Time to switch gears and go from utter rage to fanboy gushing. These are the movies I absolutely loved watching this year.
First some honorable mentions. The first would have to be Wreck-It Ralph. I don't know why I didn't go see it. It is something right up my alley. A movie all about celebrating video games. I grew up in the '80s and '90s. Games like Street Fighter, Super Mario Bros., and Sonic The Hedgehog were a big part of my childhood. I have no idea why I just never saw it.
Another movie I'm just kicking myself I didn't see in theaters was End of Watch. It's the kind of found footage movie that works well. It makes everything look just a little more gritty and puts you into the action along with two cops trying to survive the night. I've heard great things about it.
And here is my list of the best movies of 2012.
10) THE DARK KNIGHT RISES: While I wouldn't call it my favorite of even the new Batman movies, I'm such a fan of Christopher Nolan's work it deserves to be mentioned. I think this movie could've been helped with a little more creative editing and some creative re-writes, but still it was just about everything we came to expect from the Christopher Nolan Batman movies. Bane was an awesome bad guy and it wrapped up the trilogy in a satisfying way. It left us wanting more. That's the best thing I can say about a movie franchise.
9) AVENGERS: The more I look over my list of favorite movies, the more I expose myself as a total nerd. But this one does deserve some kind of honors. Like Batman, this was a much anticipated movie and it didn't disappoint. The writing was solid, the action was great, and all the characters acted per the way they were established in all the other movies that led up to it. It's not a movie that really stands out, but it's a movie that worked the basics and did so beautifully. A simplistic success. Believe me. That's rare in movies these days.
8) THE EXPENDABLES 2: I think what I liked most about this was the ability to learn from previous mistakes. The first Expendables movie was just too many characters competing for screen time, nothing was really established as far as character motivations, and it just wasn't a root for the good guy type of movie it should've been. Here they dial back on the number of action stars, they give some nice cameos to guys like Chuck Norris, and they managed to tell a simple story and get us to care what happens to the team. Plus, it was a lot of fun.
7) THE HOBBIT: This is a bit lower on the list than I normally would've thought really because it's the start of an epic adventure. There were a lot of slow parts and it really took it's time to flesh out some important characters. Those are all things a movie must do. It just took way too long to do it. The movie did it's job. We laid the ground work and it left us wanting to see what happens next. That's all we can really ask.
6) THE HUNGER GAMES: This is what I mean by an intelligent, creative, and fun action movie. It didn't go into enough detail to help me understand the sociopolitical atmosphere, but I feel like I understood enough for the context of the games. And much like The Hobbit it laid the groundwork for the next couple movies and left me wanting more.
5) ARGO: This movie was just wonderful. An absolute success in production design and storytelling. It did get cliche there towards the end to artificially build up the suspense, but it is such a great ride. The characters are witty and the danger they faced was very real. It treated the subject matter with the utmost respect. It will no doubtedly win some awards and they are well deserved.
4) LINCOLN: One of the most dramatic times in American history, one of the greatest presidents in American history, and directed by Stephen Spielberg. How can this possibly go wrong? What was really great about it was the new spin upon the character of Abraham Lincoln. In most movies, we see Lincoln as this solemn character with the weight of the world on his shoulders. He's always talking with this raspy voice and weary tone. This Lincoln is soft spoken and often tells stories and jokes. I've never seen that side of Lincoln in a movie before and it was very refreshing.
3) SKYFALL: What can I say? I'm a sucker for James Bond. This was the kind of Bond movie I've been wanting to see from Daniel Craig for some time. The earlier ones starring Daniel Craig felt more like a Bourne movie rather than a Bond movie. This one on the other hand was classic Bond. The one to really steal the show was Javier Bardem as our Bond villian. He was so menacing, intelligent, and straight up creepy. He was a great foil for the world's greatest super spy.
2) DJANGO UNCHAINED: I had all but had this one written to be an honorable mention. Then I went to see it in the theater and I'm so happy I did. Terantino is a brilliant filmmaker. I've yet to see anyone blend humor and savagry the way he does. The performances by Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, and Leo DiCaprio was just inspired. I laughed through the whole movie, I was also made to feel very uncomfortable, and then they break out the guns and we're back to having all kinds of fun. If you haven't seen it yet, it's definately a must see for any Quentin Terantino fan.
1) SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS: This is a movie that barely broke even at the box office. I'll admit I didn't think much of the story and I only went to see it because I'm such a huge fan of Christopher Walken. And boy did I find a diamond in the rough. It's not only a very funny movie, but it's one with a surprisingly high level of heart. There were times I legitamately wanted to cry. It was funny, it was beautiful. It was savage, and it was heart warming. And not many people went to see it. I have January 29th circled on my calendar for when this movie hits DVD.
And that about does it for this year. I thank all my readers and friends who help support this website and encourage me as I go forward.
Onward Moviegoers!
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Friday, December 28, 2012
Top Ten Worst Movies 2012 That I Saw
It's that time of year again for my yearly wrap-up. Honestly, I love doing these because it gives me an excuse to reflect on the movies I loved and the ones I love to hate. Again I didn't see every movie that came out this year and it would be unfair to call any movie "the worst" if I hadn't seen it. So, if there's one on here you saw and it was just god awful or the most amazing thing you've ever seen, chances are I just didn't see it.
But first, a few (dis)honorable mentions. These are movies I didn't see, but given all the buzz about them, I probably would've hated them. First, The Devil Inside. Oh my God what a nightmare of a movie. This is probably going to be the number one on a lot of lists for the worst ever. It's not on mine only because I didn't see it. The thing about this one is that it not only was a really bad movie, but wasn't finished. The ending literally cut to black and then told you to go to the internet website of the movie to see how it ended. Whoever made this movie should be mailing rebate checks to every moviegoer that saw it.
Nor did I see One For the Money. There's just something about the poster featuring Katherine Heigl with her back to me looking over her shoulder that is less cutsy and more like a Siren's call; leading me ever witlessly to smash on the rocks so her crappy movie could eat my soul. All I have to say about this is Jennifer Aniston did it better in The Bounty Hunter and that movie sucked too.
With that out of the way, let's take a look at the bad, the ugly, and the unholy abominations I sat through this year.
10) FLIGHT: For as good an actor as Denzel Washington is, this just wasn't the movie promised to us from the trailers. This movie had so little to do with flying and much more about this one guy's habitual drinking problem. And when your movie is over two and a half hours long and it only wants to talk about the evils of drinking, it gets old and fast. It doesn't help that for the entire movie we see just how much of a prick this guy Whip truely is and I couldn't wait for him to go to prison. He isn't a tragic figure. He's a mugging, manipulative jackass who really got lucky he got that plane down without killing everyone. The movie is too long and there's just nobody in the whole movie I liked.
9) GOON: Oh they aren't done ripping off Happy Gilmore just yet. What really pissed me off about this whole thing is that I'm a hockey fan and, shock of shocks, I like to watch hockey players play hockey. I'm not one of those guys that goes purely to see a fist fight on ice. But in this movie that's all you get. THEY DON'T PLAY HOCKEY! EVER! It's all about how quickly we can get this soft talking cave man on skates in the penalty box and off to see his nymphomanic girlfriend or his stereotypical Jewish parents. To hell with this movie.
8) LAWLESS: How hard is it to figure out who the protagonist of the story should be? This movie keeps insisting that it is Jack (LeBeouf) but in all reality it should be Forrest (Hardy). Instead of following along the charming, quirky, and sometimes downright brutal Forrest Bondurant, we're stuck hanging out with the whiny little worm Jack. Every twist in this movie is so horribly telegraphed if you don't know how the movie ends after the first 5 minutes, you just don't know anything about foreshadowing.
7) PROJECT X: THIS IS NOT A MOVIE! This is some moron with a hand held camera showing us his home movie from a wild party... FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF! The only way this movie could be any more boring and pointless was if we saw it as a slide show. Oh yeah, when the ending of your movie resembles the ending of a rambling Monty Python sketch, find another line of work.
6) PROMETHEUS: The worst part of the movie was the expectation of rejuvenating the Alien series. Instead we get a lot of lip service and ten feet tall albinos. No face huggers, no zenomorphic aliens until the stinger/sequel bait at the very end of the movie. How can this be an Alien prequel if there aren't any Aliens? I said it before, and I'll say it again, this movie had more in common with The X-Files than it does with Alien. Maybe it should've taken a few dollars away from making it look pretty and got a better story.
5) TOTAL RECALL: Sometimes I'm just blown away by how much someone can take an existing story and make it virtually unrecognizable. Let's take a look at what was taken out: Mars... gone. Mutants... gone. Ambiguity... gone. These are not minor details. They are the basis for the entire 1990 Schwarzenegger film! An evil company is surpressing the natural atmosphere on Mars to enslave the people and hold on to a manopoly of breathable air. Anyone who tries to leave the dome is either killed or horribly mutated. It's up to a lowly grunt to save the planet... or was it all in his head? In this "remake" it's more about one city not exploiting another. Whooptie do. The whole thing felt smaller and far more convoluted while giving the least amount of fan service possible. The only saving grace this movie has is that it wasn't a remake of Blade Runner. God help you if you do the same thing to Blade Runner.
4) SAFE: If I didn't bother to watch the first or third acts of this movie, it might be alright. But the fact that it can so screw up the most basic elements of storytelling means it has to be over the Total Recall abomination even though I enjoyed Safe far more than Total Recall. It's something I keep repeating but feel just a little more sad every time I do. If you kill off a supporting character without us ever seeing her or learning her name, I DON'T CARE IF SHE DIES! Also, in a popcorn flick like this that builds up to a one-on-one ninja fight and then deprive the audience of said fight, I question your ability to locate your buttocks with both hands and a road map.
3) GHOST RIDER - SPIRIT OF VENGANCE: The way this movie is shot makes it almost unwatchable. Add in a story that undermines the very premise of the story and you have a recipe for utter disaster. Why does God need a starship? He doesn't. Why does the Devil need a bounty hunter? He doesn't. They give some lip service answer about being less powerful while walking around in his meat suit on Earth, but I still call BS on that. Not even watching Nic Cage mugging for the camera saves this. This really has to rank up there with Howard the Duck as one of the worst Marvel Comics movie of all time.
2) A THOUSAND WORDS: Let me get this straight... you're going to get a comedian whose whole gimmick is that he's a fast talking loudmouth and then make him shut up for the whole movie? Why? So his character can learn something about humility? How does that work again? Then there's the hallmark card philosophy of Dr. Sinja who I think was as more surprised his tripe turned out to be true than Jack McCall ever was. Is it any surprise this movie was in cinematic limbo for four years? There really is no greater hell than sitting through an absolutely unfunny comedy with a crowd of people not even given a curtesy laugh.
And the absolutely worst movie I saw this year is...
1) BATTLESHIP: I got better story development playing the board game! Any kind of story is shoehorned in through blatent exposition info drops, the characters are all unlikeable and bland, there's product placement galore, and the motivations might make sense if I smash myself over the head repeatedly with a sledge hammer. I don't think I've ever seen the most basic laws of physics ever so brutally raped in a movie before. And then there's the design of the aliens! They look like the shaved cat aliens from Wing Commander with lizard eyes and porcupine quill beards. This was a movie that WANTED to be a Michael Bay style action flick with giant robots, too dumb to eat humans, and a long slow wet kiss on the mouth to the United States Military. Here's a simple question: How is this movie celebrating the United States Military when we are supposed to have this great emotional moment, when the protagonist of the movie learns humility, when in any rational world he would be court martialed for treason. HE GAVE COMMAND OF HIS SHIP TO A FOREIGN OFFICER? This movie is so bad the creators of this movie actually did interviews begging people to buy the DVD so they can waste more investor money... I mean make a sequel. This movie pissed me off so much that I believe I can comfortably boycott everyone who had anything to do with this. And I didn't even pay to see it!
But first, a few (dis)honorable mentions. These are movies I didn't see, but given all the buzz about them, I probably would've hated them. First, The Devil Inside. Oh my God what a nightmare of a movie. This is probably going to be the number one on a lot of lists for the worst ever. It's not on mine only because I didn't see it. The thing about this one is that it not only was a really bad movie, but wasn't finished. The ending literally cut to black and then told you to go to the internet website of the movie to see how it ended. Whoever made this movie should be mailing rebate checks to every moviegoer that saw it.
Nor did I see One For the Money. There's just something about the poster featuring Katherine Heigl with her back to me looking over her shoulder that is less cutsy and more like a Siren's call; leading me ever witlessly to smash on the rocks so her crappy movie could eat my soul. All I have to say about this is Jennifer Aniston did it better in The Bounty Hunter and that movie sucked too.
With that out of the way, let's take a look at the bad, the ugly, and the unholy abominations I sat through this year.
10) FLIGHT: For as good an actor as Denzel Washington is, this just wasn't the movie promised to us from the trailers. This movie had so little to do with flying and much more about this one guy's habitual drinking problem. And when your movie is over two and a half hours long and it only wants to talk about the evils of drinking, it gets old and fast. It doesn't help that for the entire movie we see just how much of a prick this guy Whip truely is and I couldn't wait for him to go to prison. He isn't a tragic figure. He's a mugging, manipulative jackass who really got lucky he got that plane down without killing everyone. The movie is too long and there's just nobody in the whole movie I liked.
9) GOON: Oh they aren't done ripping off Happy Gilmore just yet. What really pissed me off about this whole thing is that I'm a hockey fan and, shock of shocks, I like to watch hockey players play hockey. I'm not one of those guys that goes purely to see a fist fight on ice. But in this movie that's all you get. THEY DON'T PLAY HOCKEY! EVER! It's all about how quickly we can get this soft talking cave man on skates in the penalty box and off to see his nymphomanic girlfriend or his stereotypical Jewish parents. To hell with this movie.
8) LAWLESS: How hard is it to figure out who the protagonist of the story should be? This movie keeps insisting that it is Jack (LeBeouf) but in all reality it should be Forrest (Hardy). Instead of following along the charming, quirky, and sometimes downright brutal Forrest Bondurant, we're stuck hanging out with the whiny little worm Jack. Every twist in this movie is so horribly telegraphed if you don't know how the movie ends after the first 5 minutes, you just don't know anything about foreshadowing.
7) PROJECT X: THIS IS NOT A MOVIE! This is some moron with a hand held camera showing us his home movie from a wild party... FOR AN HOUR AND A HALF! The only way this movie could be any more boring and pointless was if we saw it as a slide show. Oh yeah, when the ending of your movie resembles the ending of a rambling Monty Python sketch, find another line of work.
6) PROMETHEUS: The worst part of the movie was the expectation of rejuvenating the Alien series. Instead we get a lot of lip service and ten feet tall albinos. No face huggers, no zenomorphic aliens until the stinger/sequel bait at the very end of the movie. How can this be an Alien prequel if there aren't any Aliens? I said it before, and I'll say it again, this movie had more in common with The X-Files than it does with Alien. Maybe it should've taken a few dollars away from making it look pretty and got a better story.
5) TOTAL RECALL: Sometimes I'm just blown away by how much someone can take an existing story and make it virtually unrecognizable. Let's take a look at what was taken out: Mars... gone. Mutants... gone. Ambiguity... gone. These are not minor details. They are the basis for the entire 1990 Schwarzenegger film! An evil company is surpressing the natural atmosphere on Mars to enslave the people and hold on to a manopoly of breathable air. Anyone who tries to leave the dome is either killed or horribly mutated. It's up to a lowly grunt to save the planet... or was it all in his head? In this "remake" it's more about one city not exploiting another. Whooptie do. The whole thing felt smaller and far more convoluted while giving the least amount of fan service possible. The only saving grace this movie has is that it wasn't a remake of Blade Runner. God help you if you do the same thing to Blade Runner.
4) SAFE: If I didn't bother to watch the first or third acts of this movie, it might be alright. But the fact that it can so screw up the most basic elements of storytelling means it has to be over the Total Recall abomination even though I enjoyed Safe far more than Total Recall. It's something I keep repeating but feel just a little more sad every time I do. If you kill off a supporting character without us ever seeing her or learning her name, I DON'T CARE IF SHE DIES! Also, in a popcorn flick like this that builds up to a one-on-one ninja fight and then deprive the audience of said fight, I question your ability to locate your buttocks with both hands and a road map.
3) GHOST RIDER - SPIRIT OF VENGANCE: The way this movie is shot makes it almost unwatchable. Add in a story that undermines the very premise of the story and you have a recipe for utter disaster. Why does God need a starship? He doesn't. Why does the Devil need a bounty hunter? He doesn't. They give some lip service answer about being less powerful while walking around in his meat suit on Earth, but I still call BS on that. Not even watching Nic Cage mugging for the camera saves this. This really has to rank up there with Howard the Duck as one of the worst Marvel Comics movie of all time.
2) A THOUSAND WORDS: Let me get this straight... you're going to get a comedian whose whole gimmick is that he's a fast talking loudmouth and then make him shut up for the whole movie? Why? So his character can learn something about humility? How does that work again? Then there's the hallmark card philosophy of Dr. Sinja who I think was as more surprised his tripe turned out to be true than Jack McCall ever was. Is it any surprise this movie was in cinematic limbo for four years? There really is no greater hell than sitting through an absolutely unfunny comedy with a crowd of people not even given a curtesy laugh.
And the absolutely worst movie I saw this year is...
1) BATTLESHIP: I got better story development playing the board game! Any kind of story is shoehorned in through blatent exposition info drops, the characters are all unlikeable and bland, there's product placement galore, and the motivations might make sense if I smash myself over the head repeatedly with a sledge hammer. I don't think I've ever seen the most basic laws of physics ever so brutally raped in a movie before. And then there's the design of the aliens! They look like the shaved cat aliens from Wing Commander with lizard eyes and porcupine quill beards. This was a movie that WANTED to be a Michael Bay style action flick with giant robots, too dumb to eat humans, and a long slow wet kiss on the mouth to the United States Military. Here's a simple question: How is this movie celebrating the United States Military when we are supposed to have this great emotional moment, when the protagonist of the movie learns humility, when in any rational world he would be court martialed for treason. HE GAVE COMMAND OF HIS SHIP TO A FOREIGN OFFICER? This movie is so bad the creators of this movie actually did interviews begging people to buy the DVD so they can waste more investor money... I mean make a sequel. This movie pissed me off so much that I believe I can comfortably boycott everyone who had anything to do with this. And I didn't even pay to see it!
Saturday, December 22, 2012
The Hobbit - The LONG Unexpected Journey review
For those that are my regular readers, you know I was excited as hell to see this movie. I couldn't go see it right away because of the coming holidays and that had to take priority. But today I did see it and right now I'm stalling a little because I really have no idea what to say about it.
Was it good? Yes.
Did it look good? Yes.
There was some talk about how this movie was shot. Something about 48 frames per second and some people not liking it. Yeah it looked a little cartoony at times. The trees were always a little too green, the pastel colors of Bilbo's house stood out a little. The lighting never looked natural. But that wasn't much of a problem for me because this isn't supposed to be real. It's MIDDLE Earth not Earth. Plus, this is a recollection story. This is a story being remembered by Bilbo Baggins and being told to us. If you look at it like that and keep in mind he's embellishing the story a little, then it's okay.
Was it faithful to the book? Mostly
There were a few things added. However I understand why they were added. If you ever read the book, they make constant references to things in narration that the characters themselves never bring up. The Necromancer for example. He's mentioned so many times in the book but always by the narrartor. It isn't Gandalf talking about him, or Bilbo, or any of the dwarves. So, as a screenwriter, there's a choice to be made: either cut out any refrences to the Necromancer since he never appears in the story and is only refrenced, or re-work the script so he can be mentioned and acknowledge that there are other things going on in the world other than this one journey. I think they made the right choice because later on when Gandalf leaves the party, we know where he's going.
There were a few choice cameos by Elijah Wood as Frodo in the beginning, we see Christopher Lee as Saruman again. Cate Blanchett again looking as beautiful as ever as Galadriel. Hugo Weaving with the weird crown on his head playing Elrond. They fit well into the scenes they added so it's not a big problem at all.
The movie added Radagast the Brown mage in order to establish the Necromancer. This guy acts like the old guy who introduced every episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus. He isn't in the movie very much (thankfully) so I'm going to applaud the restraint used.
Did it feel like it fit with The Lord of the Rings Trilogy? Kind of
I'll just say it: This movie was way too long. It's very self indulgent. Most of the time when writing an adaptation, things get taken out and other things added to fill in some holes. Things were added as I've said, but there is absolutely nothing taken out. Some things were changed, but not removed. A good 30 minutes of the movie is the dwarves at the dinner table. If you're a fan of the book, you want to see that because it is a rather comedic scene. If you're average joe schmo movie goer, I can understand getting a little antsy and just wanting the movie to get on with it.
Compared to the other movies, this one is much more comedic. It's more witty and characters are a little more childish. There never is any real sense of dread until they reach the Goblin Cave. And even then the Goblin King is a smirking jackass. But by far the best scene in the entire movie is Andy Serkis as Gollum. Someone get that guy an Oscar... or an Emmy... hell someone create a Serkis award for best voice actor! GIVE THIS GUY AN ANDY!!!
What's your overall feeling? I liked it.
It's a setup movie. It's meant to be a great movie on it's own. And it is. But it's also supposed to be a lesser in grandeur to what is to come. This movie accomplished it's goal and then some. It's a great movie.
Was it good? Yes.
Did it look good? Yes.
There was some talk about how this movie was shot. Something about 48 frames per second and some people not liking it. Yeah it looked a little cartoony at times. The trees were always a little too green, the pastel colors of Bilbo's house stood out a little. The lighting never looked natural. But that wasn't much of a problem for me because this isn't supposed to be real. It's MIDDLE Earth not Earth. Plus, this is a recollection story. This is a story being remembered by Bilbo Baggins and being told to us. If you look at it like that and keep in mind he's embellishing the story a little, then it's okay.
Was it faithful to the book? Mostly
There were a few things added. However I understand why they were added. If you ever read the book, they make constant references to things in narration that the characters themselves never bring up. The Necromancer for example. He's mentioned so many times in the book but always by the narrartor. It isn't Gandalf talking about him, or Bilbo, or any of the dwarves. So, as a screenwriter, there's a choice to be made: either cut out any refrences to the Necromancer since he never appears in the story and is only refrenced, or re-work the script so he can be mentioned and acknowledge that there are other things going on in the world other than this one journey. I think they made the right choice because later on when Gandalf leaves the party, we know where he's going.
There were a few choice cameos by Elijah Wood as Frodo in the beginning, we see Christopher Lee as Saruman again. Cate Blanchett again looking as beautiful as ever as Galadriel. Hugo Weaving with the weird crown on his head playing Elrond. They fit well into the scenes they added so it's not a big problem at all.
The movie added Radagast the Brown mage in order to establish the Necromancer. This guy acts like the old guy who introduced every episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus. He isn't in the movie very much (thankfully) so I'm going to applaud the restraint used.
Did it feel like it fit with The Lord of the Rings Trilogy? Kind of
I'll just say it: This movie was way too long. It's very self indulgent. Most of the time when writing an adaptation, things get taken out and other things added to fill in some holes. Things were added as I've said, but there is absolutely nothing taken out. Some things were changed, but not removed. A good 30 minutes of the movie is the dwarves at the dinner table. If you're a fan of the book, you want to see that because it is a rather comedic scene. If you're average joe schmo movie goer, I can understand getting a little antsy and just wanting the movie to get on with it.
Compared to the other movies, this one is much more comedic. It's more witty and characters are a little more childish. There never is any real sense of dread until they reach the Goblin Cave. And even then the Goblin King is a smirking jackass. But by far the best scene in the entire movie is Andy Serkis as Gollum. Someone get that guy an Oscar... or an Emmy... hell someone create a Serkis award for best voice actor! GIVE THIS GUY AN ANDY!!!
What's your overall feeling? I liked it.
It's a setup movie. It's meant to be a great movie on it's own. And it is. But it's also supposed to be a lesser in grandeur to what is to come. This movie accomplished it's goal and then some. It's a great movie.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Coming Soon: 12/21/12
With Christmas quickly approaching, it's been extremely hard to get to the theaters. I still want to see The Hobbit and part of me still wants to see Red Dawn. If for no other reason just to see how bad it really is. I've seen a couple movies on TV, one last night I saw called Zombie Honeymoon. That was a movie that has no business being as good as it was. But let's check out what we can expect in theaters this week.
1) MONSTERS, INC 3D: Monsters work in the scare factory until their worst nightmare comes true... MAN!!!!
The Good: I'm sure you've seen it before. This is a re-release of a wonderful movie.
The Bad: There's not much there in the way of surprises.
Final Thoughts: A very imaginative movie with some great characters. Kids of all ages will love it.
2) THIS IS 40: A woman with a husband and kids turns 40 and doesn't take it well.
The Good: We all have an experience like this at some point in our lives where we reflect on our lives and realize we aren't young anymore.
The Bad: It's a lowest common denominator type of comedy.
Final Thoughts: The director is Judd Apatow. His movies are so hit-or-miss. But when they work, they are really funny. Knocked Up is what made him famous as a director. And this is the sequel to Knocked Up. I see nothing immediately appealing about it but it's worth a shot.
3) JACK REACHER: An ex-military sniper is accused of killing five people. He must clear his name by finding the real killer using all his cunning.
The Good: It's Tom Cruise doing what he does best. Action.
The Bad: I've seen movies like this a million times. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Final Thoughts: Sorry, but how is this movie different than The Fugitive, Mission Impossible, The Jackyl, Assassins, The Professional, Sherlock Holmes, just about every Steven Segal movie, and a whole slew of others that even came out this year? Give me something original or don't make the movie. Not interested.
4) THE GUILT TRIP: An inventor goes on the road with his mom to sell his invention.
The Good: It has Barbara Streisand and Seth Rogan. When he wants to Seth Rogan can be a great actor.
The Bad: It's yet another road trip comedy with an odd couple getting into hilarious hyjinks. *yawn*
Final Thoughts: Would be good for a rental but I'm not wasting my evening watching this.
See you at the movies
1) MONSTERS, INC 3D: Monsters work in the scare factory until their worst nightmare comes true... MAN!!!!
The Good: I'm sure you've seen it before. This is a re-release of a wonderful movie.
The Bad: There's not much there in the way of surprises.
Final Thoughts: A very imaginative movie with some great characters. Kids of all ages will love it.
2) THIS IS 40: A woman with a husband and kids turns 40 and doesn't take it well.
The Good: We all have an experience like this at some point in our lives where we reflect on our lives and realize we aren't young anymore.
The Bad: It's a lowest common denominator type of comedy.
Final Thoughts: The director is Judd Apatow. His movies are so hit-or-miss. But when they work, they are really funny. Knocked Up is what made him famous as a director. And this is the sequel to Knocked Up. I see nothing immediately appealing about it but it's worth a shot.
3) JACK REACHER: An ex-military sniper is accused of killing five people. He must clear his name by finding the real killer using all his cunning.
The Good: It's Tom Cruise doing what he does best. Action.
The Bad: I've seen movies like this a million times. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Final Thoughts: Sorry, but how is this movie different than The Fugitive, Mission Impossible, The Jackyl, Assassins, The Professional, Sherlock Holmes, just about every Steven Segal movie, and a whole slew of others that even came out this year? Give me something original or don't make the movie. Not interested.
4) THE GUILT TRIP: An inventor goes on the road with his mom to sell his invention.
The Good: It has Barbara Streisand and Seth Rogan. When he wants to Seth Rogan can be a great actor.
The Bad: It's yet another road trip comedy with an odd couple getting into hilarious hyjinks. *yawn*
Final Thoughts: Would be good for a rental but I'm not wasting my evening watching this.
See you at the movies
Monday, December 10, 2012
Coming Soon: 12/14/12
Oh the big one is here! There are of course some other movies coming out that are not The Hobbit and I suppose I should take a look at them. Come on people! Are you really interested in anything other than The Hobbit this week? Okay, here we go.
1) THE HOBBIT: The strange encounter of a wizard and a hobbit that led to a grand adventure.
The Good: It's The Hobbit. It's Peter Jackson. Andy Serkis is back as Gollum. What's not to like?
The Bad: It's a 3 hour movie and covers roughly the first 100 pages of the book.
Final Thoughts: I'm REALLY excited to see this movie. But I totally understand when people say it is boring as hell. It's a really long movie and it's going to be lacking in action compared to the next two Hobbit movies.
2) ANY DAY NOW: The true story of how in the 1970s a gay couple try to adopt an orphaned child with down syndrome.
The Good: It's heartfelt, it has a message that pertains to today, and I'm sure incredibly well done.
The Bad: It's coming out the same day as The Hobbit.
Final Thoughts: It's an Oscar grabber. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but just the fact that it's coming out the same day as The Hobbit will hurt it's box office sales. But give this one a watch. It might surprise you.
3) SAVE THE DATE: A woman about to get married breaks up with her boyfriend and finds herself in a hot rebound romance. She must decide if it's better to be single or take a chance at love.
The Good: It's probably not going to be in most theaters.
The Bad: I hate what this movie represents.
Final Thoughts: This is a movie that wants to be a modern romance but doesn't understand what that means. It assumes women stay single because it's fun and "safe"; whatever that means. And you know how this ends. She "takes a chance at love." Whatever that means. So if being single is fun and safe, doesn't that mean marriage is boring and 'unsafe'? Ask anyone who is married if their life is boring and 'unsafe'. I plan to stay away from this one.
See you at the movies
1) THE HOBBIT: The strange encounter of a wizard and a hobbit that led to a grand adventure.
The Good: It's The Hobbit. It's Peter Jackson. Andy Serkis is back as Gollum. What's not to like?
The Bad: It's a 3 hour movie and covers roughly the first 100 pages of the book.
Final Thoughts: I'm REALLY excited to see this movie. But I totally understand when people say it is boring as hell. It's a really long movie and it's going to be lacking in action compared to the next two Hobbit movies.
2) ANY DAY NOW: The true story of how in the 1970s a gay couple try to adopt an orphaned child with down syndrome.
The Good: It's heartfelt, it has a message that pertains to today, and I'm sure incredibly well done.
The Bad: It's coming out the same day as The Hobbit.
Final Thoughts: It's an Oscar grabber. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but just the fact that it's coming out the same day as The Hobbit will hurt it's box office sales. But give this one a watch. It might surprise you.
3) SAVE THE DATE: A woman about to get married breaks up with her boyfriend and finds herself in a hot rebound romance. She must decide if it's better to be single or take a chance at love.
The Good: It's probably not going to be in most theaters.
The Bad: I hate what this movie represents.
Final Thoughts: This is a movie that wants to be a modern romance but doesn't understand what that means. It assumes women stay single because it's fun and "safe"; whatever that means. And you know how this ends. She "takes a chance at love." Whatever that means. So if being single is fun and safe, doesn't that mean marriage is boring and 'unsafe'? Ask anyone who is married if their life is boring and 'unsafe'. I plan to stay away from this one.
See you at the movies
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Coming Soon: 12/7/12
I struggled with if I should write this week's "coming soon" article or not. Mostly because there really isn't any movies coming out with any big media push to them. Plus the intial reviews are not all that positive. I was just thinking if I should waste your time giving my inital impressions of movies you probably aren't going to watch. Then when I actually sat down to write this article, something happened and it deleted about half of it. So, yeah I'm not too pleased. Here's what is coming out.
1) PLAYING FOR KEEPS: A down on his luck soccer player tries to rebuild his life by coaching his kid's youth soccer team.
The Good: There's a lot of talented actresses in this. Jessica Biel, Uma Thurman, and Catherine Zeta-Jones.
The Bad: How insulting is this movie to women? When they really have no fuction as people other than to throw themselves at the hot soccer stud?
Final Thoughts: It's a rom/com. And one I think takes itself way too seriously at times.
2) HYDE PARK ON HUDSON: The story of when the King and Queen of England went to America to ask Franklin Roosevelt for aid in the upcoming war with Germany.
The Good: Bill Murray is in it.
The Bad: Everything else.
Final Thoughts: How can you turn something like the beginning moments of World War II into a comedy? And then have a guy like Bill Murray playing FDR? Why?
3) DEADFALL: Two casino robbers crash their car on the way to Canada and go on the run.
The Good: Olivia Wilde is in it.
The Bad: What kind of crap are they just throwing against the wall now?
Final Thoughts: I love Olivia Wilde. She's an amazing actress. But there's no saving this movie.
4) LAY THE FAVORITE: A professional sports bettor finds a former stripper turned Las Vegas coctail waitress who he believes is his good luck charm. And then his wife gets jealous. And she goes to New York and gets in trouble.
The Good: ...............................................................
The Bad: WTF! Can we get a coherent story to go along with big name actors like Bruce Willis, Catherine Zeta-Jones?
Final Thoughts: Wouldn't watch this on a bet.
See you at the movies.
1) PLAYING FOR KEEPS: A down on his luck soccer player tries to rebuild his life by coaching his kid's youth soccer team.
The Good: There's a lot of talented actresses in this. Jessica Biel, Uma Thurman, and Catherine Zeta-Jones.
The Bad: How insulting is this movie to women? When they really have no fuction as people other than to throw themselves at the hot soccer stud?
Final Thoughts: It's a rom/com. And one I think takes itself way too seriously at times.
2) HYDE PARK ON HUDSON: The story of when the King and Queen of England went to America to ask Franklin Roosevelt for aid in the upcoming war with Germany.
The Good: Bill Murray is in it.
The Bad: Everything else.
Final Thoughts: How can you turn something like the beginning moments of World War II into a comedy? And then have a guy like Bill Murray playing FDR? Why?
3) DEADFALL: Two casino robbers crash their car on the way to Canada and go on the run.
The Good: Olivia Wilde is in it.
The Bad: What kind of crap are they just throwing against the wall now?
Final Thoughts: I love Olivia Wilde. She's an amazing actress. But there's no saving this movie.
4) LAY THE FAVORITE: A professional sports bettor finds a former stripper turned Las Vegas coctail waitress who he believes is his good luck charm. And then his wife gets jealous. And she goes to New York and gets in trouble.
The Good: ...............................................................
The Bad: WTF! Can we get a coherent story to go along with big name actors like Bruce Willis, Catherine Zeta-Jones?
Final Thoughts: Wouldn't watch this on a bet.
See you at the movies.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Movies I want to see: December
Merry Christmas! Oh yeah. Christmas time. That time of year where we are all a little nicer and a little more happy; while having psycho riots at toy stores. But still, a very magical time. One certainly to be enjoyed. So from me here at templeofthehut.blogspot.com, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Happy Quanza, Happy Ramadan, or whatever you celebrate.
Here's what I'm going to be watching in between Christmas Carol movies and other holiday specials:
1) THE HOBBIT- AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY: The epic story that kicked off the most epic story by J.R.R. Tolkien. I've already re-read the Hobbit and I can't wait to see it. I believe they turned The Hobbit into three movies and this one goes up to the encounter with Gollum and the Goblins. *oops spoilers* I'm so hyped for this movie.
2) ZERO DARK THIRTY: This is the movie about how the Navy SEAL team 6 got Osama Bin Laden. It's bound to make any American proud.
3) THE GUILT TRIP: Babs and Seth Rogan play up the annoying parent thing in a road trip comedy. I can't say I'm as psyched for this as I am The Hobbit, but it is one I'm willing to give a chance.
4) THIS IS 40: Much like The Guilt Trip I'm willing to give this one a chance. As a guy a not too far away from 40 myself, I think I might be able to relate to this movie. I stress might.
5) DJANGO UNCHAINED: Quenten Tarantino + Christoph Waltz + Leo DiCaprio + Samuel L. Jackson = 2 1/2 hours of awesome cowboy fun. I have to see that! Seriously, the story is something just beautiful. A freed slave becomes a freedom fighter against repressive slave owners. And he has to save the love of his life. Must see.
See you at the movies
Here's what I'm going to be watching in between Christmas Carol movies and other holiday specials:
1) THE HOBBIT- AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY: The epic story that kicked off the most epic story by J.R.R. Tolkien. I've already re-read the Hobbit and I can't wait to see it. I believe they turned The Hobbit into three movies and this one goes up to the encounter with Gollum and the Goblins. *oops spoilers* I'm so hyped for this movie.
2) ZERO DARK THIRTY: This is the movie about how the Navy SEAL team 6 got Osama Bin Laden. It's bound to make any American proud.
3) THE GUILT TRIP: Babs and Seth Rogan play up the annoying parent thing in a road trip comedy. I can't say I'm as psyched for this as I am The Hobbit, but it is one I'm willing to give a chance.
4) THIS IS 40: Much like The Guilt Trip I'm willing to give this one a chance. As a guy a not too far away from 40 myself, I think I might be able to relate to this movie. I stress might.
5) DJANGO UNCHAINED: Quenten Tarantino + Christoph Waltz + Leo DiCaprio + Samuel L. Jackson = 2 1/2 hours of awesome cowboy fun. I have to see that! Seriously, the story is something just beautiful. A freed slave becomes a freedom fighter against repressive slave owners. And he has to save the love of his life. Must see.
See you at the movies
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Coming Soon: 11/30/12
Well, November is just about done. And it's already cold. If you've never had a Seattle winter, well... there's very little snow but still really cold. Go figure. Anyway, what's coming out this week?
1) KILLING THEM SOFTLY: Some criminals rob a mob funded card game and a guy is hired to track them down.
The Good: It promises to be a brutal affair.
The Bad: Critique of capitalism aside, everything about this movie just screams pointless.
Final Thoughts: I've been making "with his song" jokes about this movie ever since I heard about it. It screams of pretense. So, just enjoy it for the action and then forget you saw it.
2) THE COLLECTION: A psycho killer kidnaps a rich man's daughter. And the rich man hires mercenaries to get her back.
The Good: Did you ever see Saw? This is the Final Destination version of Saw.
The Bad: You know this is just going to be torture porn.
Final Thoughts: If you're a gore hound, this might be for you.
3) UNIVERSAL SOLDIER - DAY OF RECKONING: A man tracks down the genetically enhanced zombie soldiers to get revenge for the death of his wife.
The Good: You know a movie this bat squeak insane won't be boring. (ps they aren't really zombies)
The Bad: Anyone looking for a good piece of cinema, may I recommend you stay at home.
Final Thoughts: B movie action with some of the best of the '80s (Van Damme and Lundgren) Can't wait!
4) SILENT NIGHT: A remake of the cult classic B movie Silent Night Deadly Night. Cops try to track down a killer Santa Claus on Christmas Eve.
The Good: Malcolm McDowell is always awesome and Knives Chou (Ellen Wong) is finally in another movie.
The Bad: It's a schlocky B movie and you have to be in on the joke.
Final Thoughts: If they remake Silent Night Deadly Night 2, that would be awesome. GARBAGE DAY!!!! (If you saw the movie, you'd get the refrence)
See you at the movies
1) KILLING THEM SOFTLY: Some criminals rob a mob funded card game and a guy is hired to track them down.
The Good: It promises to be a brutal affair.
The Bad: Critique of capitalism aside, everything about this movie just screams pointless.
Final Thoughts: I've been making "with his song" jokes about this movie ever since I heard about it. It screams of pretense. So, just enjoy it for the action and then forget you saw it.
2) THE COLLECTION: A psycho killer kidnaps a rich man's daughter. And the rich man hires mercenaries to get her back.
The Good: Did you ever see Saw? This is the Final Destination version of Saw.
The Bad: You know this is just going to be torture porn.
Final Thoughts: If you're a gore hound, this might be for you.
3) UNIVERSAL SOLDIER - DAY OF RECKONING: A man tracks down the genetically enhanced zombie soldiers to get revenge for the death of his wife.
The Good: You know a movie this bat squeak insane won't be boring. (ps they aren't really zombies)
The Bad: Anyone looking for a good piece of cinema, may I recommend you stay at home.
Final Thoughts: B movie action with some of the best of the '80s (Van Damme and Lundgren) Can't wait!
4) SILENT NIGHT: A remake of the cult classic B movie Silent Night Deadly Night. Cops try to track down a killer Santa Claus on Christmas Eve.
The Good: Malcolm McDowell is always awesome and Knives Chou (Ellen Wong) is finally in another movie.
The Bad: It's a schlocky B movie and you have to be in on the joke.
Final Thoughts: If they remake Silent Night Deadly Night 2, that would be awesome. GARBAGE DAY!!!! (If you saw the movie, you'd get the refrence)
See you at the movies
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Coming Soon: 11/23/12
I knew Lincoln would get overshadowed by Breaking Dawn Part 2. That's just sad. And if you haven't seen Breaking Dawn Part 2 yet, from what I hear, the movie trolls it's fans. You have been warned. But my guess is if you are a fan of Twilight, you've already seen it so... there you go. Here's what to expect this week.
1) RED DAWN: North Korea invades the United States and local teenagers form a resistance.
The Good: The original Red Dawn with Patrick Swayze was epic!
The Bad: This isn't the original Red Dawn with Patrick Swayze.
Final Thoughts: I have no idea why someone would want to see a remake with worse actors and an even more laughable enemy. Just wait for DVD.
2) LIFE OF PI: The story of a young boy lost at sea with a tiger.
The Good: The visuals are absolutely stunning. It must be seen in 3D. On IMAX if possible.
The Bad: Does this capture the heart of the book? Wasn't this story supposed to be "unfilmable?" Does it offer more than pretty visuals?
Final Thoughts: It looks really good and if it does do the book justice, this is going to be amazing. See it in 3D.
3) HITCHCOCK: A biopic about one of the greatest directors in history getting his masterpiece created.
The Good: Let me get this straight... Anthony Hopkins, Helen Mirren, and Scarlett Johansson?
The Bad: Don't know if it will do the man justice.
Final Thoughts: I love Hitchcock. I love Psycho. I love The Birds. But I have a bad feeling a better love letter to the Master of Suspense would be watching Mel Brooks' "High Anxiety."
4) RISE OF THE GUARDIANS: The latest cutsy movie from Dreamworks about fantasy creatures saving the world.
The Good: It's a kids story trying to tell a story and a message about life.
The Bad: It could go overboard and instead of entertaining might become preachy.
Final Thoughts: The kids are probably going to love it, but I don't see it appealing to the older audiences.
See you at the movies.
1) RED DAWN: North Korea invades the United States and local teenagers form a resistance.
The Good: The original Red Dawn with Patrick Swayze was epic!
The Bad: This isn't the original Red Dawn with Patrick Swayze.
Final Thoughts: I have no idea why someone would want to see a remake with worse actors and an even more laughable enemy. Just wait for DVD.
2) LIFE OF PI: The story of a young boy lost at sea with a tiger.
The Good: The visuals are absolutely stunning. It must be seen in 3D. On IMAX if possible.
The Bad: Does this capture the heart of the book? Wasn't this story supposed to be "unfilmable?" Does it offer more than pretty visuals?
Final Thoughts: It looks really good and if it does do the book justice, this is going to be amazing. See it in 3D.
3) HITCHCOCK: A biopic about one of the greatest directors in history getting his masterpiece created.
The Good: Let me get this straight... Anthony Hopkins, Helen Mirren, and Scarlett Johansson?
The Bad: Don't know if it will do the man justice.
Final Thoughts: I love Hitchcock. I love Psycho. I love The Birds. But I have a bad feeling a better love letter to the Master of Suspense would be watching Mel Brooks' "High Anxiety."
4) RISE OF THE GUARDIANS: The latest cutsy movie from Dreamworks about fantasy creatures saving the world.
The Good: It's a kids story trying to tell a story and a message about life.
The Bad: It could go overboard and instead of entertaining might become preachy.
Final Thoughts: The kids are probably going to love it, but I don't see it appealing to the older audiences.
See you at the movies.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Lincoln Review: A house divided...
I'd have to say that while the tone of this movie is pretty clear, it did have some great surprises. Everyone knows that this is one of those "Oscar Please" movies. This is a movie made for the academy and meant to win awards. It's a dramatic story about a dramatic time in American history.
What I found very refreshing was the attention to historical detail. Most notibly in Daniel Day-Lewis' portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. In just about every movie I've ever seen Abraham Lincoln, he's always been this solumn guy with the weight of the world on his shoulders. His voice is rough and raspy and it just looks like at any given moment he could just break down. This Lincoln is far more of an accurate portrayal. This Lincoln is funny! He's whistful! He tells stories and jokes. Yes, he feels the weight of the war and keeping the Union together. Yes, he's pushing against a lot of people trying to pass the 13th ammendment. But this guy never gives in to dispair. He's always fighting. He knows how hard it will be and just doesn't care. Because what he is doing is for the future of the country.
And Lincoln's logic makes sense. The Civil War was fought over slavery, so let's get rid of slavery. That way even if peace is reached, the country won't fall apart again.
This could've very easily brought in the brutality of the war. And it does show some of the carnage, it doesn't indulge. That's something very important going in. This is a political drama. If you're looking to see huge battle scenes, you're in for disappointment. It does show the aftermath of the Battle of Petersburg. That was a brutal scene and somehow doesn't get gratuitous. If you aren't familiar with it, please do the research. It's amazing how one-sided that battle was. Seeing a weary Lincoln surveying that battlefield on his horse was a powerful scene.
As a history fan and a movie fan I loved this movie. Go watch it.
What I found very refreshing was the attention to historical detail. Most notibly in Daniel Day-Lewis' portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. In just about every movie I've ever seen Abraham Lincoln, he's always been this solumn guy with the weight of the world on his shoulders. His voice is rough and raspy and it just looks like at any given moment he could just break down. This Lincoln is far more of an accurate portrayal. This Lincoln is funny! He's whistful! He tells stories and jokes. Yes, he feels the weight of the war and keeping the Union together. Yes, he's pushing against a lot of people trying to pass the 13th ammendment. But this guy never gives in to dispair. He's always fighting. He knows how hard it will be and just doesn't care. Because what he is doing is for the future of the country.
And Lincoln's logic makes sense. The Civil War was fought over slavery, so let's get rid of slavery. That way even if peace is reached, the country won't fall apart again.
This could've very easily brought in the brutality of the war. And it does show some of the carnage, it doesn't indulge. That's something very important going in. This is a political drama. If you're looking to see huge battle scenes, you're in for disappointment. It does show the aftermath of the Battle of Petersburg. That was a brutal scene and somehow doesn't get gratuitous. If you aren't familiar with it, please do the research. It's amazing how one-sided that battle was. Seeing a weary Lincoln surveying that battlefield on his horse was a powerful scene.
As a history fan and a movie fan I loved this movie. Go watch it.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Coming Soon: 11/16/12
If you saw Skyfall, that was a great treat. This definately was the year of the blockbuster movies. And we have another coming out this week. Also, Lincoln was pushed back to this week. Probably because it didn't want to compete with Skyfall on opening weekend. Anyway, here's what we can see this week.
1) THE TWILIGHT SAGA BREAKING DAWN PART 2: The conclusion to the girl loves vampire story of our generation.
The Good: If you love the series you're going to love this one too.
The Bad: It's Twilight. What hasn't been said about this?
Final Thoughts: There isn't any possible way you could get me interested in this movie. You'd have to pay me to see it. And then buy me booze.
2) ANNA KARENINA: The timeless love story based on the Tolstoy novel.
The Good: It's a wonderful story and a great musical.
The Bad: The trailers I've seen make it feel like it's the stage play script and not a movie adaptation.
Final Thoughts: I can't say I'll be first in line to see it, but will probably be a fun night out.
See you at the movies
1) THE TWILIGHT SAGA BREAKING DAWN PART 2: The conclusion to the girl loves vampire story of our generation.
The Good: If you love the series you're going to love this one too.
The Bad: It's Twilight. What hasn't been said about this?
Final Thoughts: There isn't any possible way you could get me interested in this movie. You'd have to pay me to see it. And then buy me booze.
2) ANNA KARENINA: The timeless love story based on the Tolstoy novel.
The Good: It's a wonderful story and a great musical.
The Bad: The trailers I've seen make it feel like it's the stage play script and not a movie adaptation.
Final Thoughts: I can't say I'll be first in line to see it, but will probably be a fun night out.
See you at the movies
Friday, November 9, 2012
Skyfall Review: Happy 50th Anniversary James Bond
I just finished my retrospective on James Bond and I was totally psyched to see this movie. All the reviews I read for Skyfall were positive and I just had to see a Bond movie. While I like Daniel Craig as an actor, (he's awesome in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo), I can't say I was ever sold on him as James Bond. Not that he's a bad actor or anything like that, he just didn't ever project the attitude I've come to expect from Sean Connery or Pierce Brosnan.
The Daniel Craig Bond movies were a complete reboot of the franchise starting with Casino Royale. And when looked in that context the series is actually quite brilliant. Instead of starting off with a polished product like we got with every other Bond movie, we get to see the character grow from his early beginnings at MI6. It provides a little more understanding into why he can be such a cold-hearted bastard or a hopeless womanizer. Skyfall was the ultimate payoff from the build we got in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. Now we have the suave, ice-cold, witty secret agent we all know and love.
Everything in this movie clicked. The opening sequence alone is worth the price of the movie ticket. It's exactly the kind of action packed start that Bond movies are famous for. The introduction of Q was wonderfully done and while it didn't go into the campy realm, they still managed to squeeze a couple good dry-witty quips out of it.
Judy Dench as M is just so memorable. She's played the character ever since Goldeneye and really made that character her own. M also has gone through quite a number of changes and it's something they happened to play with in this movie. In Goldeneye M was a number cruncher who dismissed the real-life experience and gut instinct of 007. Now in Skyfall she's 007's greatest champion arguing against the "technospy" approach and saying that we need people like James Bond to keep our world safe from enemies we don't know exist.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention how awesome Javier Bardem was as the villian, Silva. He's equal parts sadism, fanaticism, brilliance, and straight up awkwardness. It's a very memorable villian and a great foil for James Bond.
I can't say much more without giving the story away. After 50 years of James Bond movies, this is a great movie to get fans to keep asking for more.
The Daniel Craig Bond movies were a complete reboot of the franchise starting with Casino Royale. And when looked in that context the series is actually quite brilliant. Instead of starting off with a polished product like we got with every other Bond movie, we get to see the character grow from his early beginnings at MI6. It provides a little more understanding into why he can be such a cold-hearted bastard or a hopeless womanizer. Skyfall was the ultimate payoff from the build we got in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace. Now we have the suave, ice-cold, witty secret agent we all know and love.
Everything in this movie clicked. The opening sequence alone is worth the price of the movie ticket. It's exactly the kind of action packed start that Bond movies are famous for. The introduction of Q was wonderfully done and while it didn't go into the campy realm, they still managed to squeeze a couple good dry-witty quips out of it.
Judy Dench as M is just so memorable. She's played the character ever since Goldeneye and really made that character her own. M also has gone through quite a number of changes and it's something they happened to play with in this movie. In Goldeneye M was a number cruncher who dismissed the real-life experience and gut instinct of 007. Now in Skyfall she's 007's greatest champion arguing against the "technospy" approach and saying that we need people like James Bond to keep our world safe from enemies we don't know exist.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention how awesome Javier Bardem was as the villian, Silva. He's equal parts sadism, fanaticism, brilliance, and straight up awkwardness. It's a very memorable villian and a great foil for James Bond.
I can't say much more without giving the story away. After 50 years of James Bond movies, this is a great movie to get fans to keep asking for more.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
James Bond Retrospective: Part 6 Daniel Craig
Ever since Roger Moore overstayed his welcome as James Bond, playing the role until he was 57, once an actor reaches a certain age he's inevitably replaced with a younger actor to keep the franchise going. Thus was the fate of Pierce Brosnan. After several unsatisfying movies, it was time to reboot the entire series. That's why they decided to name the next Bond movie Casino Royale after the 1967 Bond movie of the same name.
Pierce Brosnan made the James Bond name marketable again so many different actors wanted to be the next James Bond. Eventually, they decided on TV actor and occasional film actor, Daniel Craig. Craig brought far more grit to the character than has ever been seen before. It's also why I don't necessarily enjoy Daniel Craig as James Bond because the portrayal reminds me far too much of something I'd see from Matt Damon in the Bourne Trilogy. It should come as no surprise then that Jeff Imada, the fight choreographer from the Bourne Trilogy also did Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.
Daniel Craig plays Bond more as a generic action star for my taste. While I think he does a good job as Bond, I just feel that James Bond after so many movies and so much popularity deserves to be more than just another action character.
And thus my retrospective of James Bond comes to a close. Skyfall is set to hit theaters very soon if it isn't out already. I hope you check it out. As usual, I will leave you with my favorites in a recap.
1) Pierce Brosnan: Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day
My Favorite: Goldeneye
2) Sean Connery: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever, Never Say Never Again
My Favorite: Goldfinger
3) Daniel Craig: Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Skyfall
My Favorite: Casino Royale (note: I haven't seen Skyfall yet as of this publication)
4) George Lazenby: On Her Magesty's Secret Service
My Favorite: On Her Magesty's Secret Service
5) Timothy Dalton: The Living Daylights, License To Kill
My Favorite: The Living Daylights
6) Roger Moore: Live and Let Die, The Man With the Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy, A View to a Kill
My Favorite: The Man With the Golden Gun
*To date my favorite Bond movie is Goldeneye. But I haven't seen Skyfall yet.
Pierce Brosnan made the James Bond name marketable again so many different actors wanted to be the next James Bond. Eventually, they decided on TV actor and occasional film actor, Daniel Craig. Craig brought far more grit to the character than has ever been seen before. It's also why I don't necessarily enjoy Daniel Craig as James Bond because the portrayal reminds me far too much of something I'd see from Matt Damon in the Bourne Trilogy. It should come as no surprise then that Jeff Imada, the fight choreographer from the Bourne Trilogy also did Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace.
Daniel Craig plays Bond more as a generic action star for my taste. While I think he does a good job as Bond, I just feel that James Bond after so many movies and so much popularity deserves to be more than just another action character.
And thus my retrospective of James Bond comes to a close. Skyfall is set to hit theaters very soon if it isn't out already. I hope you check it out. As usual, I will leave you with my favorites in a recap.
1) Pierce Brosnan: Goldeneye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day
My Favorite: Goldeneye
2) Sean Connery: Dr. No, From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever, Never Say Never Again
My Favorite: Goldfinger
3) Daniel Craig: Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Skyfall
My Favorite: Casino Royale (note: I haven't seen Skyfall yet as of this publication)
4) George Lazenby: On Her Magesty's Secret Service
My Favorite: On Her Magesty's Secret Service
5) Timothy Dalton: The Living Daylights, License To Kill
My Favorite: The Living Daylights
6) Roger Moore: Live and Let Die, The Man With the Golden Gun, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker, For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy, A View to a Kill
My Favorite: The Man With the Golden Gun
*To date my favorite Bond movie is Goldeneye. But I haven't seen Skyfall yet.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
James Bond Retrospective: Part 5 Pierce Brosnan
It's funny how things work out sometimes. Pierce Brosnan was originally going to get the part that ultimately went to Timothy Dalton. Because there were rumors Pierce Brosnan might be the next James Bond, his television show Remington Steele got picked up for another season. That meant Brosnan couldn't take the role of Bond, the rumors were squashed with the announcement of another season of Remington Steele and the choice of Timothy Dalton, and so Remington Steele gets cancelled.
But two movies later with a less than stellar Dalton, we get in my opinion is the greatest Bond movie in the entire franchise, Goldeneye! And who is the man to bring James Bond to life? Pierce Brosnan. When I think of James Bond, I think of a guy like Pierce Brosnan. He had all the cheeky one-liners of Roger Moore, the charisma of Sean Connery, and the straight up cold as ice, no nonsense of a George Lazenby. Somehow Brosnan made it all work to perfection.
In many ways Goldeneye was a game changer. It dealt with a "relic of the cold war" struggling to be relevant. There wasn't any more rogue Soviets to fight but instead international criminals or in Tomorrow Never Dies, media moguls taking yellow journalism to the extreme. The action scenes were all modern shoots with less fakey fighting like we saw in the Roger Moore movies. If there is one critique of them is that they focused too much on action and explosions that the characters are forced to take a back seat to all the action.
Brosnan played James Bond for four movies. The best by far is Goldeneye. It revolutionized the character and the tie-in video game is still one of the best out there. If you haven't seen Goldeneye yet, put it on your must have for Christmas list.
But two movies later with a less than stellar Dalton, we get in my opinion is the greatest Bond movie in the entire franchise, Goldeneye! And who is the man to bring James Bond to life? Pierce Brosnan. When I think of James Bond, I think of a guy like Pierce Brosnan. He had all the cheeky one-liners of Roger Moore, the charisma of Sean Connery, and the straight up cold as ice, no nonsense of a George Lazenby. Somehow Brosnan made it all work to perfection.
In many ways Goldeneye was a game changer. It dealt with a "relic of the cold war" struggling to be relevant. There wasn't any more rogue Soviets to fight but instead international criminals or in Tomorrow Never Dies, media moguls taking yellow journalism to the extreme. The action scenes were all modern shoots with less fakey fighting like we saw in the Roger Moore movies. If there is one critique of them is that they focused too much on action and explosions that the characters are forced to take a back seat to all the action.
Brosnan played James Bond for four movies. The best by far is Goldeneye. It revolutionized the character and the tie-in video game is still one of the best out there. If you haven't seen Goldeneye yet, put it on your must have for Christmas list.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
James Bond Retrospective: Part 4 Timothy Dalton
Timothy Dalton was originally going to be cast instead of Roger Moore, but at the time he was 22 and he turned the role down believing he wasn't old enough. Well, when critics finally had enough of Roger Moore, again we try to re-cast 007.
For "The Living Daylights" a lot of names were thrown around but the most notable is Pierce Brosnan. He was all set to do the role, but his television show, Remington Steele, got picked up again so he couldn't play James Bond. Dalton made a pretty good career doing stage shows and television roles. His film roles before Bond are fairly unremarkable.
Many of the problems with why the Dalton movies were unsuccessful were behind the scenes problems rather than problems with the final product. They were no longer doing Ian Fleming novel renditions and trying desperately to come up with compelling stories. Also with as much as Roger Moore was roasted over open coals for his slapsticky Bond, they tried to make this new 007 much more serious.
And that's probably the biggest problem in a nutshell. The movies are too serious.
The movies themselves are actually quite good, but they just never seemed to have that same Bond feeling from the previous movies because they dealt too much with real current events; for example the inclusion of the Mujahideen to help Bond fight the Soviets.
Dalton was to appear in a third Bond movie but production kept getting pushed back and he went on to other projects.
For "The Living Daylights" a lot of names were thrown around but the most notable is Pierce Brosnan. He was all set to do the role, but his television show, Remington Steele, got picked up again so he couldn't play James Bond. Dalton made a pretty good career doing stage shows and television roles. His film roles before Bond are fairly unremarkable.
Many of the problems with why the Dalton movies were unsuccessful were behind the scenes problems rather than problems with the final product. They were no longer doing Ian Fleming novel renditions and trying desperately to come up with compelling stories. Also with as much as Roger Moore was roasted over open coals for his slapsticky Bond, they tried to make this new 007 much more serious.
And that's probably the biggest problem in a nutshell. The movies are too serious.
The movies themselves are actually quite good, but they just never seemed to have that same Bond feeling from the previous movies because they dealt too much with real current events; for example the inclusion of the Mujahideen to help Bond fight the Soviets.
Dalton was to appear in a third Bond movie but production kept getting pushed back and he went on to other projects.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Coming Soon: 11/9/12
Last week was a bit disappointing. I haven't seen Wreck-it Ralph just yet, but I did see Flight and The Man With the Iron Fists and they just weren't very good. This week sure looks to be different. Let's take a look.
1) SKYFALL: James Bond is back and his loyalty to M and MI6 is threatened as MI6 comes under attack.
The Good: I LOVE James Bond movies!
The Bad: The Daniel Craig Bond feels too much like Jason Bourne rather than James Bond.
Final Thoughts: The story looks awesome, the action looks intense. I will see it. At least once.
2) LINCOLN: The story of the 16th president of the United States and his struggles with trying to end the Civil War and end slavery in the USA. All while keeping the nation together.
The Good: It's an amazing story with an amazing cast. It's hard to imagine this being bad.
The Bad: Daniel Day-Lewis' makeup job looks really distracting.
Final Thoughts: Must see. Period.
3) THE COMEDY: A wealthy, sheltered man who inherits a lot of money finds ways to push the boundaries of good behavior.
The Good: It's a strangely funny but also thought provoking look at human nature.
The Bad: It's a movie meant to provoke certain responses. Usually negative responses.
Final Thoughts: If you can understand why this guy does such things, you might find it very enjoyable.
4) A ROYAL AFFAIR: It's a period drama piece involving a love triangle between a German doctor, The Queen of Denmark, and the King.
The Good: If you like history and seeing people in Elizabethan garb, you'll enjoy it.
The Bad: It's like an episode of Jerry Springer mixed with the politics of the day.
Final Thoughts: Again looks like a great movie if this is your thing.
See you at the movies
1) SKYFALL: James Bond is back and his loyalty to M and MI6 is threatened as MI6 comes under attack.
The Good: I LOVE James Bond movies!
The Bad: The Daniel Craig Bond feels too much like Jason Bourne rather than James Bond.
Final Thoughts: The story looks awesome, the action looks intense. I will see it. At least once.
2) LINCOLN: The story of the 16th president of the United States and his struggles with trying to end the Civil War and end slavery in the USA. All while keeping the nation together.
The Good: It's an amazing story with an amazing cast. It's hard to imagine this being bad.
The Bad: Daniel Day-Lewis' makeup job looks really distracting.
Final Thoughts: Must see. Period.
3) THE COMEDY: A wealthy, sheltered man who inherits a lot of money finds ways to push the boundaries of good behavior.
The Good: It's a strangely funny but also thought provoking look at human nature.
The Bad: It's a movie meant to provoke certain responses. Usually negative responses.
Final Thoughts: If you can understand why this guy does such things, you might find it very enjoyable.
4) A ROYAL AFFAIR: It's a period drama piece involving a love triangle between a German doctor, The Queen of Denmark, and the King.
The Good: If you like history and seeing people in Elizabethan garb, you'll enjoy it.
The Bad: It's like an episode of Jerry Springer mixed with the politics of the day.
Final Thoughts: Again looks like a great movie if this is your thing.
See you at the movies
James Bond Retrospective: Part 3 Roger Moore
Never is there a more divided argument than asking who is better: Sean Connery or Roger Moore. For me the answer is way too easy. While Sean Connery tried to do a more faithful rendition of the James Bond character from the novels, Roger Moore's portrayal was always a little more cheeky and comedic. Towards the end, they ran out of Ian Fleming novels to make into movies and they started to create original stories for the movies. In the late 1970s, the sci-fi genre had really taken off with popular movies like Alien, various Godzilla movies, Planet of the Apes, Flash Gordon, Star Trek, and of course Star Wars.
With sci-fi movies so popular and old Cold War fears on the decline, James Bond had to change with the times as well. That's why we got movies like Moonraker.
Roger Moore wanted to do a more comedic take on James Bond and more emphasis was put on the Bond Girl names and cheesy one-liners. Which of course explains the all so subtly named Octopussy.
Moore was James Bond for 13 years and 7 movies. That's a longer tenure than any other actor. Of those movie he did, the only one I like personally is The Man With the Golden Gun. The rest seem to be a mix of campyness and horribly put together fight scenes.
Roger Moore the best Bond? Not by a long shot.
With sci-fi movies so popular and old Cold War fears on the decline, James Bond had to change with the times as well. That's why we got movies like Moonraker.
Roger Moore wanted to do a more comedic take on James Bond and more emphasis was put on the Bond Girl names and cheesy one-liners. Which of course explains the all so subtly named Octopussy.
Moore was James Bond for 13 years and 7 movies. That's a longer tenure than any other actor. Of those movie he did, the only one I like personally is The Man With the Golden Gun. The rest seem to be a mix of campyness and horribly put together fight scenes.
Roger Moore the best Bond? Not by a long shot.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
The Man With The Iron Fists Review: It's raining blood. Again. And again. And again
This is a hard movie for me to review. It's hard to explain how something with so many good elements can also be such a bad movie. There was so much about this movie I liked. I found the style to be very interesting. It took a lot of 1970s martial arts movie style and mixed it with rap music. It was very Samurai Shamploo in that regard. It also had an interesting film noir feel to with with the narration early on in the film. Then of course you had the awesome kung fu elements tied in with wire fu scenes and more than a hint of Tarantino-esque gratuitous violence.
The problem is that it didn't offer much more than style over substance. And the style got old real quick.
If I were to go see it again and counted all the fountains of blood spray, I'm sure the tally would hit double digits before the half hour mark. It's just too much. The fight scenes are really well done but after the first few beheadings I just think to myself, "here we go again."
RZA is a decent enough supporting actor. But I'm not sure he's good enough to carry a movie as the leading man. It's clear he took a lot of tips from Tarantino as far as directing, but the editing was not as clean as it needed to be and the story wasn't nearly as tightly told as it should be.
Maybe I should explain. Silver Lion kills his boss Gold Lion just before they are about to take a job protecting a shipment of the Emperor's gold. Silver Lion wants it so he kills Gold Lion and takes over the Lion clan. And then we get into why he wanted Gold Lion's son X-Blade killed. X-Blade wants to avenge his father's death but he really doesn't even know who killed his father. As far as he knows it was Poison Dagger.
And that gets into Russel Crowe's character Jack Knife. Who went to Jungle Village for some reason. And stayed there for some reason. And wants to fight Poison Dagger for some reason. And Silver Lion hires Brass Body (David Bautista) to kill X-Blade because X-Blade might take over the Lion clan and Silver Lion is the leader because he killed Gold Lion and blamed it on the Wolf clan. And the Lion clan is going to go to war with the Wolf clan and at the same time going to kill the Gemini Killers and steal the Emperor's gold that they were hired to safeguard (I think). All the while there's a brothel full of ninja prostitutes in town and the most beautiful of the prostitutes is in love with the blacksmith (RZA) who gets his arms chopped off by Brass Body because he helped X-Blade. And then he and his friends make a pair of iron arms for him so he can fight Brass Body.
This is what I mean! This story is all over the place! Like I said, it had a lot of elements I liked, but the movie as a whole just doesn't work.
The problem is that it didn't offer much more than style over substance. And the style got old real quick.
If I were to go see it again and counted all the fountains of blood spray, I'm sure the tally would hit double digits before the half hour mark. It's just too much. The fight scenes are really well done but after the first few beheadings I just think to myself, "here we go again."
RZA is a decent enough supporting actor. But I'm not sure he's good enough to carry a movie as the leading man. It's clear he took a lot of tips from Tarantino as far as directing, but the editing was not as clean as it needed to be and the story wasn't nearly as tightly told as it should be.
Maybe I should explain. Silver Lion kills his boss Gold Lion just before they are about to take a job protecting a shipment of the Emperor's gold. Silver Lion wants it so he kills Gold Lion and takes over the Lion clan. And then we get into why he wanted Gold Lion's son X-Blade killed. X-Blade wants to avenge his father's death but he really doesn't even know who killed his father. As far as he knows it was Poison Dagger.
And that gets into Russel Crowe's character Jack Knife. Who went to Jungle Village for some reason. And stayed there for some reason. And wants to fight Poison Dagger for some reason. And Silver Lion hires Brass Body (David Bautista) to kill X-Blade because X-Blade might take over the Lion clan and Silver Lion is the leader because he killed Gold Lion and blamed it on the Wolf clan. And the Lion clan is going to go to war with the Wolf clan and at the same time going to kill the Gemini Killers and steal the Emperor's gold that they were hired to safeguard (I think). All the while there's a brothel full of ninja prostitutes in town and the most beautiful of the prostitutes is in love with the blacksmith (RZA) who gets his arms chopped off by Brass Body because he helped X-Blade. And then he and his friends make a pair of iron arms for him so he can fight Brass Body.
This is what I mean! This story is all over the place! Like I said, it had a lot of elements I liked, but the movie as a whole just doesn't work.
James Bond Retrospective: Part 2 George Lazenby
After Sean Connery quit playing the role of James Bond, the producers had a choice to make. 1) Stop making James Bond movies or 2) find someone else to replace him. That's when they came across George Lazenby. Originally they wanted Timothy Dalton, but Dalton turned the roll down.
Lazenby impressed them with his good looks and his aggressive tendancies. He was a former male model and the story goes that he accidentily punched the fight choreographer in the face and that impressed producer Albert Broccoli.
Much is said about Lazenby's lack of acting talent and many critics criticize him as being the worst James Bond because he was only in one movie and even Timothy Dalton had two. But to that I say you need to see On Her Magesty's Secret Service for yourself and I challenge you to view it critically. It's not the acting that made this movie so bad. It's the story. James Bond is not the kind of guy who gets married. Yet here he fell in love and got married.
While Lazenby probably doesn't deserve all the hate he gets from fans, it's clear he didn't like playing the role nor did he have the acting range to really give the character life the way Sean Connery did. Lazenby was originally offered a seven movie deal but decided to only do one and he left the project to do his own movie, Universal Soldier.
A very poor career decision in every way possible.
George Lazenby's legacy is a mixed bag. He clearly wasn't up to the task of a major blockbuster movie yet did a decent job with what he had. The story was something completely new compared to what audiences know and expect from James Bond but the death of Bond's wife is still one of the most touching and heartwarming moment in any of the movies. It was a movie relying more on physical fights than gadgets but yet still was satisfying to some. How much of the criticism Lazenby gets just for being the guy to replace Connery and how much does he deserve because he just wasn't a very good actor is a matter of opinion.
I say give the movie another chance.
Lazenby impressed them with his good looks and his aggressive tendancies. He was a former male model and the story goes that he accidentily punched the fight choreographer in the face and that impressed producer Albert Broccoli.
Much is said about Lazenby's lack of acting talent and many critics criticize him as being the worst James Bond because he was only in one movie and even Timothy Dalton had two. But to that I say you need to see On Her Magesty's Secret Service for yourself and I challenge you to view it critically. It's not the acting that made this movie so bad. It's the story. James Bond is not the kind of guy who gets married. Yet here he fell in love and got married.
While Lazenby probably doesn't deserve all the hate he gets from fans, it's clear he didn't like playing the role nor did he have the acting range to really give the character life the way Sean Connery did. Lazenby was originally offered a seven movie deal but decided to only do one and he left the project to do his own movie, Universal Soldier.
A very poor career decision in every way possible.
George Lazenby's legacy is a mixed bag. He clearly wasn't up to the task of a major blockbuster movie yet did a decent job with what he had. The story was something completely new compared to what audiences know and expect from James Bond but the death of Bond's wife is still one of the most touching and heartwarming moment in any of the movies. It was a movie relying more on physical fights than gadgets but yet still was satisfying to some. How much of the criticism Lazenby gets just for being the guy to replace Connery and how much does he deserve because he just wasn't a very good actor is a matter of opinion.
I say give the movie another chance.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Flight Review: Have a drink on me
I hated this movie. When I say hate, I'm not talking about a movie like Jack and Jill that has absolutely no redeeming value at all, but there's so much wrong with this movie it's one of those movies I just can't ever imagine ever seeing again.
Here's the biggest problem; it's a two and a half hour long public service announcement. For a movie called "Flight" there's very little to do with flying in this movie. It's all about this one pilot and his problems with coke and booze. For 150 minutes!
So much of this movie is just padding. The way we establish that Whip (Denzel Washington) is a drunken deadbeat father is in the first scene. So far, so good. The way they do it is of course a full on close up of his girlfriend's naked boobs and her bare butt prancing to the bathroom.
Whip's best friend/drug dealer (John Goodman) who looks like Jerry Garcia if someone performed a resurrection is the best character in the movie and he's really pointless. He's only in two scenes. 1) when he visits Whip in the hospital and 2) when Whip is drunk as a skunk and needs some coke to sober up.
Whip's girlfriend he meets after the planecrash, Nicole is completely useless in this movie as well. In the first act we see that she's a junkie prostitute and before we even know who she is, we watch her overdose on heroin.
Hostility and Spoilers. Abandon all hope ye who read further.
I can't do this anymore. I have to explain this because someone in Hollywood clearly hasn't gotten the memo. If I don't know anything about a character, if I don't know what they are doing in the story, and if I don't know their NAME, I'm not going to be emotionally invested in what happens to them. I didn't care when naked boob lady died because I was guessing that it even was naked boob lady. She looked so much more different with her hair tied up and, you know, clothes on. I call her naked boob lady because I don't know her NAME!
Also I don't really care that much about Nicole. Because I've already seen her overdose on heroin before I even learned her NAME or had a bloody clue what she was even doing in the movie!
Also we need to have a little talk about protagonists. If you're going to do a movie like this, it's okay to have a protagonist we don't like. I didn't like Whip. At all. That's not the problem. The problem is that he has to have some kind of redeeming quality. He doesn't. We want to root for the guy. We are supposed to not want to see this guy get in trouble. We want to see this guy get help despite all the times he refuses to get help. We want to see him get better and be a better father to his kid. But he shows no likeable characteristics! I wanted him to go to jail. He shouldn't be a pilot! The guy was drinking mid-flight! This isn't the story of a good and decent man overcome by his demons. This is a foul, no good, piece of crap trying to cover his ass through the whole movie only to dramatically have one saving moment. Yep. That's your climax. His heart grew three sizes and turned over a new leaf. And all the Whos down in Whoville love him. They sent his ass to jail for gross negligence even though the problem with the plane was clearly a mechanical failure.
It's 2 1/2 hours of an unlikeable douchebag self-destructing. Fun.
Here's the biggest problem; it's a two and a half hour long public service announcement. For a movie called "Flight" there's very little to do with flying in this movie. It's all about this one pilot and his problems with coke and booze. For 150 minutes!
So much of this movie is just padding. The way we establish that Whip (Denzel Washington) is a drunken deadbeat father is in the first scene. So far, so good. The way they do it is of course a full on close up of his girlfriend's naked boobs and her bare butt prancing to the bathroom.
Whip's best friend/drug dealer (John Goodman) who looks like Jerry Garcia if someone performed a resurrection is the best character in the movie and he's really pointless. He's only in two scenes. 1) when he visits Whip in the hospital and 2) when Whip is drunk as a skunk and needs some coke to sober up.
Whip's girlfriend he meets after the planecrash, Nicole is completely useless in this movie as well. In the first act we see that she's a junkie prostitute and before we even know who she is, we watch her overdose on heroin.
Hostility and Spoilers. Abandon all hope ye who read further.
I can't do this anymore. I have to explain this because someone in Hollywood clearly hasn't gotten the memo. If I don't know anything about a character, if I don't know what they are doing in the story, and if I don't know their NAME, I'm not going to be emotionally invested in what happens to them. I didn't care when naked boob lady died because I was guessing that it even was naked boob lady. She looked so much more different with her hair tied up and, you know, clothes on. I call her naked boob lady because I don't know her NAME!
Also I don't really care that much about Nicole. Because I've already seen her overdose on heroin before I even learned her NAME or had a bloody clue what she was even doing in the movie!
Also we need to have a little talk about protagonists. If you're going to do a movie like this, it's okay to have a protagonist we don't like. I didn't like Whip. At all. That's not the problem. The problem is that he has to have some kind of redeeming quality. He doesn't. We want to root for the guy. We are supposed to not want to see this guy get in trouble. We want to see this guy get help despite all the times he refuses to get help. We want to see him get better and be a better father to his kid. But he shows no likeable characteristics! I wanted him to go to jail. He shouldn't be a pilot! The guy was drinking mid-flight! This isn't the story of a good and decent man overcome by his demons. This is a foul, no good, piece of crap trying to cover his ass through the whole movie only to dramatically have one saving moment. Yep. That's your climax. His heart grew three sizes and turned over a new leaf. And all the Whos down in Whoville love him. They sent his ass to jail for gross negligence even though the problem with the plane was clearly a mechanical failure.
It's 2 1/2 hours of an unlikeable douchebag self-destructing. Fun.
James Bond Retrospective: Part 1 Sean Connery
With the much anticipated Skyfall about to hit theaters in America, I thought it would be good to do another retrospective on one of the greatest heroes in cinema, James Bond. The problem I have is that unlike Batman, Bond has been in now 25 movies! To do a retrospective on every James Bond movie would just not be possible without dedicating an entire month to it. So, instead I've decided to look at the actors behind the iconic character. After so many movies and 40 years, it's actually amazing to think so few actors have played the roll.
But first let's talk about the 1967 movie Casino Royale. While it is a James Bond movie, it's not really considered part of the James Bond collection. Mostly because it was done more as a comedy and done in flashbacks. So, in that movie there was more than one actor playing James Bond. Therefore, I won't be covering Peter Sellers and David Niven but they do deserve an honorable mention.
James Bond is the famous British super spy, Agent 007 of Mi6. He was the star of many bestselling books by Ian Fleming. After his death, other writers carried on the James Bond story with six other books. To this date, the James Bond movies are the second highest grossing film franchise in history right behind the other famed movies based off books from Jolly old England, Harry Potter.
The first person we'll talk about to play James Bond is arguably one of the best, Sean Connery. Connery appeared in six different Bond movies; Dr. No (1962), From Russia With Love (1963), Goldfinger (1964), Thunderball (1965), You Only Live Twice (1967), and Diamonds are Forever (1971). Sean Connery also was in the 1983 movie Never Say Never Again playing a much older James Bond. Never Say Never Again was a closer adaptation to the Fleming novel Thunderball and wasn't produced by EON Productions like the other Bond movies; so many see this as not being in cannon also.
Sean Connery was originally not the first choice to play James Bond in Dr. No. Fleming and others initially wanted Cary Grant, but Grant wouldn't sign for a three movie deal. He only agreed to one. The second choice was James Mason, but like Grant would commit to only two and not the three they planned. Also, if you look at pictures of Cary Grand and James Mason, you can kind of see that they didn't exactly fit the look of what we think of James Bond today. Cary Grant still looked Clark Gable right off the set of Gone With The Wind and Mason could easily be mistaken for Fred Rogers. Connery with the odd looking wig still had the appearance of a guy who has at least seen a fight. He is 6'2" and had some muscle tone. There was some hesitance to him because he didn't look suave enough to give the character justice. Ironic as Connery now is considered one of the sexiest men alive for the last 50 years.
The Bond movies made Connery a superstar but after doing You Only Live Twice, Connery stated that he really hated playing James Bond and decided to turn down the roll for On Her Magesty's Secret Service. Connery came back to do Diamonds Are Forever because Lazenby turned the roll down to do Universal Soldier and because Connery was offered $1.25 million plus a share of the profits the movie made just to come back. At the time that was an extraordinary deal.
The Sean Connery Bond is a much more physical character. He does have the sex appeal and always got the girl, but he's far more known to attack rather than using gadgets like other Bonds we will see later. The Connery movies are some of the most iconic of the franchise. While Dr. No didn't do perticularly well, Goldfinger is still considered one of the greatest Bond movies to date.
But first let's talk about the 1967 movie Casino Royale. While it is a James Bond movie, it's not really considered part of the James Bond collection. Mostly because it was done more as a comedy and done in flashbacks. So, in that movie there was more than one actor playing James Bond. Therefore, I won't be covering Peter Sellers and David Niven but they do deserve an honorable mention.
James Bond is the famous British super spy, Agent 007 of Mi6. He was the star of many bestselling books by Ian Fleming. After his death, other writers carried on the James Bond story with six other books. To this date, the James Bond movies are the second highest grossing film franchise in history right behind the other famed movies based off books from Jolly old England, Harry Potter.
The first person we'll talk about to play James Bond is arguably one of the best, Sean Connery. Connery appeared in six different Bond movies; Dr. No (1962), From Russia With Love (1963), Goldfinger (1964), Thunderball (1965), You Only Live Twice (1967), and Diamonds are Forever (1971). Sean Connery also was in the 1983 movie Never Say Never Again playing a much older James Bond. Never Say Never Again was a closer adaptation to the Fleming novel Thunderball and wasn't produced by EON Productions like the other Bond movies; so many see this as not being in cannon also.
Sean Connery was originally not the first choice to play James Bond in Dr. No. Fleming and others initially wanted Cary Grant, but Grant wouldn't sign for a three movie deal. He only agreed to one. The second choice was James Mason, but like Grant would commit to only two and not the three they planned. Also, if you look at pictures of Cary Grand and James Mason, you can kind of see that they didn't exactly fit the look of what we think of James Bond today. Cary Grant still looked Clark Gable right off the set of Gone With The Wind and Mason could easily be mistaken for Fred Rogers. Connery with the odd looking wig still had the appearance of a guy who has at least seen a fight. He is 6'2" and had some muscle tone. There was some hesitance to him because he didn't look suave enough to give the character justice. Ironic as Connery now is considered one of the sexiest men alive for the last 50 years.
The Bond movies made Connery a superstar but after doing You Only Live Twice, Connery stated that he really hated playing James Bond and decided to turn down the roll for On Her Magesty's Secret Service. Connery came back to do Diamonds Are Forever because Lazenby turned the roll down to do Universal Soldier and because Connery was offered $1.25 million plus a share of the profits the movie made just to come back. At the time that was an extraordinary deal.
The Sean Connery Bond is a much more physical character. He does have the sex appeal and always got the girl, but he's far more known to attack rather than using gadgets like other Bonds we will see later. The Connery movies are some of the most iconic of the franchise. While Dr. No didn't do perticularly well, Goldfinger is still considered one of the greatest Bond movies to date.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Movie News and Thoughts: Star Wars
Well, I might as well address the seven ton elephant in the room. LucasFilm being bought out by Disney. I didn't respond to it right away because I really wanted to reflect on what this would mean. I could come out here with all the nerd rage I could muster, but while I'm not afraid to go there, I want to at least try to be fair.
First question: Why did George Lucas do this? Well, three things come immediately to mind. 1) George Lucas is 68 years old and probably wants to retire. 2) LucasFilm hasn't come out with anything new in about 20 years. Certainly nothing to rival Star Wars or Indiana Jones. In fact in the last 10 years they've tried and failed to bank on expanding those franchises. By "fail" I mean making a good, solid product. Not how much money they made. And 3) Lucas has said on numerous occasions that he just can't handle the negative feedback he recieved for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and the Star Wars prequel trilogy.
Whatever his reasons, I'm sure the $4 billion made letting go a lot easier.
Now let's talk about the other side of this coin. Disney. Disney and LucasFilm have worked together for a long time. At Disneyland they've had the ride "Star Tours" for many years now. If you've ever been on that ride, it's a simulation of being on a space barge flying around space... and then you blow up the Death Star. Yeah. Kinda lame. I went on that ride when I was a kid and I still remember being underwhelmed. Disneyland also has the "Indiana Jones Experience" ride. For me, the fun of that ride is the atmosphere and all the stuff you see before getting on the ride. The ride is your basic rollercoaster but a lot of fun. Just walking around felt like being on set of Temple of Doom. Much more fun than a 5 minute rollercoaster ride.
Am I surprised Disney bought LucasFilm? Not at all.
Disney much like LucasFilm is desperate for a big hit. And I'm not talking just one good movie, but a franchise much like Pirates of the Caribbean. And there is no bigger franchise out there than Star Wars. With the announcement of the buyout was also an announcement of Star Wars Episode VII. This is what has so many people talking. It's not only Episode VII but plans to make a SEQUEL trilogy.
This is where I start to have some measure of dread. Question(s): Why? Did you not see Return of the Jedi? All the bad guys are dead. The Empire is defeated. Peace was restored to the galaxy. What's left to tell? I know the books dealt with the aftermath and about Luke Skywalker having a kid, etc.
How can we do this though? Mara Jade wasn't ever in the original trilogy! Are we not content with digitally messing with the original trilogy but now we are going to RetCon it too? For those that don't know: Mara Jade marries Luke Skywalker. She was one of the Emperor's personal bodyguards. And she was never hinted at or ever established in any of the movies.
So, are we going to jump ahead and follow Ben Skywalker? Are we going to go right ahead and have Mara Jade mentoring Jaina and Anakin Solo? Will we go further and start the story with Cade Skywalker (Luke's Grandson)? Will we see Mark Hamill reprise his role of Luke Skywalker and see him as the Grand Master of the Jedi Order?
And right there is the biggest problem. With the expanded universe being in the novels already, there's very little wiggle room from die hard fans. Much like the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, if you don't do it properly, you'll alienate a very loyal fanbase. One needs look no further than the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Some hardcore fans refuse to acknowledge it. How many of your friends are pissed off at the Harry Potter movies because your favorite side character didn't get enough screen time? Yeah I'm upset I didn't get more Tonks.
The other problem I have is less about Star Wars, George Lucas, and the recent blatent cash grabs. It's more of a personal annoyance. DVDs. More specifically Disney charging $20 for DVDs no matter how old they may be. All other movies when they are out on DVD for about 20-30 years, you start to see them in the bargain bins. That's how I got my copies of Terminator, Commando, and even 2001: A Space Odyssey. Each one I got for about $5. Disney movies never drop in price. They are always around $15 to $20. It annoys the hell out of me. There are a lot of Disney movies I'd like to get on DVD. The two Tron movies for example. But for the price of getting those two movies, I could get maybe 4 or 5 others I want to see! Just becuase Disney refused to drop the price on a 30 year old movie. If I want the sequel trilogy on DVD will I have to pay $60? I don't have Episode I on DVD yet. Just to finish my collection will I need to pay $20 for a movie I probably won't ever watch because it sucks so bad?
I'm willing to go see the sequel trilogy. One of the first movies I remember seeing was Star Wars Episode IV. It's a part of my life. I'm emotionally invested in the series much like many others my age. I had the lunch box growing up. I had the toys. I played the card game and read the books. I've played many of the video games and have seen all the movies at least five times. Even the bad ones. George Lucas owes his entire fortune and career to people like me. People who keep coming back because they want to see something like what they grew up with and want to share it with future generations to come because we love it that much. The Original Trilogy was in many ways derived from so many different epic stories and movies. The characters all looked so vivid and real. There weren't any of the computer tricks that are so commonplace now. In so many ways it was a landmark series. All sci-fi movies are inevitably compared to Star Wars. To put it nicely, we didn't get what we wanted with the prequel trilogy. Can we expect better from the sequel trilogy? Probably not. But I'm still going to see it. Why? Because it's Star Wars.
I remember going to see Tron: Legacy in theaters for much of the same reasons. Tron was awesome. It was one of those movies that was so unique and had a lot to talk about once the movie was over. Tron: Legacy was none of that. It was an exciting movie with great music, but it's the very definiton of a junk food movie. This is what Disney does lately. Cash in on nostalgia with bright, shiny, polished turds.
I'll always have a fond place in my heart for the Original Star Wars trilogy. When I introduce Star Wars to my children, I will show them the Original Trilogy first. I may not even show them the Prequel Trilogy. At least not until they are older. I really hope the Sequel Trilogy is good.
First question: Why did George Lucas do this? Well, three things come immediately to mind. 1) George Lucas is 68 years old and probably wants to retire. 2) LucasFilm hasn't come out with anything new in about 20 years. Certainly nothing to rival Star Wars or Indiana Jones. In fact in the last 10 years they've tried and failed to bank on expanding those franchises. By "fail" I mean making a good, solid product. Not how much money they made. And 3) Lucas has said on numerous occasions that he just can't handle the negative feedback he recieved for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and the Star Wars prequel trilogy.
Whatever his reasons, I'm sure the $4 billion made letting go a lot easier.
Now let's talk about the other side of this coin. Disney. Disney and LucasFilm have worked together for a long time. At Disneyland they've had the ride "Star Tours" for many years now. If you've ever been on that ride, it's a simulation of being on a space barge flying around space... and then you blow up the Death Star. Yeah. Kinda lame. I went on that ride when I was a kid and I still remember being underwhelmed. Disneyland also has the "Indiana Jones Experience" ride. For me, the fun of that ride is the atmosphere and all the stuff you see before getting on the ride. The ride is your basic rollercoaster but a lot of fun. Just walking around felt like being on set of Temple of Doom. Much more fun than a 5 minute rollercoaster ride.
Am I surprised Disney bought LucasFilm? Not at all.
Disney much like LucasFilm is desperate for a big hit. And I'm not talking just one good movie, but a franchise much like Pirates of the Caribbean. And there is no bigger franchise out there than Star Wars. With the announcement of the buyout was also an announcement of Star Wars Episode VII. This is what has so many people talking. It's not only Episode VII but plans to make a SEQUEL trilogy.
This is where I start to have some measure of dread. Question(s): Why? Did you not see Return of the Jedi? All the bad guys are dead. The Empire is defeated. Peace was restored to the galaxy. What's left to tell? I know the books dealt with the aftermath and about Luke Skywalker having a kid, etc.
How can we do this though? Mara Jade wasn't ever in the original trilogy! Are we not content with digitally messing with the original trilogy but now we are going to RetCon it too? For those that don't know: Mara Jade marries Luke Skywalker. She was one of the Emperor's personal bodyguards. And she was never hinted at or ever established in any of the movies.
So, are we going to jump ahead and follow Ben Skywalker? Are we going to go right ahead and have Mara Jade mentoring Jaina and Anakin Solo? Will we go further and start the story with Cade Skywalker (Luke's Grandson)? Will we see Mark Hamill reprise his role of Luke Skywalker and see him as the Grand Master of the Jedi Order?
And right there is the biggest problem. With the expanded universe being in the novels already, there's very little wiggle room from die hard fans. Much like the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, if you don't do it properly, you'll alienate a very loyal fanbase. One needs look no further than the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Some hardcore fans refuse to acknowledge it. How many of your friends are pissed off at the Harry Potter movies because your favorite side character didn't get enough screen time? Yeah I'm upset I didn't get more Tonks.
The other problem I have is less about Star Wars, George Lucas, and the recent blatent cash grabs. It's more of a personal annoyance. DVDs. More specifically Disney charging $20 for DVDs no matter how old they may be. All other movies when they are out on DVD for about 20-30 years, you start to see them in the bargain bins. That's how I got my copies of Terminator, Commando, and even 2001: A Space Odyssey. Each one I got for about $5. Disney movies never drop in price. They are always around $15 to $20. It annoys the hell out of me. There are a lot of Disney movies I'd like to get on DVD. The two Tron movies for example. But for the price of getting those two movies, I could get maybe 4 or 5 others I want to see! Just becuase Disney refused to drop the price on a 30 year old movie. If I want the sequel trilogy on DVD will I have to pay $60? I don't have Episode I on DVD yet. Just to finish my collection will I need to pay $20 for a movie I probably won't ever watch because it sucks so bad?
I'm willing to go see the sequel trilogy. One of the first movies I remember seeing was Star Wars Episode IV. It's a part of my life. I'm emotionally invested in the series much like many others my age. I had the lunch box growing up. I had the toys. I played the card game and read the books. I've played many of the video games and have seen all the movies at least five times. Even the bad ones. George Lucas owes his entire fortune and career to people like me. People who keep coming back because they want to see something like what they grew up with and want to share it with future generations to come because we love it that much. The Original Trilogy was in many ways derived from so many different epic stories and movies. The characters all looked so vivid and real. There weren't any of the computer tricks that are so commonplace now. In so many ways it was a landmark series. All sci-fi movies are inevitably compared to Star Wars. To put it nicely, we didn't get what we wanted with the prequel trilogy. Can we expect better from the sequel trilogy? Probably not. But I'm still going to see it. Why? Because it's Star Wars.
I remember going to see Tron: Legacy in theaters for much of the same reasons. Tron was awesome. It was one of those movies that was so unique and had a lot to talk about once the movie was over. Tron: Legacy was none of that. It was an exciting movie with great music, but it's the very definiton of a junk food movie. This is what Disney does lately. Cash in on nostalgia with bright, shiny, polished turds.
I'll always have a fond place in my heart for the Original Star Wars trilogy. When I introduce Star Wars to my children, I will show them the Original Trilogy first. I may not even show them the Prequel Trilogy. At least not until they are older. I really hope the Sequel Trilogy is good.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Movies I want to see: November
Another Halloween is in the books. Next up: Thanksgiving! And also my birthday is this month. If you're looking to do something for my birthday, something quick you could do is spread the greatness that is my website. And here's a list of movies I'm looking forward to seeing this month.
1) THE MAN WITH THE IRON FISTS: It's hardly a secret that I like Quenten Terantino and martial arts. While this isn't a Terantino movie, he is the producer and we finally get to see if David Bautista can follow in Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's shoes and make the leap from WWE pro wrestler to movie star.
2) WRECK-IT RALPH: It's a movie for gamer nerds like me. An arcade villian wants to be a hero. It's simple, there's cameos by a lot of our favorite game characters... awesome!
3) FLIGHT: For those with a good memory, you might remember good 'ol "Sully" Sullenberger and how he saved over a hundred people during an emergency crash landing in New York. This is that story but with much more drama; both personally and professionally.
4) SKYFALL: James Bond is back! Enough said. ps Expect a James Bond Retrospective this month.
5) LINCOLN: It's the story of how Lincoln held the country together and how he wrestled with either ending the war or ending slavery. Believe it or not, it wasn't as easy a decision as you might think.
6) DANGEROUS LIASONS: It's a Chinese romantic drama. Really the only reason I want to see it is because my girlfriend Ziyi Zhang is the star. Zhang... please call me.
7) HITCHCOCK: It's a character piece about one of the greatest directors of all time. This is his story about how he finally got to do his greatest movie, Psycho.
8) UNIVERSAL SOLDIER-DAY OR RECKONING: It's schlock therapy! Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren are back making really bad, but entertaining, movies.
9) SILENT NIGHT: A remake of Silent Night, Deadly Night. I hope it's a trend. There's nothing I want to see more than a remake of Silent Night, Deadly Night 2. GARBAGE DAY!!!!
See you at the movies
1) THE MAN WITH THE IRON FISTS: It's hardly a secret that I like Quenten Terantino and martial arts. While this isn't a Terantino movie, he is the producer and we finally get to see if David Bautista can follow in Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson's shoes and make the leap from WWE pro wrestler to movie star.
2) WRECK-IT RALPH: It's a movie for gamer nerds like me. An arcade villian wants to be a hero. It's simple, there's cameos by a lot of our favorite game characters... awesome!
3) FLIGHT: For those with a good memory, you might remember good 'ol "Sully" Sullenberger and how he saved over a hundred people during an emergency crash landing in New York. This is that story but with much more drama; both personally and professionally.
4) SKYFALL: James Bond is back! Enough said. ps Expect a James Bond Retrospective this month.
5) LINCOLN: It's the story of how Lincoln held the country together and how he wrestled with either ending the war or ending slavery. Believe it or not, it wasn't as easy a decision as you might think.
6) DANGEROUS LIASONS: It's a Chinese romantic drama. Really the only reason I want to see it is because my girlfriend Ziyi Zhang is the star. Zhang... please call me.
7) HITCHCOCK: It's a character piece about one of the greatest directors of all time. This is his story about how he finally got to do his greatest movie, Psycho.
8) UNIVERSAL SOLDIER-DAY OR RECKONING: It's schlock therapy! Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren are back making really bad, but entertaining, movies.
9) SILENT NIGHT: A remake of Silent Night, Deadly Night. I hope it's a trend. There's nothing I want to see more than a remake of Silent Night, Deadly Night 2. GARBAGE DAY!!!!
See you at the movies
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
Coming Soon: 11/2/12
Happy Halloween! I'm writing this on Halloween day and I hope everyone is safe and has a lot of fun. Halloween is one of my favorite times of the year. I think deep down everyone loves a good scare now and again. So long as it's all in good fun. Before I start looking at movies coming out this Friday and what movies I'm looking forward to seeing in November, let me first address the cinematic elephant in the room: Disney making a new Star Wars sequel trilogy. I plan on doing an article on this soon. If you want a little preview, I am not in favor of it. Okay, before I go into free floating hostility, here's what we can look forward to this week.
1) WRECK-IT RALPH: A video game villan decides he doesn't want to be the bad guy anymore and goes on a journey through other arcade games in an effort to save the video world.
The Good: It pays homage to the video games of our youth while also looking into the ideas of redemption and what it means to be a hero.
The Bad: It's Disney. They can't help themselves when it comes to making things too cutsey. Plus, Dreamworks did this story already with Megamind.
Final Thoughts: For as much as I want to see it, I also am dreading it. It looks like a great geeky/nostalgic movie but part of me expects a rehashed cash grab movie. I hope it's good.
2) FLIGHT: A pilot makes a daring rescue when his plane starts to crash. But then his livelyhood and his freedom are put in jeopardy when it's reported that he was drinking the night before.
The Good: For those that remember "Sully" Sullenburger and the heroism he showed, this is a dramatized take on that.
The Bad: I'm not sure where they are going with this. Is this some kind of commentary on sensationalized media?
Final Thoughts: It's Denzel doing what he does best. I'm thinking this is going to be a great movie. It just has me a little confused on the overall message.
3) THE MAN WITH THE IRON FISTS: A village blacksmith is forced into making horrible weapons. When war breaks out, a stranger harnesses an ancient energy to become a super hero.
The Good: It has a lot of elements from traditional kung fu movies while adding some modern ideas.
The Bad: It's a schlockfest. You'll have to appreciate it for how cheesy it is.
Final Thoughts: Where's my ticket? I will be seeing this as soon as I can.
See you at the movies
1) WRECK-IT RALPH: A video game villan decides he doesn't want to be the bad guy anymore and goes on a journey through other arcade games in an effort to save the video world.
The Good: It pays homage to the video games of our youth while also looking into the ideas of redemption and what it means to be a hero.
The Bad: It's Disney. They can't help themselves when it comes to making things too cutsey. Plus, Dreamworks did this story already with Megamind.
Final Thoughts: For as much as I want to see it, I also am dreading it. It looks like a great geeky/nostalgic movie but part of me expects a rehashed cash grab movie. I hope it's good.
2) FLIGHT: A pilot makes a daring rescue when his plane starts to crash. But then his livelyhood and his freedom are put in jeopardy when it's reported that he was drinking the night before.
The Good: For those that remember "Sully" Sullenburger and the heroism he showed, this is a dramatized take on that.
The Bad: I'm not sure where they are going with this. Is this some kind of commentary on sensationalized media?
Final Thoughts: It's Denzel doing what he does best. I'm thinking this is going to be a great movie. It just has me a little confused on the overall message.
3) THE MAN WITH THE IRON FISTS: A village blacksmith is forced into making horrible weapons. When war breaks out, a stranger harnesses an ancient energy to become a super hero.
The Good: It has a lot of elements from traditional kung fu movies while adding some modern ideas.
The Bad: It's a schlockfest. You'll have to appreciate it for how cheesy it is.
Final Thoughts: Where's my ticket? I will be seeing this as soon as I can.
See you at the movies
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Seven Psychopaths Review: A Beautiful Disaster
I've wanted to see this movie since it came out. It's only recently I've had some free time to go see it. And I must say that it was well worth the wait. Going in I thought it was going to be a very simple, slapstick type comedy with psycho killers and dognapping. And while it has all these things in it, but there is so much more.
Here's the story. Marty (Colin Farrell) is a screenplay writer working on his next great movie called Seven Psychopaths. Marty also has a best friend named Billy (Sam Rockwell). Billy and his partner in crime Hans (Christopher Walken) run a dognapping scheme where they steal dogs, wait a few days for the owner to get desperate enough to put up posters and offer rewards, then they return the dogs and collect. That's when they kidnap the dog of a local crime boss and psychopath named Charlie (Woody Harrelson). Naturally he isn't too happy about losing his dog so now Marty and his friends are on the run.
This is what they give you in the trailers. Little did I know that it was just the tip of the iceberg. Some of the ideas and visuals in this movie are just gorgeous. It's like a beautiful disaster. It really delves into the idea of what makes a person a "psychopath". I so wish I had someone to share these ideas with because they really are something to be discussed. But I promised all of my readers I would only spoil bad movies and this is anything but.
Needless to say this is one of my favorite comedy movies. I just loved it. It reminds me a lot of another of my favorite comedies, Sideways. They are both smart comedies and really do have a lot of heart in them as well.
It might be too late to catch this gem in the theaters because bigger blockbuster movies have all but pushed this movie out of theaters early. (Seriously, I was in the theater with maybe two other people.) The minute this comes out on DVD, this one is going to be in my personal library.
And yes. Christopher Walken is still "The Man" and should be addressed only as "The Man."
Here's the story. Marty (Colin Farrell) is a screenplay writer working on his next great movie called Seven Psychopaths. Marty also has a best friend named Billy (Sam Rockwell). Billy and his partner in crime Hans (Christopher Walken) run a dognapping scheme where they steal dogs, wait a few days for the owner to get desperate enough to put up posters and offer rewards, then they return the dogs and collect. That's when they kidnap the dog of a local crime boss and psychopath named Charlie (Woody Harrelson). Naturally he isn't too happy about losing his dog so now Marty and his friends are on the run.
This is what they give you in the trailers. Little did I know that it was just the tip of the iceberg. Some of the ideas and visuals in this movie are just gorgeous. It's like a beautiful disaster. It really delves into the idea of what makes a person a "psychopath". I so wish I had someone to share these ideas with because they really are something to be discussed. But I promised all of my readers I would only spoil bad movies and this is anything but.
Needless to say this is one of my favorite comedy movies. I just loved it. It reminds me a lot of another of my favorite comedies, Sideways. They are both smart comedies and really do have a lot of heart in them as well.
It might be too late to catch this gem in the theaters because bigger blockbuster movies have all but pushed this movie out of theaters early. (Seriously, I was in the theater with maybe two other people.) The minute this comes out on DVD, this one is going to be in my personal library.
And yes. Christopher Walken is still "The Man" and should be addressed only as "The Man."
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Coming Soon: 10/26/12
Man. Life has a way of piling stuff up on you, doesn't it? I just haven't had much opportunities to see any movies lately let alone write a review. Right now I have a little time so here's what is coming out this week.
1) CLOUD ATLAS: Action, mystery and romance weave dramatically through the story as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero and a single act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution in the distant future.
The Good: Probably one of the most interesting ideas I've heard since the Matrix.
The Bad: With so many intertangling ideas it could get a little convoluted.
Final Thoughts: This will probably be in the running for the academy awards.
2) SILENT HILL - REVELATION 3D: A girl celebrating her 18th birthday starts having horrible nightmares that will change her world view.
The Good: For fans of the video game it has a lot of the elements you'll recognize.
The Bad: With all the Silent Hill movies, have any really captured the essence of what made the games so good?
Final Thoughts: The games are getting stale and the earlier movies aren't all that good. Don't expect much more than a generic monster movie.
See you at the movies
1) CLOUD ATLAS: Action, mystery and romance weave dramatically through the story as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero and a single act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution in the distant future.
The Good: Probably one of the most interesting ideas I've heard since the Matrix.
The Bad: With so many intertangling ideas it could get a little convoluted.
Final Thoughts: This will probably be in the running for the academy awards.
2) SILENT HILL - REVELATION 3D: A girl celebrating her 18th birthday starts having horrible nightmares that will change her world view.
The Good: For fans of the video game it has a lot of the elements you'll recognize.
The Bad: With all the Silent Hill movies, have any really captured the essence of what made the games so good?
Final Thoughts: The games are getting stale and the earlier movies aren't all that good. Don't expect much more than a generic monster movie.
See you at the movies
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Coming Soon: 10/19/12
Sorry this is so late. I've been busy and I just forgot. If I can talk about something else really quickly, why is Seven Psychopaths bombing at the box office? Why is Taken 2 the number 1 money draw for a second week? Even Argo didn't make it to number 1? That's embarrassing. Anyway, what's coming out this week.
1) PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 4: Now we see what happened after the events of Paranormal Activity 2.
The Good: This series is brilliant in drawing out the most chilling atmosphere possible by exploiting subtlety and the "not quite right" feelings.
The Bad: After three movies the story hasn't exactly been moving forward.
Final Thoughts: I love this series. I'll definately go see it. But I understand when people say the story is just crawling along.
2) ALEX CROSS: A detective tracks down a serial killer.
The Good: The trailers show a very interesting game of cat and mouse.
The Bad: It doesn't stand out amongst a million other movies with the same story.
Final Thoughts: I see nothing special about this but as a generic action movie it might be pretty good.
See you at the movies
1) PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 4: Now we see what happened after the events of Paranormal Activity 2.
The Good: This series is brilliant in drawing out the most chilling atmosphere possible by exploiting subtlety and the "not quite right" feelings.
The Bad: After three movies the story hasn't exactly been moving forward.
Final Thoughts: I love this series. I'll definately go see it. But I understand when people say the story is just crawling along.
2) ALEX CROSS: A detective tracks down a serial killer.
The Good: The trailers show a very interesting game of cat and mouse.
The Bad: It doesn't stand out amongst a million other movies with the same story.
Final Thoughts: I see nothing special about this but as a generic action movie it might be pretty good.
See you at the movies
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Movie News and Thoughts: Robin the Teen Wonder
I recently read this article concerning the "Robin" character in the latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises. I'll leave the link here for your reading pleasure.
http://entertainment.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/16/14482709-what-was-the-deal-with-robin-in-dark-knight-rises?lite
The article boils down to this: Was the John Blake character supposed to really be Robin? Christopher Nolan says no. According to Nolan it was a wink to the audience.
First I think we need to discuss just who I'm talking about.
There have been several characters in the DC Universe that have had the Robin name. Dick Grayson was the first and probably the most memorable because he was the little orphan boy whose parents were killed and subsequently adopted by Batman. He has a place in comic book history because he was the first real sidekick. Not only that, but becoming a father figure allowed Batman to grow as a character in ways he normally wouldn't. His relationship with Grayson has set the tone for many other relationships Batman experiences. Grayson dropped the Robin name and instead fights crime as Nightwing.
The next was Jason Todd and nobody liked him. So much so that when DC polled their readers on what should happen to Todd, they overwhelmingly voted to have him be killed by the Joker. I think a lot of people didn't gravitate to Jason Todd because while Grayson can be strong willed at times, he never came across like a punk kid the way Jason did. Killing Jason Todd turned into a great emotional vehicle. For a long time Batman resisted ever accepting anyone else as Robin. That is until Tim Drake.
Tim Drake is unlike any other Robin. His story wasn't born from tragedy. In fact, quite the opposite. He has a loving father and a great circle of friends. But what he was above all else was a curious kid with exceptional skills at deduction. He figured out who Batman was and unlike the Robins that came before him, he wanted to be Batman's sidekick.
The next Robin was a short lived character. Uhm... probably not the best choice of words there because she died. Anyway, it's Tim Drake's girlfriend Stephanie Brown. And of course as in comics, characters don't stay dead. Even Jason Todd beat death. So far she's been the only female Robin and she's mostly forgettable as Robin.
The last Robin as of this writing is Damian Wayne. If you haven't guessed from the name, he is Bruce Wayne's biological son. And no the Damian part is not coincidence or even that subtle. Batman had an affair with Talia al Ghul and she gave birth to Damian. If you didn't see The Dark Knight Rises or read any of the comics, Talia is the daughter of Ra's al Ghul. Ra's was the villian from Batman Begins; and while Nolan didn't do the character justice, Ra's al Ghul translates to The Demon's Head. So, yeah. Damian. The son of the Devil. Or in this case the Grandson of the Demon's Head. This character is very interesting because the Robin character has always been a surrogate son for Batman. Now we have a blood son and much like Jason Todd doesn't have much qualms about killing people. He embraced the Robin suit so he could learn from his father. Now Batman is not there to protect a surrogate, but to mentor and inspire his own flesh and blood.
In the Dark Knight Rises, John Blake shares a lot of the qualities of Tim Drake. Even the name is very similar. Blake = Drake. It's one letter difference and even the B and D sounds are very similar. I understand why they chose to change the name. It isn't much of a surprise if you come right out and hold up a neon sign saying "This is Robin". I'm not going to get too critical about the name.
My question is why isn't John Blake Robin? There were rumors that Christian Bale didn't want the Robin character in the movie. I heard once that he wouldn't do the movies if Robin would be included. I don't know if any of that is true and I'm willing to believe that it isn't. But just from reading this article there seems to be some resistance to acknowledging Robin in this universe. Robin is not some minor character in Batman's life. So, why does Robin only get a "wink"? Do they believe that Robin detracts from Batman? In the comics it's not true. Robin enhances Batman not only by having a partner in his crusade, but also as Bruce Wayne.
At the end of the movie Bruce left all the Bat-gear to Blake. The hint was, at least for me, that John Blake would either become the new Batman or possibly take on a different persona. aka Nightwing. I'm a Batman fan. I very much would like to see the Christopher Nolan Batman series continue. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is on record as being interested in that role should it ever materialize.
Please share your thoughts.
http://entertainment.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/16/14482709-what-was-the-deal-with-robin-in-dark-knight-rises?lite
The article boils down to this: Was the John Blake character supposed to really be Robin? Christopher Nolan says no. According to Nolan it was a wink to the audience.
First I think we need to discuss just who I'm talking about.
There have been several characters in the DC Universe that have had the Robin name. Dick Grayson was the first and probably the most memorable because he was the little orphan boy whose parents were killed and subsequently adopted by Batman. He has a place in comic book history because he was the first real sidekick. Not only that, but becoming a father figure allowed Batman to grow as a character in ways he normally wouldn't. His relationship with Grayson has set the tone for many other relationships Batman experiences. Grayson dropped the Robin name and instead fights crime as Nightwing.
The next was Jason Todd and nobody liked him. So much so that when DC polled their readers on what should happen to Todd, they overwhelmingly voted to have him be killed by the Joker. I think a lot of people didn't gravitate to Jason Todd because while Grayson can be strong willed at times, he never came across like a punk kid the way Jason did. Killing Jason Todd turned into a great emotional vehicle. For a long time Batman resisted ever accepting anyone else as Robin. That is until Tim Drake.
Tim Drake is unlike any other Robin. His story wasn't born from tragedy. In fact, quite the opposite. He has a loving father and a great circle of friends. But what he was above all else was a curious kid with exceptional skills at deduction. He figured out who Batman was and unlike the Robins that came before him, he wanted to be Batman's sidekick.
The next Robin was a short lived character. Uhm... probably not the best choice of words there because she died. Anyway, it's Tim Drake's girlfriend Stephanie Brown. And of course as in comics, characters don't stay dead. Even Jason Todd beat death. So far she's been the only female Robin and she's mostly forgettable as Robin.
The last Robin as of this writing is Damian Wayne. If you haven't guessed from the name, he is Bruce Wayne's biological son. And no the Damian part is not coincidence or even that subtle. Batman had an affair with Talia al Ghul and she gave birth to Damian. If you didn't see The Dark Knight Rises or read any of the comics, Talia is the daughter of Ra's al Ghul. Ra's was the villian from Batman Begins; and while Nolan didn't do the character justice, Ra's al Ghul translates to The Demon's Head. So, yeah. Damian. The son of the Devil. Or in this case the Grandson of the Demon's Head. This character is very interesting because the Robin character has always been a surrogate son for Batman. Now we have a blood son and much like Jason Todd doesn't have much qualms about killing people. He embraced the Robin suit so he could learn from his father. Now Batman is not there to protect a surrogate, but to mentor and inspire his own flesh and blood.
In the Dark Knight Rises, John Blake shares a lot of the qualities of Tim Drake. Even the name is very similar. Blake = Drake. It's one letter difference and even the B and D sounds are very similar. I understand why they chose to change the name. It isn't much of a surprise if you come right out and hold up a neon sign saying "This is Robin". I'm not going to get too critical about the name.
My question is why isn't John Blake Robin? There were rumors that Christian Bale didn't want the Robin character in the movie. I heard once that he wouldn't do the movies if Robin would be included. I don't know if any of that is true and I'm willing to believe that it isn't. But just from reading this article there seems to be some resistance to acknowledging Robin in this universe. Robin is not some minor character in Batman's life. So, why does Robin only get a "wink"? Do they believe that Robin detracts from Batman? In the comics it's not true. Robin enhances Batman not only by having a partner in his crusade, but also as Bruce Wayne.
At the end of the movie Bruce left all the Bat-gear to Blake. The hint was, at least for me, that John Blake would either become the new Batman or possibly take on a different persona. aka Nightwing. I'm a Batman fan. I very much would like to see the Christopher Nolan Batman series continue. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is on record as being interested in that role should it ever materialize.
Please share your thoughts.
Friday, October 12, 2012
Argo Review: Argo F*** Yourself
As far as moving going goes, I think this is going to be a busy week for me. It's Friday and my first thought of the day was which movie I was going to go see first. I originally wanted to see Seven Psychopaths first because of Christopher Walken. Instead I went to see Argo. I told my Dad about my movie plans and he turned his nose up at Seven Psychopaths. That's when I mentioned Argo and he was more receptive to that.
And you know what? Argo is a brilliantly done movie.
Ben Affleck has done a lot to rebuild his credibility as a director and an actor. He's not doing movies like Daredevil or Gigli anymore. His last two movies he starred in and directed were of course this one and also another movie I absolutely loved; The Town. He knows what he's doing.
For those not familiar with the story; Iran has taken Americans hostage in 1980. During the chaos of Iranian thugs taking the embassy, six managed to escape and took refuge in the Canadian embassy. Affleck plays a CIA operative named Antonio Mendez and it's his job to rescue those six people. His idea on how to do it was to pretend to make a movie called Argo and possibly have it filmed on location in Iran. Then he just gathers the six people posing as production people (director, set designer, etc) and just calmly board a flight out.
It sounds insane. It sounds impossible. And oh by the way it's a true story. This actually happened.
And that leads me in to what I loved the most about this movie. The production design. This in every way felt like it was back in 1980. Everything felt so genuine. Other than the dramatic climax, nothing about this movie felt contrived. It was put together beautifully. I normally don't recommend staying through the credits, but just before the credits roll, they show pictures of the fake Canadian passports, photos they used to create really dramatic scenes in the movie, they even showed the cast along side pictures of the actual people who were involved. It's something that cements the realism of the movie despite how incredible it was. And to top it off they finish with a recording of an interview with President Carter!
Alan Arkin was brilliant. I know the title of my review is far from subtle but if you see the movie, you'd understand. That is one of the best lines of the movie.
Talking about the historical facts of this movie is a little more dicey. In the movie the role of the Canadian Government is a bit more downplayed and more emphasis is on the risks the people in the CIA took. Canada deserves so much respect for their role in this. Especially Ken Taylor.
The movie calls the Iranian Hostage Crisis as an enduring model of international co-operation between governments. I couldn't agree more. American citizens were held prisoner for 444 days. Interrogation, torture, mock executions, and the constant fear that at any moment they could be killed.
If I can sum up why it happened: America and England supported the Shah (king) of Iran. The Shah was brutal to his people and many militants blamed the USA because the USA overthrew the Iranian government to put the Shah in power. So the Iranians rebelled and stormed the US embassy.
This was such a huge issue in America at the time that it dominated the news cycle and the presidential debates. President Carter lost in no small part to soon to be President Reagan because of the embarrassment and his preceived inaction to end it. In the end it did end peacefully. None of the hostages died and all were released the day after President Carter left office. It's believed the Iranians chose the date because they wanted to symbolically punish President Carter for supporting the Shah of Iran.
There were some liberties taken with the historical facts done for dramatic effect but honestly it's a great movie and well worth seeing. Especially stay for the end credits and see the photos and listen to President Carter.
And you know what? Argo is a brilliantly done movie.
Ben Affleck has done a lot to rebuild his credibility as a director and an actor. He's not doing movies like Daredevil or Gigli anymore. His last two movies he starred in and directed were of course this one and also another movie I absolutely loved; The Town. He knows what he's doing.
For those not familiar with the story; Iran has taken Americans hostage in 1980. During the chaos of Iranian thugs taking the embassy, six managed to escape and took refuge in the Canadian embassy. Affleck plays a CIA operative named Antonio Mendez and it's his job to rescue those six people. His idea on how to do it was to pretend to make a movie called Argo and possibly have it filmed on location in Iran. Then he just gathers the six people posing as production people (director, set designer, etc) and just calmly board a flight out.
It sounds insane. It sounds impossible. And oh by the way it's a true story. This actually happened.
And that leads me in to what I loved the most about this movie. The production design. This in every way felt like it was back in 1980. Everything felt so genuine. Other than the dramatic climax, nothing about this movie felt contrived. It was put together beautifully. I normally don't recommend staying through the credits, but just before the credits roll, they show pictures of the fake Canadian passports, photos they used to create really dramatic scenes in the movie, they even showed the cast along side pictures of the actual people who were involved. It's something that cements the realism of the movie despite how incredible it was. And to top it off they finish with a recording of an interview with President Carter!
Alan Arkin was brilliant. I know the title of my review is far from subtle but if you see the movie, you'd understand. That is one of the best lines of the movie.
Talking about the historical facts of this movie is a little more dicey. In the movie the role of the Canadian Government is a bit more downplayed and more emphasis is on the risks the people in the CIA took. Canada deserves so much respect for their role in this. Especially Ken Taylor.
The movie calls the Iranian Hostage Crisis as an enduring model of international co-operation between governments. I couldn't agree more. American citizens were held prisoner for 444 days. Interrogation, torture, mock executions, and the constant fear that at any moment they could be killed.
If I can sum up why it happened: America and England supported the Shah (king) of Iran. The Shah was brutal to his people and many militants blamed the USA because the USA overthrew the Iranian government to put the Shah in power. So the Iranians rebelled and stormed the US embassy.
This was such a huge issue in America at the time that it dominated the news cycle and the presidential debates. President Carter lost in no small part to soon to be President Reagan because of the embarrassment and his preceived inaction to end it. In the end it did end peacefully. None of the hostages died and all were released the day after President Carter left office. It's believed the Iranians chose the date because they wanted to symbolically punish President Carter for supporting the Shah of Iran.
There were some liberties taken with the historical facts done for dramatic effect but honestly it's a great movie and well worth seeing. Especially stay for the end credits and see the photos and listen to President Carter.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Coming Soon: 10/12/12
Last week I caught my first cold of the season. So the thought of going to the theaters wasn't a pleasant prospect; plus I doubt anyone there would've appreciated me sniffling and coughing through the whole movie. Because I was sick I missed out on seeing Lawrence of Arabia in theaters. Yeah. I'm still disappointed by that. It's a new week, I'm feeling better, and there's some really good movies coming out this week. Let's take a look.
1) ARGO: A truth is stranger than fiction account of CIA operatives working in Iran during the Iranian Hostage Crisis.
The Good: Ben Affleck is more than capable of pulling movies like this off. Throw in guys like Alan Arkin and this is going to be great.
The Bad: Political thrillers have a niche audience so it might not appeal to everyone.
Final Thoughts: I love movies like this not only from an action fan standpoint but from a history standpoint. I'll definately want to see this one.
2) SINISTER: A true crime novelist discovers a true crime story in his own house. And the killer is a ghost.
The Good: The trailers look phenominal and look like they take the time to build suspense.
The Bad: If you can't buy the premise of an evil spirit living in pictures, then there's nothing for you here.
Final Thoughts: It looks very reminicient of other horror films. For example The Ring or Mirrors. I think it will please horror fans.
3) SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS: A screenwriter dreams of finishing his story when he and his friends kidnap a gangster's beloved dog.
The Good: CHRISTOPHER WALKEN!!!!! And some other funny guys.
The Bad: It's a farcical comedy where crazy things happen. Oh wait. Sorry. I'm supposed to write some thing bad here. Nevermind.
Final Thoughts: If you liked Smoking Aces, this is your movie. Oh and there is that one guy who I really like. I plan to see this before any other this week.
4) HERE COMES THE BOOM: A beloved science teacher tries to earn money for his school by competing in MMA matches.
The Good: It's a good natured comedy with a protagonist you want to root for.
The Bad: It's going to be as predictable as you think.
Final Thoughts: Kevin James is a comedic genius and Selma Hayek can still light up the screen. It's going to be a lot of fun.
5) ATLAS SHRUGGED - PART II: People struggle to get by as the world economy sinks into another Great Depression.
The Good: No.
The Bad: The drama is forced, the political message is heavy-handed, and the premise of the story is fundamentally cynical.
Final Thoughts: If you thought Battleship was bad, watch this.
See you at the movies
1) ARGO: A truth is stranger than fiction account of CIA operatives working in Iran during the Iranian Hostage Crisis.
The Good: Ben Affleck is more than capable of pulling movies like this off. Throw in guys like Alan Arkin and this is going to be great.
The Bad: Political thrillers have a niche audience so it might not appeal to everyone.
Final Thoughts: I love movies like this not only from an action fan standpoint but from a history standpoint. I'll definately want to see this one.
2) SINISTER: A true crime novelist discovers a true crime story in his own house. And the killer is a ghost.
The Good: The trailers look phenominal and look like they take the time to build suspense.
The Bad: If you can't buy the premise of an evil spirit living in pictures, then there's nothing for you here.
Final Thoughts: It looks very reminicient of other horror films. For example The Ring or Mirrors. I think it will please horror fans.
3) SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS: A screenwriter dreams of finishing his story when he and his friends kidnap a gangster's beloved dog.
The Good: CHRISTOPHER WALKEN!!!!! And some other funny guys.
The Bad: It's a farcical comedy where crazy things happen. Oh wait. Sorry. I'm supposed to write some thing bad here. Nevermind.
Final Thoughts: If you liked Smoking Aces, this is your movie. Oh and there is that one guy who I really like. I plan to see this before any other this week.
4) HERE COMES THE BOOM: A beloved science teacher tries to earn money for his school by competing in MMA matches.
The Good: It's a good natured comedy with a protagonist you want to root for.
The Bad: It's going to be as predictable as you think.
Final Thoughts: Kevin James is a comedic genius and Selma Hayek can still light up the screen. It's going to be a lot of fun.
5) ATLAS SHRUGGED - PART II: People struggle to get by as the world economy sinks into another Great Depression.
The Good: No.
The Bad: The drama is forced, the political message is heavy-handed, and the premise of the story is fundamentally cynical.
Final Thoughts: If you thought Battleship was bad, watch this.
See you at the movies
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Coming Soon: 10/5/12
I haven't made it to the theaters this week. I caught a cold and it's all I can do to stay conscious. My head has been swimming. But I did check out Freddie's Dead: The Final Nightmare. If you haven't seen that, it's hilarious and has a small cameo by Rosanne and Tom Arnold. Well worth seeing. Let's see what will be out this week.
1) TAKEN 2: The man with a specific set of skills must now rescue his wife and himself.
The Good: If you liked Taken, here's more of the same.
The Bad: I hated Taken.
Final Thoughts: It's every action cliche with a premise that is way beyond the pail. And if this was done more like Expendables, I'd be for it. But it takes itself way too seriously so it's just not fun. Avoid.
2) FRANKENWEENIE: Tim Burton's tounge in cheek animated movie about Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with a twist.
The Good: It's a wonderfully heartwarming story about a kid who loses his dog/best friend and brings him back to life.
The Bad: can't think of anything.
Final Thoughts: This is a loving tribute to monster movies done with enough originality to make this a very compelling movie.
3) PITCH PERFECT: A music lover goes to college and unwittingly joins a motley crew of talented singers.
The Good: There should be some good singing.
The Bad: It's competitive acapella singing. How good a movie could it be?
Final Thoughts: I'm sure it'll be fun, but I'd still wait for it to be on DVD or something.
4) BUTTER: The story of an ambitious woman in the competitive world of butter sculpting.
The Good: An amazing cast with Jennifer Garner, Hugh Jackman, Rob Corddry, Olivia Wilde, and Alicia Silverstone
The Bad: It's butter sculpting. At this point they are playing mad-libs to create plots.
Final Thoughts: It's a farcical comedy and I see it being very hit or miss.
See you at the movies
1) TAKEN 2: The man with a specific set of skills must now rescue his wife and himself.
The Good: If you liked Taken, here's more of the same.
The Bad: I hated Taken.
Final Thoughts: It's every action cliche with a premise that is way beyond the pail. And if this was done more like Expendables, I'd be for it. But it takes itself way too seriously so it's just not fun. Avoid.
2) FRANKENWEENIE: Tim Burton's tounge in cheek animated movie about Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with a twist.
The Good: It's a wonderfully heartwarming story about a kid who loses his dog/best friend and brings him back to life.
The Bad: can't think of anything.
Final Thoughts: This is a loving tribute to monster movies done with enough originality to make this a very compelling movie.
3) PITCH PERFECT: A music lover goes to college and unwittingly joins a motley crew of talented singers.
The Good: There should be some good singing.
The Bad: It's competitive acapella singing. How good a movie could it be?
Final Thoughts: I'm sure it'll be fun, but I'd still wait for it to be on DVD or something.
4) BUTTER: The story of an ambitious woman in the competitive world of butter sculpting.
The Good: An amazing cast with Jennifer Garner, Hugh Jackman, Rob Corddry, Olivia Wilde, and Alicia Silverstone
The Bad: It's butter sculpting. At this point they are playing mad-libs to create plots.
Final Thoughts: It's a farcical comedy and I see it being very hit or miss.
See you at the movies
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Movies I want to see: October
This is one of my favorite times of year. I love halloween. And what would halloween be without some scary stories and monster movies? Here's what I'm personally looking forward to seeing in theaters this month.
1) SINISTER: Much like Mirrors, this is a bizzare story with so many possibilities. Ghosts living in pictures killing people. If you haven't had a good freakout yet, check out the trailers.
2) ARGO: It's the truth is stranger than fiction story about the Iranian Hostage Crisis where the idea to make a fake movie was used to get operatives into Iran to help rescue fifty-two people from being executed.
3) HERE COMES THE BOOM: This is the kind of comedy I'd like to see more often. It's a movie with heart and some legitimately funny scenes. It's nice to have a nice guy really putting himself out there for others in an extreme way. Can't wait.
4) SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS: Schlock, schlock, and more schlock with the king of schlock "The Man" Christopher Walken. It's going to be hilarious.
5) PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 4: I love this series! It's so heavy in atmosphere I really am pressed to think of a horror movie I enjoy more. After the third movie, we have all the backstory filled in and now it's time to advance the story into some very creepy areas. I can't get enough of these!
See you at the movies
1) SINISTER: Much like Mirrors, this is a bizzare story with so many possibilities. Ghosts living in pictures killing people. If you haven't had a good freakout yet, check out the trailers.
2) ARGO: It's the truth is stranger than fiction story about the Iranian Hostage Crisis where the idea to make a fake movie was used to get operatives into Iran to help rescue fifty-two people from being executed.
3) HERE COMES THE BOOM: This is the kind of comedy I'd like to see more often. It's a movie with heart and some legitimately funny scenes. It's nice to have a nice guy really putting himself out there for others in an extreme way. Can't wait.
4) SEVEN PSYCHOPATHS: Schlock, schlock, and more schlock with the king of schlock "The Man" Christopher Walken. It's going to be hilarious.
5) PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 4: I love this series! It's so heavy in atmosphere I really am pressed to think of a horror movie I enjoy more. After the third movie, we have all the backstory filled in and now it's time to advance the story into some very creepy areas. I can't get enough of these!
See you at the movies
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Coming Soon: 9/28/12
Man I saw some great movies this week. I needed a week like this. I still haven't seen End of Watch, but I might squeeze it in before the Friday new releases. In the meantime, here's what is coming out on Friday.
1) LOOPER: Time travel exists and it's illegal. So, when the mob wants to get rid of someone, they send him 30 years into the past where a hired gun kills that person. Until one day the mob decides to send the hired gun into the past to be killed.
The Good: It's a very smart sci-fi movie with Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt
The Bad: I don't understand why they send people into the past. And the previews make it look like some people have magic powers.
Final Thoughts: I'd see it but be wary of some things that might be out of place.
2) HOTEL TRANSYLVANIA: Dracula runs a hotel that caters to monsters so they don't have to interact with humans. Then a little boy finds the hotel.
The Good: It has all your favorite monsters.
The Bad: This is a story so lacking in any kind of imagination or creativity, I'm surprised it exists.
Final Thoughts: It might be good for kids, but not for anyone else.
3) SOLOMON KANE: Kane is a 16th century warrior looting and pillaging all across Northern Africa until he tries to attack the wrong castle.
The Good: This is a movie that is for guys like me that enjoy absurdity.
The Bad: I don't know if it plays into the cartoonish nature enough.
Final Thoughts: I want to see it. This is a very Conan-like movie. If you like epic action with funny quips, this is your movie.
See you at the movies
1) LOOPER: Time travel exists and it's illegal. So, when the mob wants to get rid of someone, they send him 30 years into the past where a hired gun kills that person. Until one day the mob decides to send the hired gun into the past to be killed.
The Good: It's a very smart sci-fi movie with Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt
The Bad: I don't understand why they send people into the past. And the previews make it look like some people have magic powers.
Final Thoughts: I'd see it but be wary of some things that might be out of place.
2) HOTEL TRANSYLVANIA: Dracula runs a hotel that caters to monsters so they don't have to interact with humans. Then a little boy finds the hotel.
The Good: It has all your favorite monsters.
The Bad: This is a story so lacking in any kind of imagination or creativity, I'm surprised it exists.
Final Thoughts: It might be good for kids, but not for anyone else.
3) SOLOMON KANE: Kane is a 16th century warrior looting and pillaging all across Northern Africa until he tries to attack the wrong castle.
The Good: This is a movie that is for guys like me that enjoy absurdity.
The Bad: I don't know if it plays into the cartoonish nature enough.
Final Thoughts: I want to see it. This is a very Conan-like movie. If you like epic action with funny quips, this is your movie.
See you at the movies
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Dredd 3D review: Pass
I'm torn on this one. Honestly, I never had this feeling about a movie before and quite frankly I'm baffled. It's not that it's a bad movie. It's more the idea that what I liked about this movie are also the things I also didn't like so much. How can I both like and not like the same thing at the same time?
Here's some examples:
1) If you haven't heard, this is a basic story about Judge Dredd taking a rookie under his wing and investigating a triple homicide that turns into a drug war. On the streets, there is a new drug that makes the brain feel like time slows down.
Here's what I liked: the slow motion scenes are breath-taking. I mean when I first saw the villian (Ma-Ma played by Lena Headey) sitting in the bathtub playing with the water, I was just blown away.
Here's what I didn't like: They kept doing it. And with a movie only an hour and 38 minutes long, having several slow motion scenes started to feel padded; like the movie just couldn't get to that magical 90 minute run-time.
2) The scale of this movie is completely different from the Sylvester Stallone movie. The Stallone movie was much larger in scale. Dredd had his arch-nemesis, who was also his brother, and his clone, and all the head judged had been killed and the future of the city is unclear. This movie is much more of a "day in the life". This was a routine day in the life of a Judge. It was a simple investigation and then all hell broke loose.
Here's what I liked: A story like Judge Dredd needs to be smaller scale. It needs to be focused because it's much more nuanced than the simple action story. A lot of the drama from this movie is ingrained in the premise of the whole story. The Earth is in ruins, billions live in Mega Cities, and the only way for there to be any kind of law and order is to empower police officers with absolute authority. We need to see what that means in the setting of the story before we completely trash it.
Here's what I didn't like: It didn't feel special. At the end of the movie it didn't feel like anything was accomplished. Because the story really didn't end. The case was closed, but it was one bloody case out of countless more that day and many more to come.
3) This movie took itself far more seriously than the Stallone version.
Here's what I liked: It was much more dark, gritty, and far more faithful to the comic books. Everything was geared toward a much harder look at Judge Dredd. Dredd even did the grizzled Batman voice.
Here's what I didn't like: It took itself too seriously. The first kill of the movie a guy was shot in the mouth with an incindiary bomb. It was hilarious. The guy's head melted from the inside out. Have you ever seen one of those pumpkins on halloween that had a candle that was just a little too big? It was kinda like that. But then we're seeing people get skinned alive and thrown two-hundred stories straight down... in slow motion... Later we get three chain guns leveling an entire floor of the building, and then we get threats of rape and mutilation.
The one thing I absolutely didn't like was Dredd's partner Judge Anderson. She's a psychic.... Yeah... uhm... how can I say this... Don't. Do. That! Here's the problem with making a character able to read people's minds. It undermines the drama and creates plot holes. Dredd and Anderson arrest a guy named Kay for the murder of the three guys they were called to investigate. The only way they knew he was the guy was because Anderson read his mind. So they decide to take him in for interrogation..... Why? Read his mind. They do it later in the movie anyway. Why not read his mind right there? The very reason they get trapped in the building in the first place wasn't because they were LISTENING to what they were saying, it was because they SAW the Judges walking away with Kay in cuffs and didn't want him to talk. Then later Anderson used her psychic powers to enter into his mind and play around with his perceptions. Again, if she had that kind of power, why didn't she use it more? How about using it after she established this power to save her own neck? Why not swiss cheese Ma-Ma's brain? Later on there are rogue Judges and one was going to kill Anderson and she used her psychic powers to realize it. So instead of getting the dramatic tension of is she going to die, instead she shoots the rogue cop and we move on with our lives.
Do you see the problem? Don't make characters psychic.
This is why I'm torn on this movie. I thought it was a great movie, but man it really bothers me the stuff I like are also gnawing at me. Go see it. It's a great action flick, it's a great comic book flick, but man I just can't shake these love/hate feelings.
Here's some examples:
1) If you haven't heard, this is a basic story about Judge Dredd taking a rookie under his wing and investigating a triple homicide that turns into a drug war. On the streets, there is a new drug that makes the brain feel like time slows down.
Here's what I liked: the slow motion scenes are breath-taking. I mean when I first saw the villian (Ma-Ma played by Lena Headey) sitting in the bathtub playing with the water, I was just blown away.
Here's what I didn't like: They kept doing it. And with a movie only an hour and 38 minutes long, having several slow motion scenes started to feel padded; like the movie just couldn't get to that magical 90 minute run-time.
2) The scale of this movie is completely different from the Sylvester Stallone movie. The Stallone movie was much larger in scale. Dredd had his arch-nemesis, who was also his brother, and his clone, and all the head judged had been killed and the future of the city is unclear. This movie is much more of a "day in the life". This was a routine day in the life of a Judge. It was a simple investigation and then all hell broke loose.
Here's what I liked: A story like Judge Dredd needs to be smaller scale. It needs to be focused because it's much more nuanced than the simple action story. A lot of the drama from this movie is ingrained in the premise of the whole story. The Earth is in ruins, billions live in Mega Cities, and the only way for there to be any kind of law and order is to empower police officers with absolute authority. We need to see what that means in the setting of the story before we completely trash it.
Here's what I didn't like: It didn't feel special. At the end of the movie it didn't feel like anything was accomplished. Because the story really didn't end. The case was closed, but it was one bloody case out of countless more that day and many more to come.
3) This movie took itself far more seriously than the Stallone version.
Here's what I liked: It was much more dark, gritty, and far more faithful to the comic books. Everything was geared toward a much harder look at Judge Dredd. Dredd even did the grizzled Batman voice.
Here's what I didn't like: It took itself too seriously. The first kill of the movie a guy was shot in the mouth with an incindiary bomb. It was hilarious. The guy's head melted from the inside out. Have you ever seen one of those pumpkins on halloween that had a candle that was just a little too big? It was kinda like that. But then we're seeing people get skinned alive and thrown two-hundred stories straight down... in slow motion... Later we get three chain guns leveling an entire floor of the building, and then we get threats of rape and mutilation.
The one thing I absolutely didn't like was Dredd's partner Judge Anderson. She's a psychic.... Yeah... uhm... how can I say this... Don't. Do. That! Here's the problem with making a character able to read people's minds. It undermines the drama and creates plot holes. Dredd and Anderson arrest a guy named Kay for the murder of the three guys they were called to investigate. The only way they knew he was the guy was because Anderson read his mind. So they decide to take him in for interrogation..... Why? Read his mind. They do it later in the movie anyway. Why not read his mind right there? The very reason they get trapped in the building in the first place wasn't because they were LISTENING to what they were saying, it was because they SAW the Judges walking away with Kay in cuffs and didn't want him to talk. Then later Anderson used her psychic powers to enter into his mind and play around with his perceptions. Again, if she had that kind of power, why didn't she use it more? How about using it after she established this power to save her own neck? Why not swiss cheese Ma-Ma's brain? Later on there are rogue Judges and one was going to kill Anderson and she used her psychic powers to realize it. So instead of getting the dramatic tension of is she going to die, instead she shoots the rogue cop and we move on with our lives.
Do you see the problem? Don't make characters psychic.
This is why I'm torn on this movie. I thought it was a great movie, but man it really bothers me the stuff I like are also gnawing at me. Go see it. It's a great action flick, it's a great comic book flick, but man I just can't shake these love/hate feelings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)