October had a lot of great movies. Let's see what we have for the first week of November!
1) A Very Harold and Kumar Christmas: Harold and Kumar get high, burn down a Christmas tree and have to replace it.
The Good: Giggling stoners and lovers of toilet humor are in for a treat.
The Bad: Just read the summary. Does it sound at all interesting?
Final Thoughts: It's Harold and Kumar. You know what kind of movie it is. Moving on.
2) Tower Heist: Blue-collar guys get screwed by a wall street con man and they want revenge. And hilarity ensues.
The Good: Ben Stiller + Alan Alda + Eddie Murphy. It's going to be campy fun. Throw in Matthew Broderick and it's going to be VERY over the top.
The Bad: It's a satire of Ocean's 11. Ocean's 11 was an action/comedy. This is just straight up comedy. Expect someone to get hit in the groin.
Final Thoughts: I'm interested to see how this cast plays off each other. The movie probably won't be all that great but the performance might salvage it.
3) Killing Bono: Two Irish brothers in the 1980s try to make it big in the music industry.
The Good: It's in the '80s and that means some radical '80s music. The soundtrack alone might be worth the ticket price.
The Bad: Anyone younger than 25 isn't going to know who Bono is let alone find this very interesting.
Final Thoughts: Give it a watch if you like '80s music. If not, it's got nothing for you.
4) The Son of No One: A cop with hidden baggage is assigned to his old neighborhood.
The Good: AL PACINO!
The Bad: It's not original and I don't expect it to really bring anything new or exciting to a tired cliche.
Final Thoughts: AL PACINO! And he's playing a cop! I don't care if I've seen it in other movies before. IT'S AL PACINO PLAYING A COP!
5) The Other F Word: A documentary about how the punk rockers of the '80s and '90s have changed their ways to become not only musicians but also fathers.
The Good: It's important to see people as people. Guys maybe we emulated growing up and see how much they've grown up as well.
The Bad: Same with Killing Bono, nobody under the age of 25 is going to really know anything about Flea, Ron Reyes, or Fat Mike.
Final Thoughts: It's a nostalgia documentary and if you are looking for the same rebels we grew up with, you're in for disappointment seeing them paying bills and going to PTA meetings. That being said, I think the message this movie has to deliver is more important than that. It's about how to be responsible to your loved ones while also rebelling against the ills of society. I want to see it.
6) Five Star Day: A guy gets a glowing horoscope on his birthday. But then has the worst day of his life. Convinced astrology is a hoax, he searches for others born on the same day and place as him.
The Good: ................................
The Bad: I could rage for hours on how stupid astrology is. This screams of contrivance.
Final Thoughts: WTF man. What do you expect from a movie like this? What's the story? Astrology is stupid? Yes. I know that. So, he goes out into the world to prove what he already knows? Why?
See you at the movies
Monday, October 31, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Movies I want to see: November
Hard to believe I forgot about this segement last month. No matter. October is just about finished so lets move on to movies in November. What's got me excited this month? Yeah this might be a short list.
1) Tower Heist. This is a bit of a perverse choice. I'm not expecting this to be anywhere as good as Ocean's 11, but Ben Stiller is one of those actors for me. Every movie of his is either really good or really bad. Mostly bad. Throw in Eddie Murphy and Alan Alda and what do you get? I have no idea. But I want to find out.
2) J. Edgar. I love history. It was my major in college so when a historical drama comes up, I get excited. For those who don't know, J. Edgar Hoover was the former head of the FBI. And there's more than one controversial story about him. Cross dressing being the least of them. Check it out.
3) Melancolia. This one has weird written all over it. But who cares? Kiefer Sutherland! It's being called a psychological disaster movie. I have no idea what that even means. But I'm interested and early reviews are very positive.
4) The Muppets. It's the Muppets! Enough said. I grew up watching the Muppets. I love these mop/puppet things. The Muppet movies usually are very good. Muppet Treasure Island while satirical was true to the spirit of the book and a lot of fun. AND THEY ARE BRINGING BACK THE MUPPET THEATER!!! The only thing that might sink this is.... of course.... Jack Black.
It's a short list unfortunately. Not many big name movies coming out in November. Remember this is a list of movies I personally want to see. So, movies like Twilight: Rising Dawn part 1 and Harold and Kumar Christmas are not going to be listed because I don't want to see them. God help me though I might end up seeing them anyway.
1) Tower Heist. This is a bit of a perverse choice. I'm not expecting this to be anywhere as good as Ocean's 11, but Ben Stiller is one of those actors for me. Every movie of his is either really good or really bad. Mostly bad. Throw in Eddie Murphy and Alan Alda and what do you get? I have no idea. But I want to find out.
2) J. Edgar. I love history. It was my major in college so when a historical drama comes up, I get excited. For those who don't know, J. Edgar Hoover was the former head of the FBI. And there's more than one controversial story about him. Cross dressing being the least of them. Check it out.
3) Melancolia. This one has weird written all over it. But who cares? Kiefer Sutherland! It's being called a psychological disaster movie. I have no idea what that even means. But I'm interested and early reviews are very positive.
4) The Muppets. It's the Muppets! Enough said. I grew up watching the Muppets. I love these mop/puppet things. The Muppet movies usually are very good. Muppet Treasure Island while satirical was true to the spirit of the book and a lot of fun. AND THEY ARE BRINGING BACK THE MUPPET THEATER!!! The only thing that might sink this is.... of course.... Jack Black.
It's a short list unfortunately. Not many big name movies coming out in November. Remember this is a list of movies I personally want to see. So, movies like Twilight: Rising Dawn part 1 and Harold and Kumar Christmas are not going to be listed because I don't want to see them. God help me though I might end up seeing them anyway.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
In Time Review: It's PUNishment
I have never been so pissed off at a movie. I've seen bad movies. I've seen bad movies just for the sake of watching a bad movie. I feel like I need an apology from everyone who made this movie. IN WRITING!
Why is it so bad? Let's start with the most annoying part first. The puns. It's a hour and 40 minute movie and they never stop with the "time" puns. I don't have time, can you spare a minute, time zones, time keepers, all the time in the world, and on and on and on.
Here's the story. Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) is a poor guy and since your life force (or time) is the only source of currency, he has about a day to live unless he makes more time. F*** EVEN I'M DOING THE STUPID PUNS! ARRGH!
One day a rich guy goes into the ghetto where Salas lives (time zone 12). He wants to die because he's over 100 years old and sick of living as a gorgeous 25 year old who has so much time he will probably never die. My a***h*** bleeds for his plight. Instead of getting himself killed my gangsters, called minutemen.... yes they are called minutemen....he gives his time to Salas with his only parting words are written on the window, "don't waste my time."
Ok I have to stop here for a minute. I want you to count how many time puns I just made in that last paragraph. Go ahead. Count it. This is what happens in the first ten or fifteen minutes of the movie! And oh believe me I'm not saying a bunch more that happens in that same fifteen minutes! "I'll give you a half hour so you can have a nice lunch." "That'll be four hours for a cup of coffee?" I WANTED TO SET FIRE TO THE THEATER!
So naturally all the things Will does with that time attracts the police's attention. Oh, did I say police? I mean the timekeepers. *ahem* And of course they are corrupt and want to kill Will. Why? Hell if I know. But that doesn't stop the movie from shoehorning in a subplot! Oh no. The timekeeper trying to catch Will knew Will's father. He was some kind of Robin Hood type. Stealing time from the rich and giving it to the poor. I like his father. He sounds like a good and noble man. He just might be the best character in the entire movie. BECAUSE HE ISN'T IN THE MOVIE! I'm not kidding. No pictures, no name, nothing... I was completely unaware Will had a father until the cop said he knew his father. I'm not going to call him a timekeeper. F*** that!
Which brings me to my second complaint. The writing SUCKS! There's symbolism, there's foreshadowing, and then there's this damn movie. Symbolism and foreshadowing are supposed to be subtle things. Things we aren't supposed to think about but in hindsight we recognize it and go, "oh yeah." IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE A SHOVEL UPSIDE OUR HEADS! Look no further than the title of the movie. "In Time." Throughout the movie we see a mission. With a nice green neon sign reading, "out of time". Get it. Get the joke there. Do you see the pun? Do you? DO YOU SEE IT. LOOK! IT'S A NEON SIGN! IT SAYS "OUT OF TIME!" BUT LATER WILL GETS LOTS OF TIME AND GIVES IT TO THE MISSION! NOW THEY HAVE TIME! THEY ARE "IN TIME!"
Or how about the foreshadowing of saying Will's father died in a fight. You see, they don't fight like we do. No. Time is transfered just by grabbing someone by the wrist. (That's really not an efficient way to keep one from dieing.) So, to fight, they lock wrists and the clocks on their arm runs down. Whoever can suck out the life force of their opponent first, wins. Just lovely. Guess what happens to the minutemen gangsters? Can you guess? Every twist and turn in this movie is telegraphed so poorly I swear a seventh grader wrote the script.
How about the message of the movie? That of course being a oh so lovely lecture on Social Darwinism. How the rich get to live forever because they are strong and get to suck the life out of the lower classes because they don't have much. In what might be the only classy thing this movie did was not including Queen's song "Who Wants To Live Forever." Instead they go with the horrendous line, "for few to be immortal, many must die." I will simply leave it at that. No doubt you can hear the hampster fall off the wheel. The mouse is losing his cheese. The screw is in the ball. In other words, THIS IF F***ING STUPID!
But I saved the best piece of stupid for last. You see, when you are born, there's a glowing clock already on your arm. It says you have one year. The clock starts to run down once you turn 25 years old. So, nobody ever ages over the age of 25. How does any of this work. SHUT UP. Will says he doesn't "have time" to think about these things. So we are just meant to accept that this is how this world works. You're born with a clock in your arm. It doesn't do anything for 25 years. Once you hit 25 it jolts your body and starts ticking. THIS IS PERFECTLY NORMAL! So people go to factories and make "time machines" that can collect your life energy so it can be stored in a bank.
Can you see why I hated this movie? Life energy slowly bleeding away until death. That's a great metaphor for the whole viewing experience.
Poll time. Talk amongst your friends. Which of these makes the least amount of sense?
1) Fighting exploding birds with coat hangers
2) Dracula fighting werewolves with a holy hand grenade
3) A psychic timetraveling demonic rabbit predicting the end of the world
4) Life energy being not only real, but measured in terms of minutes and used as currency in a world where everyone is essentially soul stealing vampires.
Bonus points if you can guess which movies these are. #4 is of course "In Time"
Why is it so bad? Let's start with the most annoying part first. The puns. It's a hour and 40 minute movie and they never stop with the "time" puns. I don't have time, can you spare a minute, time zones, time keepers, all the time in the world, and on and on and on.
Here's the story. Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) is a poor guy and since your life force (or time) is the only source of currency, he has about a day to live unless he makes more time. F*** EVEN I'M DOING THE STUPID PUNS! ARRGH!
One day a rich guy goes into the ghetto where Salas lives (time zone 12). He wants to die because he's over 100 years old and sick of living as a gorgeous 25 year old who has so much time he will probably never die. My a***h*** bleeds for his plight. Instead of getting himself killed my gangsters, called minutemen.... yes they are called minutemen....he gives his time to Salas with his only parting words are written on the window, "don't waste my time."
Ok I have to stop here for a minute. I want you to count how many time puns I just made in that last paragraph. Go ahead. Count it. This is what happens in the first ten or fifteen minutes of the movie! And oh believe me I'm not saying a bunch more that happens in that same fifteen minutes! "I'll give you a half hour so you can have a nice lunch." "That'll be four hours for a cup of coffee?" I WANTED TO SET FIRE TO THE THEATER!
So naturally all the things Will does with that time attracts the police's attention. Oh, did I say police? I mean the timekeepers. *ahem* And of course they are corrupt and want to kill Will. Why? Hell if I know. But that doesn't stop the movie from shoehorning in a subplot! Oh no. The timekeeper trying to catch Will knew Will's father. He was some kind of Robin Hood type. Stealing time from the rich and giving it to the poor. I like his father. He sounds like a good and noble man. He just might be the best character in the entire movie. BECAUSE HE ISN'T IN THE MOVIE! I'm not kidding. No pictures, no name, nothing... I was completely unaware Will had a father until the cop said he knew his father. I'm not going to call him a timekeeper. F*** that!
Which brings me to my second complaint. The writing SUCKS! There's symbolism, there's foreshadowing, and then there's this damn movie. Symbolism and foreshadowing are supposed to be subtle things. Things we aren't supposed to think about but in hindsight we recognize it and go, "oh yeah." IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE A SHOVEL UPSIDE OUR HEADS! Look no further than the title of the movie. "In Time." Throughout the movie we see a mission. With a nice green neon sign reading, "out of time". Get it. Get the joke there. Do you see the pun? Do you? DO YOU SEE IT. LOOK! IT'S A NEON SIGN! IT SAYS "OUT OF TIME!" BUT LATER WILL GETS LOTS OF TIME AND GIVES IT TO THE MISSION! NOW THEY HAVE TIME! THEY ARE "IN TIME!"
Or how about the foreshadowing of saying Will's father died in a fight. You see, they don't fight like we do. No. Time is transfered just by grabbing someone by the wrist. (That's really not an efficient way to keep one from dieing.) So, to fight, they lock wrists and the clocks on their arm runs down. Whoever can suck out the life force of their opponent first, wins. Just lovely. Guess what happens to the minutemen gangsters? Can you guess? Every twist and turn in this movie is telegraphed so poorly I swear a seventh grader wrote the script.
How about the message of the movie? That of course being a oh so lovely lecture on Social Darwinism. How the rich get to live forever because they are strong and get to suck the life out of the lower classes because they don't have much. In what might be the only classy thing this movie did was not including Queen's song "Who Wants To Live Forever." Instead they go with the horrendous line, "for few to be immortal, many must die." I will simply leave it at that. No doubt you can hear the hampster fall off the wheel. The mouse is losing his cheese. The screw is in the ball. In other words, THIS IF F***ING STUPID!
But I saved the best piece of stupid for last. You see, when you are born, there's a glowing clock already on your arm. It says you have one year. The clock starts to run down once you turn 25 years old. So, nobody ever ages over the age of 25. How does any of this work. SHUT UP. Will says he doesn't "have time" to think about these things. So we are just meant to accept that this is how this world works. You're born with a clock in your arm. It doesn't do anything for 25 years. Once you hit 25 it jolts your body and starts ticking. THIS IS PERFECTLY NORMAL! So people go to factories and make "time machines" that can collect your life energy so it can be stored in a bank.
Can you see why I hated this movie? Life energy slowly bleeding away until death. That's a great metaphor for the whole viewing experience.
Poll time. Talk amongst your friends. Which of these makes the least amount of sense?
1) Fighting exploding birds with coat hangers
2) Dracula fighting werewolves with a holy hand grenade
3) A psychic timetraveling demonic rabbit predicting the end of the world
4) Life energy being not only real, but measured in terms of minutes and used as currency in a world where everyone is essentially soul stealing vampires.
Bonus points if you can guess which movies these are. #4 is of course "In Time"
Monday, October 24, 2011
Coming Soon: 10/28/11
I might be more negative in this one. Sorry up front for that. I had a really bad day at work. Anyway, let's do something fun and look at movies.
1) Anonymus: A look at an old conspiracy about the authorship of the works of William Shakespeare and one possible explanation
The Good: It looks wonderful. The costumes are authentic and given a very 17th century feel.
The Bad: It's a political intrigue movie. Not exactly a known large crowd pleaser.
Final Thoughts: This one was requested I review from one of my friends on twitter. (hi Kim) And I can see why. It looks like a very well made movie and one that will prove to be interesting. If you are into politics, history, and willing to accept a little bit of whimsy, I think this one is worth watching.
2) The Rum Diary: A strange case of corporate greed and corruption.
The Good: Johnny Depp is in it. The guy is phenomonal. It's an interesting story. One grounded in the problems of today.
The Bad: Can we stop with the political lecture movies please?
Final Thoughts: It's good. But I still don't want to see it. I'm so tired of hearing about corporate greed, corrupt politics, and what not. I get it. America has been bought. That's hardly newsworthy. If you feel that strongly about it, do something. Join the protests. Do you really think making a movie about the problem impresses me?
3) In Time: In a world where your life span is the new currency, one man is framed for murder.
The Good: Oh God. Make the pain stop!
The Bad: My brain feels like a monkey used it for a toilet! A very large monkey on laxatives!
Final Thoughts: I would rather cut my lawn one blade of grass at a time with nail clippers than be within a hundred miles of any theater showing this!
4) Like Crazy: A love story where two people fall in love and separate.
The Good: Uhm... there's love in it.
The Bad: We've all had bad breakups. They suck. We move on. Apparently someone made a movie about it. Thrilling. If you have to leave the country, call on the telephone! The internet is everywhere! SKYPE!
Final Thoughts: More pretentious love crap from someone who read too many romance books.
5) 13 The story of a man sucked into a world of underground Russian Roulette tournaments.
The Good: You have to be F***ing kidding. Jasan Statham and Mickey Rourke are in this crap?
The Bad: It's Russian Roulette tournaments? Do I really need to explain how bad this is going to be? Ok. Here's something else. It's a remake. Game over man. Check please.
Final Thoughts: Remake. Russian. Roulette. Tournaments. The end.
6) The Double: Retired CIA agent and a rookie FBI agent team up to find an assassin.
The Good: Great cast. (Topher Grace aside) Richard Gere and Martin Sheen lend credibility immediately.
The Bad: I saw this movie. It was called the Jackyl. It had Bruce Willis. Back when he still had hair. It also had Richard Gere. It sucked.
See you at the movies.
1) Anonymus: A look at an old conspiracy about the authorship of the works of William Shakespeare and one possible explanation
The Good: It looks wonderful. The costumes are authentic and given a very 17th century feel.
The Bad: It's a political intrigue movie. Not exactly a known large crowd pleaser.
Final Thoughts: This one was requested I review from one of my friends on twitter. (hi Kim) And I can see why. It looks like a very well made movie and one that will prove to be interesting. If you are into politics, history, and willing to accept a little bit of whimsy, I think this one is worth watching.
2) The Rum Diary: A strange case of corporate greed and corruption.
The Good: Johnny Depp is in it. The guy is phenomonal. It's an interesting story. One grounded in the problems of today.
The Bad: Can we stop with the political lecture movies please?
Final Thoughts: It's good. But I still don't want to see it. I'm so tired of hearing about corporate greed, corrupt politics, and what not. I get it. America has been bought. That's hardly newsworthy. If you feel that strongly about it, do something. Join the protests. Do you really think making a movie about the problem impresses me?
3) In Time: In a world where your life span is the new currency, one man is framed for murder.
The Good: Oh God. Make the pain stop!
The Bad: My brain feels like a monkey used it for a toilet! A very large monkey on laxatives!
Final Thoughts: I would rather cut my lawn one blade of grass at a time with nail clippers than be within a hundred miles of any theater showing this!
4) Like Crazy: A love story where two people fall in love and separate.
The Good: Uhm... there's love in it.
The Bad: We've all had bad breakups. They suck. We move on. Apparently someone made a movie about it. Thrilling. If you have to leave the country, call on the telephone! The internet is everywhere! SKYPE!
Final Thoughts: More pretentious love crap from someone who read too many romance books.
5) 13 The story of a man sucked into a world of underground Russian Roulette tournaments.
The Good: You have to be F***ing kidding. Jasan Statham and Mickey Rourke are in this crap?
The Bad: It's Russian Roulette tournaments? Do I really need to explain how bad this is going to be? Ok. Here's something else. It's a remake. Game over man. Check please.
Final Thoughts: Remake. Russian. Roulette. Tournaments. The end.
6) The Double: Retired CIA agent and a rookie FBI agent team up to find an assassin.
The Good: Great cast. (Topher Grace aside) Richard Gere and Martin Sheen lend credibility immediately.
The Bad: I saw this movie. It was called the Jackyl. It had Bruce Willis. Back when he still had hair. It also had Richard Gere. It sucked.
See you at the movies.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Paranormal Activity 3 review:
I was looking forward to this movie. I had a hard day at work and I loved Paranormal Activity 2. I often use the Paranormal Activity movies as an example of truely scary movies and brilliant work with minimal budgets and practical effects. It's brilliant in its simplicity.
So, what did I think? I thought it could've been better. I'll get to that in a moment but I feel the need to explain something. Boo scares shouldn't be used so much. Here's why. When you are laying out a truely scary scene, the tension needs to build to a boiling point. That can be done with really minimal effort. To establish that there is something unseen in the house, you could swing a hanging light, you can do some subtle scary sounds, you can slowly move something. Anything that can possibly be written off as something mundane. Boo scares are like shooting a shotgun. Bang and it's done. You blew your load. That's your big payoff in one big strike. Sometimes you want that because it does give the audience a good jolt of energy. But when it's done so often, the audience become desensitized to it. They start to expect it more. Plus, all the tension leading up to that boo scare goes away and you have to start building again for the next scare.
Was the movie scary? Yes. Very much so. But I do feel like this latest movie was of a sorts a betrayal of what made the first one so compelling. There was much more emphasis on kinetic energy, boo scares, and a couple ill concieved CG effects. Paranormal activity 3 suffers because of the success of the other two movies. With success comes a lot more money. With more money comes the temptation to take the movie away from it's independant movie roots and add things that might seem cool in theory and you couldn't do previously because of budget restrictions.
Another reason I didn't like it as much as I thought I would was because this one opens up some serious plot holes. Some that really cripple the atmospheric feel of the trilogy in general. They were gaping holes in the story and they sucked me right out of it. Here's what I mean and what I think I would've done differently.
1) Who's watching the tapes? In the beginning of the movie, we establish that Katie has these tapes of their childhood. A time that they forgot about. (More on that later) But a few moments later we are in Paranormal Activity 2 just after the house is burlarized. The only thing stolen were these homemade movies from about 20 years ago. Leading the audience to one of two conclusions: a) the burglars are watching these tapes and we never established that fact or b) the ghost/demon/spirit thing didn't want anyone to see these tapes and probably hid them somewhere or destroyed them. Either way, we have a problem. It's never established how or why we are watching these old VHS videos.
My solution: Instead of having the tapes stolen, think of it like we are the police. There's been a brutal murder and we are trying to solve it. We know that the house has cameras everywhere. (Paranormal Activity 2) We know this family has this weird obsession with taping everything. We see the tapes and we see the scene where Katie is talking about all the weird things that happened to them while they were kids. Ok. That gives the police officer an idea to go back and look at all the old tapes of the time she was talking about. That brings the audience into the movie as a character playing a role, thus making the sensations more realistic.
2) The children had their memories erased. So how can Katie remember what happened in Paranormal Activity 2?
My solution: make it something vague. Sometimes she has bad dreams about evil ghosts. Something like that would've helped.
3) Why didn't the mother know what was going on? This gets into spoiler territory but it is a nagging question and one I don't have an answer for. I won't go into detail because I don't wish to spoil the movie (I only do that for bad movies) but let's say something is established later on in the movie and logically speaking, the mother should've been at least somewhat knowledgeable about what was happening.
One of the major characteristics of this series is vagueness. We never see the spirit. We never really know what it wants. We never know why it lashes out. Even when lashing out is counter-productive to it's supposed goal. And we never learn any effective way to combat the spirit. But this isn't a story. It's an experience. The story comes from the trailer. "We have these tapes. I don't know what to make of it, but here it is. It's scary. Your guess is as good as mine."
If you love scary movies, it's hard to go wrong with this trilogy.
So, what did I think? I thought it could've been better. I'll get to that in a moment but I feel the need to explain something. Boo scares shouldn't be used so much. Here's why. When you are laying out a truely scary scene, the tension needs to build to a boiling point. That can be done with really minimal effort. To establish that there is something unseen in the house, you could swing a hanging light, you can do some subtle scary sounds, you can slowly move something. Anything that can possibly be written off as something mundane. Boo scares are like shooting a shotgun. Bang and it's done. You blew your load. That's your big payoff in one big strike. Sometimes you want that because it does give the audience a good jolt of energy. But when it's done so often, the audience become desensitized to it. They start to expect it more. Plus, all the tension leading up to that boo scare goes away and you have to start building again for the next scare.
Was the movie scary? Yes. Very much so. But I do feel like this latest movie was of a sorts a betrayal of what made the first one so compelling. There was much more emphasis on kinetic energy, boo scares, and a couple ill concieved CG effects. Paranormal activity 3 suffers because of the success of the other two movies. With success comes a lot more money. With more money comes the temptation to take the movie away from it's independant movie roots and add things that might seem cool in theory and you couldn't do previously because of budget restrictions.
Another reason I didn't like it as much as I thought I would was because this one opens up some serious plot holes. Some that really cripple the atmospheric feel of the trilogy in general. They were gaping holes in the story and they sucked me right out of it. Here's what I mean and what I think I would've done differently.
1) Who's watching the tapes? In the beginning of the movie, we establish that Katie has these tapes of their childhood. A time that they forgot about. (More on that later) But a few moments later we are in Paranormal Activity 2 just after the house is burlarized. The only thing stolen were these homemade movies from about 20 years ago. Leading the audience to one of two conclusions: a) the burglars are watching these tapes and we never established that fact or b) the ghost/demon/spirit thing didn't want anyone to see these tapes and probably hid them somewhere or destroyed them. Either way, we have a problem. It's never established how or why we are watching these old VHS videos.
My solution: Instead of having the tapes stolen, think of it like we are the police. There's been a brutal murder and we are trying to solve it. We know that the house has cameras everywhere. (Paranormal Activity 2) We know this family has this weird obsession with taping everything. We see the tapes and we see the scene where Katie is talking about all the weird things that happened to them while they were kids. Ok. That gives the police officer an idea to go back and look at all the old tapes of the time she was talking about. That brings the audience into the movie as a character playing a role, thus making the sensations more realistic.
2) The children had their memories erased. So how can Katie remember what happened in Paranormal Activity 2?
My solution: make it something vague. Sometimes she has bad dreams about evil ghosts. Something like that would've helped.
3) Why didn't the mother know what was going on? This gets into spoiler territory but it is a nagging question and one I don't have an answer for. I won't go into detail because I don't wish to spoil the movie (I only do that for bad movies) but let's say something is established later on in the movie and logically speaking, the mother should've been at least somewhat knowledgeable about what was happening.
One of the major characteristics of this series is vagueness. We never see the spirit. We never really know what it wants. We never know why it lashes out. Even when lashing out is counter-productive to it's supposed goal. And we never learn any effective way to combat the spirit. But this isn't a story. It's an experience. The story comes from the trailer. "We have these tapes. I don't know what to make of it, but here it is. It's scary. Your guess is as good as mine."
If you love scary movies, it's hard to go wrong with this trilogy.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Coming Soon: 10/21/11
Not too many good movies came out last week. Let's see what we have this week.
1) Paranormal Activity 3. Two little girls are haunted by a mysterious force.
The Good: The other Paranormal Activity movies are awesome and this one we finally see how it all started.
The Bad: This one looks more heavy on kinetic energy rather than atmosphere. Expect a lot more people getting thrown around by the invisible monster.
Final Thoughts: The entire series played out in reverse order to great effect. It gives us the feeling that we are the dectective of a brutal murder case and we find all these tapes. We are trying to understand what is happening but can't quite believe what we see. Now it's the payoff. I'm worried about the possibility of disappointment because like I said, it was a complete mystery for the last two movies. Will it live up to the hype? We'll see.
2) The Three Musketeers. Based (loosely) on the Alexandre Dumas novel, the musketeers must go on a secret mission to protect the dignity of the monarchy.
The Good: The action looks great if a bit cartoonish.
The Bad: It's Paul WS Anderson. The same director that made such classic garbage as Resident Evil, AVP: Aliens Vs Predator, and Mortal Kombat. Expect the same level of quality.
Final Thoughts: I've already seen this movie. I called it as intelletually stimulating as a Three Musketeers chocolate bar and I stand by that opinion It's flashing and dumb. But it is entertaining... when it completely ignores the plot. See it if you must, otherwise ignore this one.
3) Johnny English Reborn: Johnny English once again must save the world from war when the Premier of China is targeted for assassination.
The Good: Rowan Atkinson is a comedic legend.
The Bad: Rowan Atkinson is a comedic legend from twenty years ago. He hasn't put out a good movie since 2001 with Rat Race and he wasn't a main character in that one.
Final Thoughts: The first Johnny English movie bombed. Why would you expect different from the sequel?
4) Martha Marcy May Marlene: A psychological thriller about a woman going insane after escaping from a cult.
The Good: It looks really creepy and the actors play well off each other perfectly.
The Bad: I don't know where they are going with it. They make it sound like she's haunted by the memories and it makes her insane, but the trailer is all jumbled.
Final Thoughts: I love psychological thrillers. I love movies like The Black Swan or Shutter Island. I don't know if this movie will measure up to those, but I want to see this one.
5) Oranges and Sunshine. The story of a woman who exposes an appauling human rights scandal in England.
The Good: The premise of the movie is intriguing. Children told their parents are dead and then sent to Australia where they are abused and made into slave laborers. And one woman reunites thousands of families. It's touching.
The Bad: It's a real story. It's hard not to feel outraged something like this can happen but overjoyed that it does have a happy ending.
Final Thoughts: It's an oscar movie. You are meant to feel sad, outraged, and ultimately overcome with happiness when the families are reunited. It'll move you. I recommend it.
6) Margin Call: It's about investment bankers just before the financial collapse in 2008. Then a low level employee uncovers something big.
The Good: Kevin Spacey and Jeremy Irons. Can't go wrong with this.
The Bad: I've seen this movie before. A lot. We get it. Wall Street screwed us.
Final Thoughts: I'm so tired of movies with a political agenda. We get it. Wall Street screwed up the economy and they own the government. Instead of making a movie about it and commanding million dollar paychecks to further your political cause, how about you do something constructive if you feel that passionately about it?
See you at the movies
1) Paranormal Activity 3. Two little girls are haunted by a mysterious force.
The Good: The other Paranormal Activity movies are awesome and this one we finally see how it all started.
The Bad: This one looks more heavy on kinetic energy rather than atmosphere. Expect a lot more people getting thrown around by the invisible monster.
Final Thoughts: The entire series played out in reverse order to great effect. It gives us the feeling that we are the dectective of a brutal murder case and we find all these tapes. We are trying to understand what is happening but can't quite believe what we see. Now it's the payoff. I'm worried about the possibility of disappointment because like I said, it was a complete mystery for the last two movies. Will it live up to the hype? We'll see.
2) The Three Musketeers. Based (loosely) on the Alexandre Dumas novel, the musketeers must go on a secret mission to protect the dignity of the monarchy.
The Good: The action looks great if a bit cartoonish.
The Bad: It's Paul WS Anderson. The same director that made such classic garbage as Resident Evil, AVP: Aliens Vs Predator, and Mortal Kombat. Expect the same level of quality.
Final Thoughts: I've already seen this movie. I called it as intelletually stimulating as a Three Musketeers chocolate bar and I stand by that opinion It's flashing and dumb. But it is entertaining... when it completely ignores the plot. See it if you must, otherwise ignore this one.
3) Johnny English Reborn: Johnny English once again must save the world from war when the Premier of China is targeted for assassination.
The Good: Rowan Atkinson is a comedic legend.
The Bad: Rowan Atkinson is a comedic legend from twenty years ago. He hasn't put out a good movie since 2001 with Rat Race and he wasn't a main character in that one.
Final Thoughts: The first Johnny English movie bombed. Why would you expect different from the sequel?
4) Martha Marcy May Marlene: A psychological thriller about a woman going insane after escaping from a cult.
The Good: It looks really creepy and the actors play well off each other perfectly.
The Bad: I don't know where they are going with it. They make it sound like she's haunted by the memories and it makes her insane, but the trailer is all jumbled.
Final Thoughts: I love psychological thrillers. I love movies like The Black Swan or Shutter Island. I don't know if this movie will measure up to those, but I want to see this one.
5) Oranges and Sunshine. The story of a woman who exposes an appauling human rights scandal in England.
The Good: The premise of the movie is intriguing. Children told their parents are dead and then sent to Australia where they are abused and made into slave laborers. And one woman reunites thousands of families. It's touching.
The Bad: It's a real story. It's hard not to feel outraged something like this can happen but overjoyed that it does have a happy ending.
Final Thoughts: It's an oscar movie. You are meant to feel sad, outraged, and ultimately overcome with happiness when the families are reunited. It'll move you. I recommend it.
6) Margin Call: It's about investment bankers just before the financial collapse in 2008. Then a low level employee uncovers something big.
The Good: Kevin Spacey and Jeremy Irons. Can't go wrong with this.
The Bad: I've seen this movie before. A lot. We get it. Wall Street screwed us.
Final Thoughts: I'm so tired of movies with a political agenda. We get it. Wall Street screwed up the economy and they own the government. Instead of making a movie about it and commanding million dollar paychecks to further your political cause, how about you do something constructive if you feel that passionately about it?
See you at the movies
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Real Steel review: They rock'em and they sock'em
I honestly wasn't all that excited to see this movie. I made the jokes like everyone else. It's Rocky with Rock'em Sock'em Robots. And largely, that is this movie. But that doesn't mean it's a bad movie. I enjoyed it. There's a lot of good boxing scenes, the CGI is not a jarring as I feared, and you get involved.
The primary focus of the movie is the father and son relationship between Charlie (Hugh Jackman) and Max (Dakota Goyo). Max's mother dies and that means Charlie must now step up and take care of the son he abandoned a long time ago. In the mix is Max's mother's sister, named Debra.(Hope Davis) (Yes I did have to say it like that because we never learn Max's mother's name. More on that later.) Debra is married to a rich man named Marvin. (James Rebhorn) Charlie gets the idea that he will sell custody to Debra and Marvin in exchange for $100,000. The catch is that they are going away to Italy so Charlie will have to take Max for the summer. And they spend their summer with fighting robots.
While I did have fun watching the movie, I would be remiss if I didn't bring up the embarrassing levels of characterization. The people in this movie are just as robotic as their CG counterparts. Max is an eleven year old kid but he seems far more emotionally mature than anyone else. His mom died, his father sold him to his aunt, and never once did he ever bring up his mom. Kid. It's okay to wake up in the middle of the night crying. We'd understand. He often is more rational than Charlie.
Charlie is your standard wash-out bumb. He owes money to just about everyone, he's quick to gamble what little he has, and is generally more reckless than a fully functional human being after an all-night bender.
The rest of the characters are one note if they even manage to get that much attention. They are all plot devices meant to be thrown at Charlie and Max and have no other identity other than the plot needs them. We have Bailey the love interest. That's about it for her. There's Mashido the Japanese robot builder guy. Uhm... he builds very strong robots... and... Then we have rich Russian lady. And Cowboy Redneck. And there's Black Gangster. Oh don't forget super large mohawk guy.
But what really sank the movie a few notches was the characterization of Max's mom. Or I should say complete lack thereof. Never do we see a picture of her, get any kind of fond rememberances of her, and I know her name was only said aloud ONE TIME! Oh yeah. Really warms my heart to know that she raises a son alone and Max forgets her immediately. Charlie never asks about her, Max never talks about her, she is completely forgotten. And how did she die? It's bad enough the only thing I know about her is that she's a woman and dead, but you couldn't throw in a line saying she was in a car accident or something? NOTHING! Fine.
Overall, the CGI is great, the boxing is good, the acting is passable, and the script is terrible. But still a fun movie.
The primary focus of the movie is the father and son relationship between Charlie (Hugh Jackman) and Max (Dakota Goyo). Max's mother dies and that means Charlie must now step up and take care of the son he abandoned a long time ago. In the mix is Max's mother's sister, named Debra.(Hope Davis) (Yes I did have to say it like that because we never learn Max's mother's name. More on that later.) Debra is married to a rich man named Marvin. (James Rebhorn) Charlie gets the idea that he will sell custody to Debra and Marvin in exchange for $100,000. The catch is that they are going away to Italy so Charlie will have to take Max for the summer. And they spend their summer with fighting robots.
While I did have fun watching the movie, I would be remiss if I didn't bring up the embarrassing levels of characterization. The people in this movie are just as robotic as their CG counterparts. Max is an eleven year old kid but he seems far more emotionally mature than anyone else. His mom died, his father sold him to his aunt, and never once did he ever bring up his mom. Kid. It's okay to wake up in the middle of the night crying. We'd understand. He often is more rational than Charlie.
Charlie is your standard wash-out bumb. He owes money to just about everyone, he's quick to gamble what little he has, and is generally more reckless than a fully functional human being after an all-night bender.
The rest of the characters are one note if they even manage to get that much attention. They are all plot devices meant to be thrown at Charlie and Max and have no other identity other than the plot needs them. We have Bailey the love interest. That's about it for her. There's Mashido the Japanese robot builder guy. Uhm... he builds very strong robots... and... Then we have rich Russian lady. And Cowboy Redneck. And there's Black Gangster. Oh don't forget super large mohawk guy.
But what really sank the movie a few notches was the characterization of Max's mom. Or I should say complete lack thereof. Never do we see a picture of her, get any kind of fond rememberances of her, and I know her name was only said aloud ONE TIME! Oh yeah. Really warms my heart to know that she raises a son alone and Max forgets her immediately. Charlie never asks about her, Max never talks about her, she is completely forgotten. And how did she die? It's bad enough the only thing I know about her is that she's a woman and dead, but you couldn't throw in a line saying she was in a car accident or something? NOTHING! Fine.
Overall, the CGI is great, the boxing is good, the acting is passable, and the script is terrible. But still a fun movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)