what will happen next. This is one of best science fiction movies in years, a top five candidate for best since Children of Men.
The lead character here has a unique situation. Joseph Gordon Levitt plays Joe, a Looper. His job is a special kind of hit-man that waits at a location to kill somebody from the future. Thirty years into the future time travel is perfected but illegal, crime syndicates use it to dispose of problem people, Loopers clean up the problem in a different time, where the problem doesn't exist yet. Joe lives a hard and fast lifestyle. Drowning himself in drugs and chasing after a stripper/prostitute doesn't make Joe seem like a such a good person (the whole hit-man thing adds to that). However him learning french in his spare time suggests there's more that meets the surface. Joe's life is changed when one day the man he is meant to kill is his future self (played by Bruce Willis)
Looper is unforgiving in nature and is not afraid of the whole coherent time travel ramblings. What's wonderful is the details here. Emily Blunt's character in introduced in a moment of calm, she sits on a her porch and makes motions of blowing an imaginary cigarette, I was won over immediately with such a simple action. Looper is well constructed and thought out to give something to the audience to ponder the meaning of some scenes as the film progresses. Building upon its story and characters make the action scenes much more rewarding. It makes even sitting on a farm for much of its climax utterly cool. Looper is not one to miss.
***1/2 out of ****
Sunday, September 23, 2012
The Master (**** out of ****)
I know I'm not alone in the cult of Paul Thomas Anderson. The Master is his sixth feature film and continues the director's amazing track work. He might be the best working director of his generation. The Master is a challenging film and one that Anderson does not take lightly. He throws all of himself in it to create a true classic. All directors work their hardest when making a film, but the quality they put in varies. Anderson's best is revelatory stuff. It's the work of a master restoring faith in cinema as an art form one scene at a time.
The Master is based off of Scientology and it's controversial leader L. Ron Hubbard. The film version group is known as The Cause and is led by Lancaster Dodd played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Dodd it is widely interesting man who is both a philosopher and psychologist of a new age. He pictures himself like Socrates and Freud, one of intelligence who will awaken those around him through his beliefs. He laughs, sings, and teaches his followers in a sincere matter. It is throughly convincing to his followers and even comes across onto the film's audience.
The film is mostly about Freddie Quell played by Joaquin Phoenix. Returning from war, Freddie is a man unhinged. Mumbling through psychological tests, the man comes off as insane or at least unstable. He can't bring himself to face the world and drinks his sorrow away while running away from a girl he left. He stumbles across Dodd and the teacher gladly brings him in. This will be the guinea pig Dodd has been looking for. A person so broken that if his teaching can reach him, it could reach anyone. The two form an odd friendship that is ever changing. They switch between the role of hero and villain, a power game of unusual circumstances.
The Master is a work of art if the highest order. It manipulates the audience into a strange place. By the end of the film the audience likely will feel empty. However this seems to be the intention of the film. People's love crumbles and their trusts are betrayed in the film, they leave with a empty hole, this reflected onto those watching.The film deals with several different themes and ideas all of which are on the surface, there's no need to hide anything here. There is the idea of greed, power, mind games, son vs father and master vs student. Freddie behaves like a mad animal and Dodd acts civilized, the complications of human behavior is ever present. The Master is gorgeously shot in 70mm, it might be the best looking film of the year. Johnny Greenwood also creates a luring yet dangerous score. Everything in the film is firing off on all cylinders. Perhaps the most striking contribution is the acting. Philip Seymour Hoffman is is utterly convincing in his role as Dodd. Ranging in emotion and intensity he lives and breathes the role. It's easy to lose tract on where the actor ends and where this character has just come to life. Playing Dodd's wife is Amy Adams, a strong and curious woman with many haunting scenes. Adams is devastating in the role, first rate work from her. Then there is Joaquin Phoenix, it's his Academy Award to lose right now. The man is so imbedded in the rage and confusion of his character it's impossible to look away. It's the performance of his career and some of the best acting I've seen in years. The Master might just be the film of the year, but there is still time. I look forward to any film to any film that might top the list, it will be a masterpiece of the highest quality. Regardless The Master is unforgettable, an American classic.
**** out of ****
Cosmopolis (*** out of ****)
David Cronenberg never shies away from a challenge. The director has made maddening films from The Fly, Crash all the way to Naked Lunch. His past three films while still deeply thought provoking, were rather tame for the director. Cosmopolis is almost a return to his origins but is something new at the same time. Claiming to be the first film to describe the new decade it is a philosophical and controversial look at those in charge, the 1%
The film stars Robert Pattinson as Eric Packer in a departure from his usual area of film. Cold, intelligent, and sly, Pattinson proves his acting skills. Cronenberg's work with him reminds me of what the director did for Jeremy Irons with Dead Ringers (Minus the iconic performance). Eric Packer spends a rather unusual day moving around a city in his modified limousine. Traffic is at a near standstill allowing Eric do conduct meetings in the back of the limo. He meets analyzers, executives and even stops to eat with his new frigid wife (a ghostly Sarah Gadon). Eric has made a wild bet against the Chinese Yuan and is losing money by the tons. The city meanwhile is in chaos in a mad attempt to stall the future.
Cosmopolis is a mess, but a brilliant and fascinating one. The film has scenes that seem unintentionally hilarious, but that might not be true either. It is intellectually simplistic in design yet still it is easy to miss 1/4 of what is said. It's hard to pick out just what to focus on as a theme. However the film is ambitious and that is very admirable. It's very well acted, containing actors such as Paul Giamatti, Juliet Binoche, Samantha Morton and others. The dialogue and exchange between actors is often hypnotic. What can be deciphered from the plot is that the world is falling part and blames the 1%. People are scarred of the future and act animalistic to keep the world from advancing. I'm not sure how multiple viewing will help this film, I think I learned most of what it offered the first time. However just because the film is sinful in nature, doesn't mean I won't enjoy seeing it again.
*** out of ****
The film stars Robert Pattinson as Eric Packer in a departure from his usual area of film. Cold, intelligent, and sly, Pattinson proves his acting skills. Cronenberg's work with him reminds me of what the director did for Jeremy Irons with Dead Ringers (Minus the iconic performance). Eric Packer spends a rather unusual day moving around a city in his modified limousine. Traffic is at a near standstill allowing Eric do conduct meetings in the back of the limo. He meets analyzers, executives and even stops to eat with his new frigid wife (a ghostly Sarah Gadon). Eric has made a wild bet against the Chinese Yuan and is losing money by the tons. The city meanwhile is in chaos in a mad attempt to stall the future.
Cosmopolis is a mess, but a brilliant and fascinating one. The film has scenes that seem unintentionally hilarious, but that might not be true either. It is intellectually simplistic in design yet still it is easy to miss 1/4 of what is said. It's hard to pick out just what to focus on as a theme. However the film is ambitious and that is very admirable. It's very well acted, containing actors such as Paul Giamatti, Juliet Binoche, Samantha Morton and others. The dialogue and exchange between actors is often hypnotic. What can be deciphered from the plot is that the world is falling part and blames the 1%. People are scarred of the future and act animalistic to keep the world from advancing. I'm not sure how multiple viewing will help this film, I think I learned most of what it offered the first time. However just because the film is sinful in nature, doesn't mean I won't enjoy seeing it again.
*** out of ****
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Resident Evil: Retribution (** out of ****)
Alice, the Umbrella Corporation, zombies, and mutants all return in the fifth film in the franchise. Milla Jovovich and her husband Paul W. Anderson make one of these films every few years and the world keeps spinning. Retribution is not the strongest of the mediocre series but probably not the worst. This time Alice must fight her way out of a Umbrella facility that was used to simulate the T virus (zombie virus) on major cities. There's other returning faces in the characters Jill and Rain, but for fans of the video game series Ada Wong, Barry Burton, and Leon Kennedy (the best) make their debut. In creating an action film of this type it falls flat in comparison to other great films. In using slow motion and bullet time effects Retribution tries to be like The Matrix but fails in making intense and emotionally gripping fights. The series once tried for an action horror route in the vein of Aliens, little is left now. The video game series has made some classic moments in it's industry. I don't know why they don't try to replicate the stories of either the first or fourth game. There are some moments of fun here and there and I never grew that bored so that's a nice compliment for the franchise. Say what you want of Paul W. Anderson (I often am very critical), but he's one of the few directors who understands how to incorporate 3-D properly into a film By the end of the film it appears that the craziest days await us in the sixth film. Yay?
** out of ****
** out of ****
Arbitrage (*** out of ****)
Lead characters don't have to be likable nor be pure heinous. They need substance, development and something intriguing. Robert Miller played by a mesmerizing Richard Gere is such a character. A white collar hedge fund magnate who only thinks of himself. He analyzes problems and people and how they effect his ultimate life goals. This puts him in trouble with his wife (Susan Sarandon), his daughter/protege (Brit Marling) and his mistress (Laetitia Casta). However one of those people he ends dead through his fault which will set a detective (Tim Roth) after him. Robert Miller must match wits with the law and his family.
This is a tight and well made thriller. It's filled with talented actors who all perform well. Richard Gere isn't exactly an actor you think of for fantastic performances but much like The Hoax Gere is capable of moments of brilliance. Very well constructed and paced, Arbitrage is exciting from beginning to end. The only fault worth mentioning is the film treats Miller's problems often very separate up until the finale. His corporate life and his criminal action don't collide as well as they should. Putting Miller on more of a edge with the combination seems like a better route. Regardless Arbitrage is a wonderful little film that shows intrigue should be built by the film itself and not by initial expectations.
*** out of ****
Saturday, September 8, 2012
The Words (*1/2 out of ****)
For film about literature, The Words is constructed how I'd imagine a 4th grader trying to write something meaningful. Sure there is some attempt at intelligence and a plausible story, but the tale is so poorly constructed that eye rolling and yawns would be induced if you weren't well thinking "this is the child trying their best". However that is not the case here, directors/writing duo Brian Klugman and Lee Sternhal are two people who should know how to make a at least somewhat likable film.
Bradley Cooper is starting to be typecast as a struggling writer it appears with his character Rory. He marries the girl of his dreams Dory (Zoe Saldana) and tries to make it as a big shot writer. Too bad nobody likes his work. Unwilling to grow up he fortunately comes across a manuscript in an old bag. The manuscript is a beautifully written story which Rory steals as his own. Well when things don't go smoothly when the original writer (Jeremy Irons) shows up. He's the real kick, none of this is real in the film, it's all a story. An author named Clay (Dennis Quaid) wrote this story and his reading it at a showing and later a grad student (Olivia Wilde). If two mediocre stories weren't enough, we also learn the events of the stolen story in first person (With Ben Barnes playing the young Jeremy Irons). So this is a story within a story within a story that is actually just another story.
The Words has many problems. Stories are plagued with unneeded narration that explains exactly what each character is thinking (defeating genuine character development). The film is incredibly predictable, basically telling the same story three times. There is scenes of boring and unintentionally funny melodrama that is more painful to watch then laugh of at it's failing. This doesn't feel like a human story, just something thrown together from half finished ideas. It's one of the worst films I've seen this year and I look forward to never having t watch it again.
*1/2 out of ****
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Celeste & Jesse Forever (*** out of ****)
Celeste & Jesse Forever is romantic, dryly funny, lifelike, sweet, charming, touching, engaging and just plain fun. Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) seem like they would be the perfect couple. Childhood best friends and have been together since high school. It was only logical that they marry. However a few years later they realize that maybe their family life might not be what they are looking for. They love each other but can't see the other person as a parent to their kids. They begin to fight over details they didn't before and thus decide to get a divorce. However they are still best friends and despite being separated, they spend all their time together. However they begin to grow apart and Celeste is lost on what to do.
Here is a film that is well thought out and contains very interesting characters. The supporting cast made up of Ari Graynor, Will McCormack, Eric Christian Olsen, Elijah Wood, Chris Messina and Emma Roberts, all of which breathe life into small roles, the seem to occupy their own story rather than just be background plot to the two leads. Celeste & Jesse Forever largely skips romantic cliches and those few it contains are rewritten in a more engaging fashion. Rashida Jones cowrote the screenplay here and shows that she is very capable or making a great film, I'm sure she has many more on the way.
*** out of ****
Here is a film that is well thought out and contains very interesting characters. The supporting cast made up of Ari Graynor, Will McCormack, Eric Christian Olsen, Elijah Wood, Chris Messina and Emma Roberts, all of which breathe life into small roles, the seem to occupy their own story rather than just be background plot to the two leads. Celeste & Jesse Forever largely skips romantic cliches and those few it contains are rewritten in a more engaging fashion. Rashida Jones cowrote the screenplay here and shows that she is very capable or making a great film, I'm sure she has many more on the way.
*** out of ****
Lawless (**1/2 out of ****)
Director John Hillcoat has the rare beauty to match beauty and violence. The darker violence is unapologetic and often brutal. Yet this is surround by gorgeous scenery captured in the most flattering ways. Lawless is a very well made film, quite good really, but not very compelling nor refreshing.
During The Depression, prohibition was rather nasty business. Crime increased country wide to keep illegal alcohol flowing. In Virginia, moonshine was the illegal booze of choice. The Bondurant brothers were the kins of the world in this field. However their business is challenged by dirty cops and other gangsters.
Lawless is very well acted, is paced reasonably well, and tells a complete story. However in trying to tell the story of a family fighting with a life of crime (Hey it's like The Godfather) it does nothing original. It just feels like a less stellar gangster drama. The characters aren't the most intriguing either (except for one). Protagonists don't have to be perfect but it would be nice if they were fully entertaining, not just every now and then. The cast composed of Shia LaBeouf, Tom Hardy, Jason Clarke, Jessica Chastain, Mia Wasikowska, Dane DeHaan, Gary Oldman and a scene stealing Guy Pearce did a good job in making a bland story worth while. John Hillcoat has done a lot of good here, but it's easier to see the not so great here.
**1/2 out of ****
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Premium Rush (*** out of ****)
Premium Rush is probably the surprise of the summer. If you had told me I'd really enjoy an action comedy about people riding bicycles, I'd just laugh. this isn't exactly a deep and compelling film, but it's a blast of excitement for a quick 90 minutes. There is a lot going for this rather simple film.
Joseph Gordon Levitt and Michael Shannon are rather fascinating actors. They are excellent at what they do and can easily jump genres. JGL stars as Wilee, a reckless bike messenger in New York City. He's given a end of the day assignment where he must deliver a message all the way on the other side of the city. However he's stopped by Bobby Monday (Michael Shannon) who wants what's in the envelope to be delivered and won't stop until he'll get it. What follows is often hilarious and suspenseful mad dash around the city. The film is almost a live action Loony Tunes (evident with the lead sharing a name with a certain cartoon coyote). Michael Shannon is absolute dynamite in his role. It's delightful to see a villain who's incompetent. There's been too many serious bad guys lately, this is huge and welcomed change in material. Premium Rush is reminiscent of other highly stylized films like Run Lola Run and Shoot 'Em Up which is for the better. This is the tight and driven filmmaking with engaging stunts that can really give you quite a ride.
*** out of ****
Joseph Gordon Levitt and Michael Shannon are rather fascinating actors. They are excellent at what they do and can easily jump genres. JGL stars as Wilee, a reckless bike messenger in New York City. He's given a end of the day assignment where he must deliver a message all the way on the other side of the city. However he's stopped by Bobby Monday (Michael Shannon) who wants what's in the envelope to be delivered and won't stop until he'll get it. What follows is often hilarious and suspenseful mad dash around the city. The film is almost a live action Loony Tunes (evident with the lead sharing a name with a certain cartoon coyote). Michael Shannon is absolute dynamite in his role. It's delightful to see a villain who's incompetent. There's been too many serious bad guys lately, this is huge and welcomed change in material. Premium Rush is reminiscent of other highly stylized films like Run Lola Run and Shoot 'Em Up which is for the better. This is the tight and driven filmmaking with engaging stunts that can really give you quite a ride.
*** out of ****
The Expendables 2 (** out of ****)
The Expendables 2 is in my opinion slightly better than the 2010 original. That's not much of an accomplishment considering the disappointment that was a first. Most of the characters return here (some just cameos) for another mission. This time they must stop plutonium from falling into the hands Villain (Jean Claude Van Damme), yes that's really his name. My problem with this film is pretty much the same I had with the first. The series' gimmick is getting together all the big and often older action stars. For a movie with the old guard heroes there is a lot of new age cheaply done CGI. Would it have not been more fun if the film had used the special effects of old instead of computer generated blood? There is also the story which seems to have been written based on the actors thoughts. Chuck Norris' cameo suspends the already simplistic story(not in the good way) just for him to do something cool. The first film was much better with incorporating all these actions stars. The Expendables 2 is goofy fun and has some entertaining action scenes. However with no pay off nor anything memorable in this ensemble, the film is doomed to be mediocre.
** out of ****
(I decided to have a Van Damme picture since he's arguably given the best performance of the group in JCVD)
Friday, August 17, 2012
Beasts Of The Southern Wild (**** out of ****)
Somewhere outside of New Orleans there is a humble community known as The Bathtub. The place is is nearly void of time and society. The residents live in a dream like bliss where joy comes first. In this place there lives a girl of immaculate bravery. Her name is Hushpuppy and she will be king of The Bathtub, a figure who historians will talk about a 1000 years from now. Hushpuppy is a girl unlike and similar to many children. She is different due to her resilient strength, living situation and curiosity in a life that is like no other. She is similar due to her being a child that is simply discovering the world. Hushpuppy believes the universe is all connected and she is a piece of larger puzzle. She believes her situation will result in impossible fame though, how children dream. The character is played by Quvenzhane Wallis in hypnotic performance. She lives and breaths the world around and is impossible to ignore her talent. Without her the film would not be possible, she is part of the magic that holds it together.
Hushpuppy lives with her father (a marvelous Dwight Henry) in this isolated community. Her father named Wink is a father of great love. He trains Hushpuppy in the ways of survivor and living. He loves his daughter unquestionable but is not afraid of punishing her ( a slap after she burns down a shack is tough love). Wink has told Hushpuppy that her mother swam out into the water and the small child believes she will return one day. She calls out to mother in hard times, a child looking for help when it may never come. Some of the trouble in this child's life comes from the environment and nature itself. Whether it be the rising water or large boar like animals called Aurochs. People of the community believe in a folk tale that these pre Ice Age creatures will return one day and that is not far the truth.
Beasts Of The Southern Wild is a film that will be seen in many different ways. A small girl's path into maturity, a fantasy story on small proportions, a tale of pieces of the universe, a father and daughter's love, a message about society and the environment and others that have yet to be realized. The film is shot on a minuscule budget and shines bright with authenticity. The locations and the people feel real for an odd folk lore. The actors (namely the two leads) are a welcomed relief to art form where performances seemed phoned in now days. The story is easy to be absorb into and dissected for depths. Sometimes it takes a smaller film (in size not heart) to make one appreciate the allure of cinema. Director Behn Zeitlin makes a wondrous debut with this film. It's in the style of a David Gordon Green (before he decided to stop thinking intelligently). Beasts Of The Southern Wild has the style, depth and love of a Terrence Malick film but also the bruising but hopeful heart and imagination of a Hayao Miyazaki (it's like a live action version of one of his films). This is arguably the best film of the year right now but undoubtedly should be considered as one of the best any way you take it.
**** out of ****
Hushpuppy lives with her father (a marvelous Dwight Henry) in this isolated community. Her father named Wink is a father of great love. He trains Hushpuppy in the ways of survivor and living. He loves his daughter unquestionable but is not afraid of punishing her ( a slap after she burns down a shack is tough love). Wink has told Hushpuppy that her mother swam out into the water and the small child believes she will return one day. She calls out to mother in hard times, a child looking for help when it may never come. Some of the trouble in this child's life comes from the environment and nature itself. Whether it be the rising water or large boar like animals called Aurochs. People of the community believe in a folk tale that these pre Ice Age creatures will return one day and that is not far the truth.
Beasts Of The Southern Wild is a film that will be seen in many different ways. A small girl's path into maturity, a fantasy story on small proportions, a tale of pieces of the universe, a father and daughter's love, a message about society and the environment and others that have yet to be realized. The film is shot on a minuscule budget and shines bright with authenticity. The locations and the people feel real for an odd folk lore. The actors (namely the two leads) are a welcomed relief to art form where performances seemed phoned in now days. The story is easy to be absorb into and dissected for depths. Sometimes it takes a smaller film (in size not heart) to make one appreciate the allure of cinema. Director Behn Zeitlin makes a wondrous debut with this film. It's in the style of a David Gordon Green (before he decided to stop thinking intelligently). Beasts Of The Southern Wild has the style, depth and love of a Terrence Malick film but also the bruising but hopeful heart and imagination of a Hayao Miyazaki (it's like a live action version of one of his films). This is arguably the best film of the year right now but undoubtedly should be considered as one of the best any way you take it.
**** out of ****
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
The Campaign (**1/2 out of ****)
The Campaign plays it smart and makes up it's own story. Another kind of comedy would have modeled the two candidates after real life politicians. Also stereotypes about right wing and left wing could have filled up most of the film. The republican isn't a simple god fearing loyal American (well he is but does so without style) and the democrat isn't so kind. The Campaign comes up with original, unpredictable and funny comedy. It's just not the best Will Ferrell comedy out there.
Cam Brady (Will Ferrell) has run unopposed for congressman of his district for the past four terms. It's a cushiony job that he takes full advantage of. Two CEO's (John Lithgow and Dan Aykroyd) who own a number of sweatshops in China want to take things locally and plan on using Brady's district by running their own candidate. This person would unfortunately be Marty Huggins (Zach Galifianakis). An odd man to say the least, perhaps the best way to describe him is he's the kind of person who talks about his two pugs as often as he can. The two enter a heated race that is both professional and personal.
The Campaign is often fun and contains both outrageous and over the top scenes but has also it's character driven jokes. There's also a small hint of subtly to some jokes. Most of the comedy is hit or miss and unfortunately is closer to that miss category. However the film is quick and paced well. Even if the humor in areas is lacking the film is pretty joyous throughout. Quite good but not one of those Ferrell cult classics out there.
**1/2 out of ****
Cam Brady (Will Ferrell) has run unopposed for congressman of his district for the past four terms. It's a cushiony job that he takes full advantage of. Two CEO's (John Lithgow and Dan Aykroyd) who own a number of sweatshops in China want to take things locally and plan on using Brady's district by running their own candidate. This person would unfortunately be Marty Huggins (Zach Galifianakis). An odd man to say the least, perhaps the best way to describe him is he's the kind of person who talks about his two pugs as often as he can. The two enter a heated race that is both professional and personal.
The Campaign is often fun and contains both outrageous and over the top scenes but has also it's character driven jokes. There's also a small hint of subtly to some jokes. Most of the comedy is hit or miss and unfortunately is closer to that miss category. However the film is quick and paced well. Even if the humor in areas is lacking the film is pretty joyous throughout. Quite good but not one of those Ferrell cult classics out there.
**1/2 out of ****
The Bourne Legacy (**1/2 out of ****)
Bourne is back... in photographs and name only. No The Bourne Legacy is a spinoff without too much connection to the Matt Damon series. It's plausible to think that the story might have been tweaked to a point where the film is completely separate of the Bourne universe without dropping in quality. However that doesn't let the production company to cash in on the Bourne franchise. The Bourne Legacy is well built and often engaging action thriller. The film can be gripping in the moment. "The problem is in getting the moments to add up".
Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) much like Bourne is a genetically enhanced spy. The Bourne Legacy is ultimately the story of Aaron trying to get his pills. One green pill and one blue pill must be taken at certain times of the day so Aaron can keep his enhanced strength. Meanwhile in Washington DC Eric Byer (Edward Norton) is placed in charged of closing down the program that enhanced people like Aaron. This includes killing Aaron as well Marta Sharing (Rachel Weisz), a doctor who helped develop the medication participants of the program need to take. The two go on the run but it's never easy.
The Bourne Legacy is probably weakest "Bourne" film but still a fine movie. Not great but acceptable. Jeremy Renner is a worthy replacement for Matt Damon. The problem is the introduction of Aaron to the franchise is not nearly as strong as Jason Bourne's in the first film. The character of Marta is well done for the kind of thriller this film is. It's not meant to be simple. Thus Marta and Aaron have chemistry but it is not hugely romantic. Weisz makes the best of the character. Tony Gilroy has finally takes of the directing helm after writing the previous installments but it's not his best work. Gilroy is capable of making a smart and engaging film (Michael Clayton and Duplicity) but his actions scenes vary in quality. The Bourne Legacy is easier to follow during fights but that doesn't make it better. Paul Greengrass made perhaps use of shaky camera fighting in the two previous installments. Gilroy's actions scenes are impressive but not as much as Greengreass' films. As for the actual scenes the best one is includes a scene of madness by a lab technician played by capable Zelijko Ivanek. Marta's home is also the center of a strong action. Filled with both human emotion and clean editing. The big chase in Manila is thrilling but runs a bit long (as does the entire film, many the analyses scenes could have been cut). The Bourne Legacy is has it's problems but also it's strengths, the good outweighs the bad here.
**1/2 out of ****
Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) much like Bourne is a genetically enhanced spy. The Bourne Legacy is ultimately the story of Aaron trying to get his pills. One green pill and one blue pill must be taken at certain times of the day so Aaron can keep his enhanced strength. Meanwhile in Washington DC Eric Byer (Edward Norton) is placed in charged of closing down the program that enhanced people like Aaron. This includes killing Aaron as well Marta Sharing (Rachel Weisz), a doctor who helped develop the medication participants of the program need to take. The two go on the run but it's never easy.
The Bourne Legacy is probably weakest "Bourne" film but still a fine movie. Not great but acceptable. Jeremy Renner is a worthy replacement for Matt Damon. The problem is the introduction of Aaron to the franchise is not nearly as strong as Jason Bourne's in the first film. The character of Marta is well done for the kind of thriller this film is. It's not meant to be simple. Thus Marta and Aaron have chemistry but it is not hugely romantic. Weisz makes the best of the character. Tony Gilroy has finally takes of the directing helm after writing the previous installments but it's not his best work. Gilroy is capable of making a smart and engaging film (Michael Clayton and Duplicity) but his actions scenes vary in quality. The Bourne Legacy is easier to follow during fights but that doesn't make it better. Paul Greengrass made perhaps use of shaky camera fighting in the two previous installments. Gilroy's actions scenes are impressive but not as much as Greengreass' films. As for the actual scenes the best one is includes a scene of madness by a lab technician played by capable Zelijko Ivanek. Marta's home is also the center of a strong action. Filled with both human emotion and clean editing. The big chase in Manila is thrilling but runs a bit long (as does the entire film, many the analyses scenes could have been cut). The Bourne Legacy is has it's problems but also it's strengths, the good outweighs the bad here.
**1/2 out of ****
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Bachelorette (** out of ****)
In the wake of the success of the hilarious Bridesmaids comes the less stellar Bachelorette. Instead of combining a variety of characters, all with their own humor to bring, this film creates three very unlikable similar leads. Regan (Kirstin Dunst), Katie (Isla Fisher) and Gena (Lizzy Caplan) are all bridesmaids in their high-school friend's wedding They're load mouth, spoiled, selfish and act superior to everyone else. Being an unlikable character is not a problem when done correctly. Paul Giamatti isn't great hero in Sideways but he has a depth. Our leads here aren't one dimensional but just not very interesting. The three girls embark on a wild night after they in a foolishly rip the wedding dress. The movie doesn't have many big laughs nor is that pleasant to watch. The emotional moments show some interesting insight on each character but the intrigue is quick to fade. Bachelorette takes elements from other successful comedies and just makes things average. Not much more to say here because there is not much to see in the first place.
** out of ****
** out of ****
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Total Recall (**1/2 out of ****)
There are very few good reasons to remake a already functional film. Converting it into english is not one of them. Producers making money on a remake is also unfortunate. One of the most legitimate reasons is to touch upon a theme in a different or more in depth scope. Total Recall has a theme/gimmick that is absorbing and rich in exciting confusion. What is real and what is Recall? Where does the audience come down on this line? In the original version the line was near even. However this Total Recall makes its greatest error and makes the question one sided. Instead of touching up on it's theme the film instead looks to focus on visuals and action. It's only slightly better than the generic action movie which is very unfortunate.
Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) lives a life he didn't imagine growing up. He's a factory worker, building synthetics (combat mechs) who lives in a small apartment in The Colony. After chemical warfare Earth has only two livable areas left, The Federation of Britain and The Colony (Australia). Doug who has grown trapped in his life visits a "Rekall" center. A place where memories of grand adventures can be placed in your head. It's like a virtual reality simulator that feels real. Doug dreams of being a spy but things go wrong when they claim Doug already has memories of being a spy, that's when the military attempts to abduct Doug. They claim he is a resistance soldier working for The Colony against Britain but Doug has no memory of this. Doug has been set up in a fake life with a fake wife (Kate Beckinsale) and now that he is aware of his past must be stopped at any cost. He'll have some help from Melina (Jessica Biel) along the way. However has he really forgotten his past life or is he simply having a "Rekall" experience.
The problems with the film lay upon directors Len Wiseman's shoulders. He can create a well crafted action movie, but often does it without soul. Underworld, Live Free or Die Hard, and Total Recall all have the same problems and strengths. The look incredible but have very little to get one emotionally involved in the story. Nothing beyond the simple "if I don't feel something for these people then there is no point in watching". Colin Farrell is fine actor but doesn't have the charm Arnold Schwarzenegger had in the original. Arnold's performance is like a child who has been shown what the world really is like. Farrell plays the early stages of the film like he is in fact trapped in his life. The idea goes along with the films biggest problem that I stated early. This version of Total Recall doesn't focus on what is real or not. It's the film's greatest aspect but is put on the back burner for much of this film. The opening scene should never have been included because really implies one side over the other, it is very poor work. This version of Total Recall does have its strengths. It must be said that the film looks marvelous. The cyber punk setting are brilliantly done. The mix between actual sets and CGI is very smooth and worth boasting about. The action scenes here are well done, easy to understand each move and flashy enough to invite originality. The supporting cast (Bill Nighy, John Cho and the invaluable Bryan Cranston included here) are all effective in their roles. Beckinsale and Biel sway back and forth on the line between simple eye candy and tough and interesting woman but are still entertaining. Total Recall is decent but the question needs to be asked. If your going to remake a movie, why make it generic?
**1/2 out of ****
Douglas Quaid (Colin Farrell) lives a life he didn't imagine growing up. He's a factory worker, building synthetics (combat mechs) who lives in a small apartment in The Colony. After chemical warfare Earth has only two livable areas left, The Federation of Britain and The Colony (Australia). Doug who has grown trapped in his life visits a "Rekall" center. A place where memories of grand adventures can be placed in your head. It's like a virtual reality simulator that feels real. Doug dreams of being a spy but things go wrong when they claim Doug already has memories of being a spy, that's when the military attempts to abduct Doug. They claim he is a resistance soldier working for The Colony against Britain but Doug has no memory of this. Doug has been set up in a fake life with a fake wife (Kate Beckinsale) and now that he is aware of his past must be stopped at any cost. He'll have some help from Melina (Jessica Biel) along the way. However has he really forgotten his past life or is he simply having a "Rekall" experience.
The problems with the film lay upon directors Len Wiseman's shoulders. He can create a well crafted action movie, but often does it without soul. Underworld, Live Free or Die Hard, and Total Recall all have the same problems and strengths. The look incredible but have very little to get one emotionally involved in the story. Nothing beyond the simple "if I don't feel something for these people then there is no point in watching". Colin Farrell is fine actor but doesn't have the charm Arnold Schwarzenegger had in the original. Arnold's performance is like a child who has been shown what the world really is like. Farrell plays the early stages of the film like he is in fact trapped in his life. The idea goes along with the films biggest problem that I stated early. This version of Total Recall doesn't focus on what is real or not. It's the film's greatest aspect but is put on the back burner for much of this film. The opening scene should never have been included because really implies one side over the other, it is very poor work. This version of Total Recall does have its strengths. It must be said that the film looks marvelous. The cyber punk setting are brilliantly done. The mix between actual sets and CGI is very smooth and worth boasting about. The action scenes here are well done, easy to understand each move and flashy enough to invite originality. The supporting cast (Bill Nighy, John Cho and the invaluable Bryan Cranston included here) are all effective in their roles. Beckinsale and Biel sway back and forth on the line between simple eye candy and tough and interesting woman but are still entertaining. Total Recall is decent but the question needs to be asked. If your going to remake a movie, why make it generic?
**1/2 out of ****
The Watch (*1/2 out of ****)
How hard is it to recreate Ghostbusters? It doesn't seem as difficult as all these knockoffs are making it to be. A good mix of comedy and fear, great one liners, lovable cast, an interesting location and a gimmick fascinating that you won't see in any kind of movie. The Watch feels and looks like a film that was made to be a raunchy modern Ghostbusters. However what we got here is an unfunny, needless profound, boringly simple and just plain messy film.
Instead writing a love letter to New York as in Ghostbusters, The Watch takes place in a suburb almost like any other that leaves too little of an impression. If it had left no impression it might have been a smart little detail about boring suburb life, but that's not really the case. Evan (I'm just in it for the money Ben Stiller) is a active member of his suburb and after a murder in the Costco he manages, Evan starts a neighborhood watch. Joining him are Bob (Vince Vaughn brining his obnoxious frat guy attitude with him), Franklin (Jonah Hill looking lost and confused) and the Jamarcus (Richard Ayoade deserved a better Hollywood debut). The four hunt for the murder but it turns out instead of some serial killer, the culprit(s) is/are other worldly life. These aliens look to destroy Earth of course but can our four lovable loser stop them? You'll have to see for yourself (Or just read about it and save your money).
The Watch doesn't have much original humor. The characters use curse words left and right but without any fun to them. It's like the idea that simply swearing in unusual ways is actual humor. There are some funny parts here but their quick and surrounded by weak jokes. It's very disappointing this film is quite bad with the talent involved. The four actors involved have done hilarious things in the past (some more than others), the director Akiva Schaffer made the hilariously absurd Hot Rod and Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg helped write the screenplay (they also did Superbad and Pineapple Express). Yet The Watch ends up failing for the most part even with all that talent. There is also the unneeded subplot of Evan's failure to have a child with his wife (Rosemarie DeWitt wasting her talent here). It's poor drama in a mediocre comedy. It's not an unwatchable film but thankfully very forgettable.
*1/2 out of ****
Instead writing a love letter to New York as in Ghostbusters, The Watch takes place in a suburb almost like any other that leaves too little of an impression. If it had left no impression it might have been a smart little detail about boring suburb life, but that's not really the case. Evan (I'm just in it for the money Ben Stiller) is a active member of his suburb and after a murder in the Costco he manages, Evan starts a neighborhood watch. Joining him are Bob (Vince Vaughn brining his obnoxious frat guy attitude with him), Franklin (Jonah Hill looking lost and confused) and the Jamarcus (Richard Ayoade deserved a better Hollywood debut). The four hunt for the murder but it turns out instead of some serial killer, the culprit(s) is/are other worldly life. These aliens look to destroy Earth of course but can our four lovable loser stop them? You'll have to see for yourself (Or just read about it and save your money).
The Watch doesn't have much original humor. The characters use curse words left and right but without any fun to them. It's like the idea that simply swearing in unusual ways is actual humor. There are some funny parts here but their quick and surrounded by weak jokes. It's very disappointing this film is quite bad with the talent involved. The four actors involved have done hilarious things in the past (some more than others), the director Akiva Schaffer made the hilariously absurd Hot Rod and Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg helped write the screenplay (they also did Superbad and Pineapple Express). Yet The Watch ends up failing for the most part even with all that talent. There is also the unneeded subplot of Evan's failure to have a child with his wife (Rosemarie DeWitt wasting her talent here). It's poor drama in a mediocre comedy. It's not an unwatchable film but thankfully very forgettable.
*1/2 out of ****
Savages (**1/2 out of ****)
Oliver Stone is somewhat back baby! Savages isn't one of Stone's recent political undertakings but back to the material that made Stone popular. Hard, uncompromising, moral defining, bloody, and obscene. This is a return to form, although Stone is still not quite there yet. Savages is too long for the kind of film it is and often can be quite boring. However It's nice to see Stone doing an original story.
Chon (Taylor Kitsch) and Ben (Aaron Johnson) are best friends and work together in quite the controversial business. Ben grows some the best Marijuana in the world and Chon is the muscle that keeps things moving smoothly. They both are in love with their shared girlfriend "O" (Blake Lively) who is acts as our narrator. Chon's, Ben's and O's lives are turned upside down by a cartel lord (Salma Hayek) will do anything to partner up with the two boys. This includes kidnapping O.
Savages has some strengths and features that make it worthwhile but not saving graces. Benicio Del Toro who plays a ruthless henchman working for Hayek is very effective as a villain. His cold and cruel actions make him easy to hate. Savages also benefits from a very quick and energetic style to it. This is done through fast editing and different color filters. It gives the film a bit of a fascinating edge. Oliver Stone is trying again and it's worth a view.
**1/2 out of ****
Chon (Taylor Kitsch) and Ben (Aaron Johnson) are best friends and work together in quite the controversial business. Ben grows some the best Marijuana in the world and Chon is the muscle that keeps things moving smoothly. They both are in love with their shared girlfriend "O" (Blake Lively) who is acts as our narrator. Chon's, Ben's and O's lives are turned upside down by a cartel lord (Salma Hayek) will do anything to partner up with the two boys. This includes kidnapping O.
Savages has some strengths and features that make it worthwhile but not saving graces. Benicio Del Toro who plays a ruthless henchman working for Hayek is very effective as a villain. His cold and cruel actions make him easy to hate. Savages also benefits from a very quick and energetic style to it. This is done through fast editing and different color filters. It gives the film a bit of a fascinating edge. Oliver Stone is trying again and it's worth a view.
**1/2 out of ****
Friday, July 20, 2012
Best and Worst Classic Super Heroes Movies
So with the release of The Dark Knight Rises I thought it might be fun to make list of the worst to best super hero movies. Nothing is set in stone here and I'm sure some choices will be up for debate but everybody would have a different list. Farthest back I'll go is the original Tim Burton Batman (sorry Superman). I haven't seen every one (Ghost Rider) but I got the majority Here we go!
37.) Cat Woman
36.) Batman & Robin
35.) Elektra
34.) Fantastic Four
33.) Fantastic Four 2: Rise of The Silver Surfer
32.) Dare Devil
31.) Green Lantern
30.) X-Men 3: The Last Stand
29.) Spider-Man 3
28.) Blade Trinity
26.) The Incredible Hulk
25.) X-Men Origins: Wolverine
24.) Iron Man 2
23.) Thor
22.) Batman Forever
21.) X-Men
20.) Blade
19.) Hellboy
18.) Hulk
17.) Superman Returns
16.) Batman Returns
15.) Captain America: The First Avenger
14.) Batman
13.) The Avengers
12.) X-Men: First Class
11.) Spider-Man
10.) X2: X-Men United
9.) The Amazing Spider-Man
8.) Blade II
7.) Hellboy 2: The Golden Army
6.) Watchmen
5.) Iron Man
4.) Batman Begins
3.) Spider-Man 2
2.) The Dark Knight Rises
1.) The Dark Knight
37.) Cat Woman
36.) Batman & Robin
35.) Elektra
34.) Fantastic Four
33.) Fantastic Four 2: Rise of The Silver Surfer
32.) Dare Devil
31.) Green Lantern
30.) X-Men 3: The Last Stand
29.) Spider-Man 3
28.) Blade Trinity
26.) The Incredible Hulk
25.) X-Men Origins: Wolverine
24.) Iron Man 2
23.) Thor
22.) Batman Forever
21.) X-Men
20.) Blade
19.) Hellboy
18.) Hulk
17.) Superman Returns
16.) Batman Returns
15.) Captain America: The First Avenger
14.) Batman
13.) The Avengers
12.) X-Men: First Class
11.) Spider-Man
10.) X2: X-Men United
9.) The Amazing Spider-Man
8.) Blade II
7.) Hellboy 2: The Golden Army
6.) Watchmen
5.) Iron Man
4.) Batman Begins
3.) Spider-Man 2
2.) The Dark Knight Rises
1.) The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight Rises (***1/2 out of ****)
The Dark Knight Rises does the impressive job of bringing Christopher Nolan's staggering and monumental trilogy to a satisfying conclusion. The series has has done a 180 on the super hero formula and come out perhaps the better. Instead of light hearted fun and other worldly powers (even some literal cases), the Dark Knight trilogy is filled with despair, paranoia, prejudice but the biggest idea the series presents is there is also hope. A light that shines through even when the rest of the world has gone pitch black. The Dark Knight Rises is gigantic summer blockbuster that wraps up the trilogy while bringing in big ideas and awe inspiring cinematic entertainment.
Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has become a hermit in the time from the last film, The Dark Knight. Eight years have past and Batman has not reemerged to either hate or glory. It isn't until "meeting" a certain thief that he decides to come back to society and see what the world has become without his influence. This thief is Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) better known as her alice Cat Woman. She is a dangerous and intelligence woman with deep personal problems (who hasn't those here?). Selina is unsure if she can join modern society and whether mischievous stealing can continue forever. Upon Bruce's return he learns of the presence of Bane (Tom Hardy). A golem of a man that carries the philosophical ideas of a revolutionary but with the strength to even over power the Caped Crusader. Bane has big plans for Gotham and it will take everything Batman has in him to even try to stop the masked madmen.
Returning is Michael Caine in effective short scenes as Alfred, Bruce's lifelong butler/caretaker. There is also Morgan Freeman, the "Q" of the series. Lastly retuning is the ever faithful Gary Oldman as commissioner Jim Gordon. Newer members of the cast fit in just right with the old and feel like they've been here all along. There is Joseph Gordon Levitt in a emotional performance has rookie cop John Blake, who ideas of hope are what Bruce once had eight years ago. Lastly there is the always good Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate, a investor in Wayne enterprises. As for Bale, Hardy and Hathaway, all deserve praise. Bale brings soul to his character, Hardy lives and breathes his role and Hathaway steal the show in every scene she's in a sexy and fun performance that never comes close to eye candy nor camp, but is always somebody who is genially interesting.
The Dark Knight Rises which feels a lot like a final chapter rather than a stand alone movie is very affective in giving the the series the conclusion a wondrous finale. That finale being a pulse pounding climax that is unlike any other. There are a lot of fantastic little scenes. Without saying too much a fight scene between Bane and Batman doesn't contain any music. The brutal reality of the monster Batman faces terrifying. Big ideas are brought up from the comic books and there are some beautiful changes to fit the story (the smallest spoiler I'll give is just wait and see how a prison is this series' Lazarus Pit). Things feel bigger here than every before. Despite being a big success the film could improve in some areas. Some of it comes down to Bane, his mouthpiece makes hard to understand what he is saying and the gravity of his words get lost in the scuffle. Also Bane's plans seem a bit contradicting of giving life to the people (you'll see). Despite small flaws (The Dark Knight had them too) the finished product is too hard not to admire. It's a super hero movie unblinking cynicism of today's society (post 9/11 anxiety ) and will feed on your every emotion. However you'll welcome it. The Dark Knight Rises is a triumph and the ending the people deserve.
***1/2 out of ****
Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has become a hermit in the time from the last film, The Dark Knight. Eight years have past and Batman has not reemerged to either hate or glory. It isn't until "meeting" a certain thief that he decides to come back to society and see what the world has become without his influence. This thief is Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway) better known as her alice Cat Woman. She is a dangerous and intelligence woman with deep personal problems (who hasn't those here?). Selina is unsure if she can join modern society and whether mischievous stealing can continue forever. Upon Bruce's return he learns of the presence of Bane (Tom Hardy). A golem of a man that carries the philosophical ideas of a revolutionary but with the strength to even over power the Caped Crusader. Bane has big plans for Gotham and it will take everything Batman has in him to even try to stop the masked madmen.
Returning is Michael Caine in effective short scenes as Alfred, Bruce's lifelong butler/caretaker. There is also Morgan Freeman, the "Q" of the series. Lastly retuning is the ever faithful Gary Oldman as commissioner Jim Gordon. Newer members of the cast fit in just right with the old and feel like they've been here all along. There is Joseph Gordon Levitt in a emotional performance has rookie cop John Blake, who ideas of hope are what Bruce once had eight years ago. Lastly there is the always good Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate, a investor in Wayne enterprises. As for Bale, Hardy and Hathaway, all deserve praise. Bale brings soul to his character, Hardy lives and breathes his role and Hathaway steal the show in every scene she's in a sexy and fun performance that never comes close to eye candy nor camp, but is always somebody who is genially interesting.
The Dark Knight Rises which feels a lot like a final chapter rather than a stand alone movie is very affective in giving the the series the conclusion a wondrous finale. That finale being a pulse pounding climax that is unlike any other. There are a lot of fantastic little scenes. Without saying too much a fight scene between Bane and Batman doesn't contain any music. The brutal reality of the monster Batman faces terrifying. Big ideas are brought up from the comic books and there are some beautiful changes to fit the story (the smallest spoiler I'll give is just wait and see how a prison is this series' Lazarus Pit). Things feel bigger here than every before. Despite being a big success the film could improve in some areas. Some of it comes down to Bane, his mouthpiece makes hard to understand what he is saying and the gravity of his words get lost in the scuffle. Also Bane's plans seem a bit contradicting of giving life to the people (you'll see). Despite small flaws (The Dark Knight had them too) the finished product is too hard not to admire. It's a super hero movie unblinking cynicism of today's society (post 9/11 anxiety ) and will feed on your every emotion. However you'll welcome it. The Dark Knight Rises is a triumph and the ending the people deserve.
***1/2 out of ****
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
The Amazing Spider-Man (*** out of ****)
Only five years after the last Spider-Man film and only ten years after the original Sam Raimi version we have a reboot of the series. There are complaints of this film coming out too soon after the death of the last franchise. Well they're right but that's more a problem to bring up with Sony Pictures. For the most part The Amazing Spider-Man contains some great work in the comic book movie genre. The idea of the reboot isn't so strange. We've had three different Batman stories (with four different caped crusaders) in a span of sixteen years. I'll take a rather good Spider-Man reboot after fiver years rather than a fifteen year wait and have Joel Schumacher helmed version. It's best to look at this Spider-Man film for its strengths and ignoring its weaknesses that are there mostly because comparisons with the 2002 version.
Andrew Garfield plays Peter Parker this time around in a very charming performance. We're told Spider-Man's origins once again but with a bit more feeling. Peter is an outsider in high school but has many interesting characteristics. He's intelligent, quick with his words and has a strong sense of morals. It can be argued that Peter Parker is the best personality outside of a flashy suit in the comic books. The Amazing Spider-Man acts much like a coming of age story filled with awkward moments of girls, questioning care giver's instructions and a deep parental issues. The origin story spends more time building up Peter as character and has him accepting his powers in a fresh way. Of course how many times does one need to see the fate of Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen)?
Emma Stone plays Peter's first girlfriend Gwen Stacy who might just be the best love interest in recent super hero history. Stone and Garfield have wonderful chemistry together and really give meaning to Peter's quest to get the girl. It's not the perfect romance, sometimes it feels slightly like something that just has to happen rather than something Peter fights for. Either way Emma Stone is a delight and makes the film much better for it.
Peter is looking for clues on why his parents left him in the care of his aunt and uncle. The mystery leads him to his father's former college Dr. Curt Conners (Rhys Ifans) who's working on cross species genetics. Conners' goal is to regenerate his missing arm like a reptile would. However his reckless experimenting leads to his mutation known as the villain, The Lizard. While The Lizard appears sometimes too animated his presence is phenomenal. He's physically intimidating, scary, has a well crafted back story, intelligent and while appearing stronger than Spider-Man it's not impossible to imagine our hero winning in a straight up but brutal fight. The action scenes in this are the smoothest they've ever been. Their easy to follow, exciting and involve the risk of the people closest to Peter getting hurt. The Lizard might only be behind Nolan's and Burton's Batman villains and Spider-Man 2's Doc Oct (Green Goblin is really close if not tied for The Lizard's position).
The Amazing Spider-Man is quite good, it's probably the second best Spider-Man film (behind Spider-Man 2, a near perfect traditional super here movie). The action is great, the romance is better than the 2002 version, the origin story is told with more detail and Peter's inner struggles are more compelling this time. Both this and Spider-Man have their strengths (the 2002 version deals better with Uncle Ben and Green Goblin does have the edge on where the heinous villain begins and the man under the masks ends), but overall The Amazing Spider-Man might be the better. Sure we got no J. Jonah Jameson this time around but Gwen Stacy's father (Dennis Leary) might just deliver the best line of the whole series, it's a fair trade. The comparisons and ideas on the need for a reboot will always be there. However just enjoy The Amazing Spider-Man for what it it, more web slinging fun.
*** out of ****
Andrew Garfield plays Peter Parker this time around in a very charming performance. We're told Spider-Man's origins once again but with a bit more feeling. Peter is an outsider in high school but has many interesting characteristics. He's intelligent, quick with his words and has a strong sense of morals. It can be argued that Peter Parker is the best personality outside of a flashy suit in the comic books. The Amazing Spider-Man acts much like a coming of age story filled with awkward moments of girls, questioning care giver's instructions and a deep parental issues. The origin story spends more time building up Peter as character and has him accepting his powers in a fresh way. Of course how many times does one need to see the fate of Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen)?
Emma Stone plays Peter's first girlfriend Gwen Stacy who might just be the best love interest in recent super hero history. Stone and Garfield have wonderful chemistry together and really give meaning to Peter's quest to get the girl. It's not the perfect romance, sometimes it feels slightly like something that just has to happen rather than something Peter fights for. Either way Emma Stone is a delight and makes the film much better for it.
Peter is looking for clues on why his parents left him in the care of his aunt and uncle. The mystery leads him to his father's former college Dr. Curt Conners (Rhys Ifans) who's working on cross species genetics. Conners' goal is to regenerate his missing arm like a reptile would. However his reckless experimenting leads to his mutation known as the villain, The Lizard. While The Lizard appears sometimes too animated his presence is phenomenal. He's physically intimidating, scary, has a well crafted back story, intelligent and while appearing stronger than Spider-Man it's not impossible to imagine our hero winning in a straight up but brutal fight. The action scenes in this are the smoothest they've ever been. Their easy to follow, exciting and involve the risk of the people closest to Peter getting hurt. The Lizard might only be behind Nolan's and Burton's Batman villains and Spider-Man 2's Doc Oct (Green Goblin is really close if not tied for The Lizard's position).
The Amazing Spider-Man is quite good, it's probably the second best Spider-Man film (behind Spider-Man 2, a near perfect traditional super here movie). The action is great, the romance is better than the 2002 version, the origin story is told with more detail and Peter's inner struggles are more compelling this time. Both this and Spider-Man have their strengths (the 2002 version deals better with Uncle Ben and Green Goblin does have the edge on where the heinous villain begins and the man under the masks ends), but overall The Amazing Spider-Man might be the better. Sure we got no J. Jonah Jameson this time around but Gwen Stacy's father (Dennis Leary) might just deliver the best line of the whole series, it's a fair trade. The comparisons and ideas on the need for a reboot will always be there. However just enjoy The Amazing Spider-Man for what it it, more web slinging fun.
*** out of ****
Headhunters (*** out of ****)
The best kind of thrillers draw you into the game their playing. This game can be both predictable and fresh, it just was to engage the audience's attention. Headhunters plays with the audience and even in it's darkest moments is a whole lot of fun.
Headhunters is gifted with the kind of protagonist a thriller needs. One that is cool, collected, smart, deceitful and can have that entire world thrown upside down. Roger Brown (Aksel Hennie) is a full time art thief and works for a security company (as a cover) on the side. He steals valuable paintings from people who interview for the company by asking detailed questions on their home life. One potential employee is a former head of a rival company named Clas Greve (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau). Roger learns Cles has a incredibly valuable paining and plans on stealing it but then everything that could go wrong does.
The film contains three scenes that are so wickedly entertaining that it was hard not to grin ear from ear. Those scenes are met with plenty of other fine scenes. In fact there aren't any significant flaws here. Only the story chooses cheap fashions to wrap up some events, nothing to bad though. The good severally outweighs the bad here. There are scenes of thrilling action, luring mystery and wicked black comedy, all of which is entertaining. Headhunters is a mind racing gem.
***1/2 out of ****
Headhunters is gifted with the kind of protagonist a thriller needs. One that is cool, collected, smart, deceitful and can have that entire world thrown upside down. Roger Brown (Aksel Hennie) is a full time art thief and works for a security company (as a cover) on the side. He steals valuable paintings from people who interview for the company by asking detailed questions on their home life. One potential employee is a former head of a rival company named Clas Greve (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau). Roger learns Cles has a incredibly valuable paining and plans on stealing it but then everything that could go wrong does.
The film contains three scenes that are so wickedly entertaining that it was hard not to grin ear from ear. Those scenes are met with plenty of other fine scenes. In fact there aren't any significant flaws here. Only the story chooses cheap fashions to wrap up some events, nothing to bad though. The good severally outweighs the bad here. There are scenes of thrilling action, luring mystery and wicked black comedy, all of which is entertaining. Headhunters is a mind racing gem.
***1/2 out of ****
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Ted (** out of ****)
Ted is a movie nearly void of anything resembling a intelligent joke and instead focuses on getting laughs. Whether these laughs are genuine, cheap or fast, Ted can often be funny. However the humor is temporary and Ted with a little help will fade from time as an excess of poor comedy that still manages to get a chuckle.
Before going into more critic the plot needs to be stated. A teddy bear is brought to life by a boy's wish for his best friend to be real. "Teddy" (voiced by Seth Macfarlane) becomes a overnight hit and gets worldwide coverage as a truly magical event. However 27 years later and now going by Ted, the stuffed animal is all but forgotten about or people just don't care anymore. Ted now lives with his childhood best friend so memorably named John (Mark Wahlberg) in a state of childhood arrested development. They smoke weed daily and watch Flash Gordon re-runs whenever possible. John's girlfriend Lori (Mila Kunis) isn't pleased with this lack of maturing in John and motions him in a direction of adulthood away from Ted. Also in the movie is Joel Mchale playing Lori's boss, a one dimensional character that only wants to sleep with her, and Giovani Ribisi playing a man who wants Ted for his own. To the film's credit this may be the creepiest Ribisi character out there (tremendous praise for the actor).
Ted might just be the most pop culture littered movie of all time. Nearly every joke is similar to Macfarlane's show in the "remember that event (the audience then laughs cause they got the reference)". The jokes aren't bad in moderations but every minute for 115 is too much. Knowing Macfarlane's style this sort of humor was expected but that doesn't make it a good movie, it can get laughs but still be poor comedy. In this reference humor there are "jokes"that are only funny because a talking animated teddy bear is saying them. Ten seconds of a an actual person "singing like people from the 90s" seems cringe worthy, but Ted makes it somewhat appealing. So is this good humor or something looking for as many simple laughs as possible?
On this topic of comedy in Ted it's disturbing the lack of it at times. These times I'm referring to is the film's treatment of the idea of woman and comedy. As the film progressed I felt bad for Mila Kunis. Everyone knows she can be funny (That 70's Show, Friends With Benefits) or give a good performance (Black Swan) but here she is here to play the role of John's girlfriend with maybe two meager offerings of jokes. Women in Ted are here to act trashy and look pretty, not to tell an actual joke.
Hopefully and quite possibly Ted will be forgotten about in a decade. It's humor is based entirely on references and quick jokes. Not a hint of intelligence is to be seen here. Comedy and intelligence don't have to be mutually exclusive things. It won't be remembered as defining classics like Caddyshack, Animal House, or any Monty Python film. Those movies stand up for future generations and are still easily accessible. Ted seems like a movie that can be looked at years from now and have people asking "Who is Taylor Lautner, Justin Bieber and Susan Boyle?". Maybe much like Flash Gordon, the show John and Ted so love, it most likely will have no appeal to people introduced to it years from now. Still Ted gets some laughs, the audience I watched the film with laughed often. Giovanni Ribisi's scenes, a party a Ted's place and Mark Wahlberg's willingness to through his all into the movie make it still somewhat entertaining. In the end though Ted predictable, a bit long, a decent amount of laughs, not to many clever jokes. and nothing to but a movie for the here and now.
Note: I don't due "the recommendations" section any more but for this I'll make an exception cause it makes a lot of sense. Do you want to watch an 115 minute long episode of later season Family Guy? If yes then go for it, you'll like it better than I probably did. If not you didn't miss a thing.
** out of ****
Before going into more critic the plot needs to be stated. A teddy bear is brought to life by a boy's wish for his best friend to be real. "Teddy" (voiced by Seth Macfarlane) becomes a overnight hit and gets worldwide coverage as a truly magical event. However 27 years later and now going by Ted, the stuffed animal is all but forgotten about or people just don't care anymore. Ted now lives with his childhood best friend so memorably named John (Mark Wahlberg) in a state of childhood arrested development. They smoke weed daily and watch Flash Gordon re-runs whenever possible. John's girlfriend Lori (Mila Kunis) isn't pleased with this lack of maturing in John and motions him in a direction of adulthood away from Ted. Also in the movie is Joel Mchale playing Lori's boss, a one dimensional character that only wants to sleep with her, and Giovani Ribisi playing a man who wants Ted for his own. To the film's credit this may be the creepiest Ribisi character out there (tremendous praise for the actor).
Ted might just be the most pop culture littered movie of all time. Nearly every joke is similar to Macfarlane's show in the "remember that event (the audience then laughs cause they got the reference)". The jokes aren't bad in moderations but every minute for 115 is too much. Knowing Macfarlane's style this sort of humor was expected but that doesn't make it a good movie, it can get laughs but still be poor comedy. In this reference humor there are "jokes"that are only funny because a talking animated teddy bear is saying them. Ten seconds of a an actual person "singing like people from the 90s" seems cringe worthy, but Ted makes it somewhat appealing. So is this good humor or something looking for as many simple laughs as possible?
On this topic of comedy in Ted it's disturbing the lack of it at times. These times I'm referring to is the film's treatment of the idea of woman and comedy. As the film progressed I felt bad for Mila Kunis. Everyone knows she can be funny (That 70's Show, Friends With Benefits) or give a good performance (Black Swan) but here she is here to play the role of John's girlfriend with maybe two meager offerings of jokes. Women in Ted are here to act trashy and look pretty, not to tell an actual joke.
Hopefully and quite possibly Ted will be forgotten about in a decade. It's humor is based entirely on references and quick jokes. Not a hint of intelligence is to be seen here. Comedy and intelligence don't have to be mutually exclusive things. It won't be remembered as defining classics like Caddyshack, Animal House, or any Monty Python film. Those movies stand up for future generations and are still easily accessible. Ted seems like a movie that can be looked at years from now and have people asking "Who is Taylor Lautner, Justin Bieber and Susan Boyle?". Maybe much like Flash Gordon, the show John and Ted so love, it most likely will have no appeal to people introduced to it years from now. Still Ted gets some laughs, the audience I watched the film with laughed often. Giovanni Ribisi's scenes, a party a Ted's place and Mark Wahlberg's willingness to through his all into the movie make it still somewhat entertaining. In the end though Ted predictable, a bit long, a decent amount of laughs, not to many clever jokes. and nothing to but a movie for the here and now.
Note: I don't due "the recommendations" section any more but for this I'll make an exception cause it makes a lot of sense. Do you want to watch an 115 minute long episode of later season Family Guy? If yes then go for it, you'll like it better than I probably did. If not you didn't miss a thing.
** out of ****
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Your Sister's Sister (***1/2 out of ****)
Every now and then a film like Your Sister's Sister comes along and leaves you in a euphoric state. It sets aside normal Hollywood conventions and larger than life plots. Here conversations seem real and in that case all the more hypnotic. With convincing performances and multidimensional characters. Where even when the plot seems a bit off, there is to much to like not to forgive it. For 90 minutes it's better to surrender yourself to the film and just experience every twist and turn along the journey.
A year after his brother's death Jack (Mark Duplass) is still a mess. After making a scene at a party to remember his brother, his best friend Iris (Emily Blunt) has a plan to help Jack. She sends him to her father's remote cabin on a small island. There's no internet or TV so he has a lot of time to think. Upon arriving he finds the cabin isn't empty, Iris' sister Hannah (Rosemarie DeWitt) is already staying here. The two know each other through Iris' stories but are still strangers. They begin to connect over tequila as they drown their pain. A few drinks later and the two end up in bed together. Iris shows up the next day as the two try to decide on how they should proceed with what happened the night before.
A plot like this could have gone many different ways. A simpler movie would have found ways to fit as much comedy in this situation as possible and cliche romantic moves. Instead Your Sister's Sister feels grounded, not to far fetched and incredibly real. All three actors give stellar performances given the room to improvise in lengthy conversations. Director Lynn Shelton allows the actors to work how they want but keeps the pace of the film moving and engaging. You'll laugh and feel the emotional bruises the characters suffer. Here is one of the year's greatest (best I've seen so far) films that relishes in realistic drama.
***1/2 out of ****
A year after his brother's death Jack (Mark Duplass) is still a mess. After making a scene at a party to remember his brother, his best friend Iris (Emily Blunt) has a plan to help Jack. She sends him to her father's remote cabin on a small island. There's no internet or TV so he has a lot of time to think. Upon arriving he finds the cabin isn't empty, Iris' sister Hannah (Rosemarie DeWitt) is already staying here. The two know each other through Iris' stories but are still strangers. They begin to connect over tequila as they drown their pain. A few drinks later and the two end up in bed together. Iris shows up the next day as the two try to decide on how they should proceed with what happened the night before.
A plot like this could have gone many different ways. A simpler movie would have found ways to fit as much comedy in this situation as possible and cliche romantic moves. Instead Your Sister's Sister feels grounded, not to far fetched and incredibly real. All three actors give stellar performances given the room to improvise in lengthy conversations. Director Lynn Shelton allows the actors to work how they want but keeps the pace of the film moving and engaging. You'll laugh and feel the emotional bruises the characters suffer. Here is one of the year's greatest (best I've seen so far) films that relishes in realistic drama.
***1/2 out of ****
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Seeking a Friend for the End of the World (*** out of ****)
What would you do knowing the world was ending in a few days. Where would go? Who'd you visit? What in a limited out of time left would you do? I have maybe three ideas since seeing this film, two with a similar theme inspired by this film. I'd like to find somebody who made the countdown to the end of the world not only easier but maybe even lovely. Simply finding someone to make me enjoy the time I have left. It could be an odd partnership for all I know but who the person is doesn't really matter in the end. Seeking a Friend for the End of the World is intimate, meaningful, moving, a bit funny but mostly sincere.
An asteroid of enormous size is heading toward earth and will cause massive destruction. All life on the planet will end it seems. People begin to quite possibly show their true selves. They panic and behave in ways that only this stress brings out. They riot, have mass orgies, do a lot of drugs, or behave normally because they don't know what else to do. Every character in the film has their own way of approaching the end and each one has a bit of intrigue. Dodge (Steve Carell) moves melancholy between friends and work, he has regrets of letting his childhood sweetheart get away. Down his apartment hall lives Penny (Keira Knightly) who misses her chance to return home to England when the airlines shut down. Through a mailing mistake, Penny unknowingly receives a letter from Dodge's high school girlfriend and she gives it to him now with two weeks left to live. Penny feeling awful about the mistake looks to right the wrong and help Dodge drive to the return address on the envelope. In exchange Dodge knows a man nearby the address with a plane that could help Penny get home. So begins an unlikely and unusual road trip filled wild and fantastic characters.
Carell and Knightly are and odd partnership. Their talent makes chemistry in the most unlikely places. However their strange pairing just seems to fit the film's message. The person you want with you at the end might not be the person you'd think of right now. This on pen and paper is a romantic comedy but it has something different to offer. It's a rom-com for people who don't like rom-com. Instead of cute romantic gestures and a happy ending you have people trying to make final connection and an ending where everyone on the planet dies. Much like Canada's Last Night, the film focus on quieter and sweeter story about two kindred spirits forming one final connection in the face of destruction. This movie may not appeal for everyone, it's not hysterical instead focusing on a clever and plot fitting jokes. I'm sure Knightly and Carell won't convince some but to others they will be the odd couple we've been waiting for. Also Penny is sort of a Manic Pixie Dream Girl but apocalyptic style. However due to this sort of plot it never feels like life will be better for Dodge. In some ways Penny is just as confused as Dodge is. Even with it's flaws Seeking a Friend for the End of the World is a darkly refreshing rom com with a stellar cast. Enjoy this film and life while it lasts.
*** out of ****
An asteroid of enormous size is heading toward earth and will cause massive destruction. All life on the planet will end it seems. People begin to quite possibly show their true selves. They panic and behave in ways that only this stress brings out. They riot, have mass orgies, do a lot of drugs, or behave normally because they don't know what else to do. Every character in the film has their own way of approaching the end and each one has a bit of intrigue. Dodge (Steve Carell) moves melancholy between friends and work, he has regrets of letting his childhood sweetheart get away. Down his apartment hall lives Penny (Keira Knightly) who misses her chance to return home to England when the airlines shut down. Through a mailing mistake, Penny unknowingly receives a letter from Dodge's high school girlfriend and she gives it to him now with two weeks left to live. Penny feeling awful about the mistake looks to right the wrong and help Dodge drive to the return address on the envelope. In exchange Dodge knows a man nearby the address with a plane that could help Penny get home. So begins an unlikely and unusual road trip filled wild and fantastic characters.
Carell and Knightly are and odd partnership. Their talent makes chemistry in the most unlikely places. However their strange pairing just seems to fit the film's message. The person you want with you at the end might not be the person you'd think of right now. This on pen and paper is a romantic comedy but it has something different to offer. It's a rom-com for people who don't like rom-com. Instead of cute romantic gestures and a happy ending you have people trying to make final connection and an ending where everyone on the planet dies. Much like Canada's Last Night, the film focus on quieter and sweeter story about two kindred spirits forming one final connection in the face of destruction. This movie may not appeal for everyone, it's not hysterical instead focusing on a clever and plot fitting jokes. I'm sure Knightly and Carell won't convince some but to others they will be the odd couple we've been waiting for. Also Penny is sort of a Manic Pixie Dream Girl but apocalyptic style. However due to this sort of plot it never feels like life will be better for Dodge. In some ways Penny is just as confused as Dodge is. Even with it's flaws Seeking a Friend for the End of the World is a darkly refreshing rom com with a stellar cast. Enjoy this film and life while it lasts.
*** out of ****
Moonrise Kingdom (***1/2 out of ****)
Wes Anderson movies exist outside of this dimension. In his world everything is like a story book. The world has charm that can be seen in a popup book. The adventures contain misunderstood heroes who fight battles others would have forsaken quickly. Colorful supporting characters add dimension to the story and either aid or hinder the protagonists. Moonrise Kingdom is a welcomed break from half baked ideas for films we see week in and week out. This is one of year's best films right now.
Sam (Jared Gilman) and Suzy (Kara Hayward) have decided to run away together. Sam is isn't a popular child and has had plenty of youthful hardships. Suzy is violent mood swings and is seen as a trouble maker in the town's eyes. They are kids in a young a blissful love. Due to their running away, a search team is sent out after them. Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis) who heads up the search is a kind man with a good sense of morals. Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton) and the and Sam's fellow boy scouts also scour the island. Suzy's parents (Bill Murray & Frances McDormand) also desperately search for their troubled daughter.
The film is probably similar to the books Suzy so often reads. A young hero lives outside of a normal world in a wild fantasy. Sam and Suzy live a story that might have come out of a novel made for youths. Charm is almost leaking out of the screen it's that amusing. However unlike a child's book Wes Anderson movies also contain another style. His films have sort of a light-hearted melancholy. The characters even while happy have a sense of sadness about them, as in this moment won't last. It's a characteristic that appears rarely in bigger films but is very luring and understandable. Moonrise Kingdom is a miniature wonder and very welcoming.
***1/2 out of ****
Sam (Jared Gilman) and Suzy (Kara Hayward) have decided to run away together. Sam is isn't a popular child and has had plenty of youthful hardships. Suzy is violent mood swings and is seen as a trouble maker in the town's eyes. They are kids in a young a blissful love. Due to their running away, a search team is sent out after them. Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis) who heads up the search is a kind man with a good sense of morals. Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton) and the and Sam's fellow boy scouts also scour the island. Suzy's parents (Bill Murray & Frances McDormand) also desperately search for their troubled daughter.
The film is probably similar to the books Suzy so often reads. A young hero lives outside of a normal world in a wild fantasy. Sam and Suzy live a story that might have come out of a novel made for youths. Charm is almost leaking out of the screen it's that amusing. However unlike a child's book Wes Anderson movies also contain another style. His films have sort of a light-hearted melancholy. The characters even while happy have a sense of sadness about them, as in this moment won't last. It's a characteristic that appears rarely in bigger films but is very luring and understandable. Moonrise Kingdom is a miniature wonder and very welcoming.
***1/2 out of ****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)