Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts

13 March 2012

The Twitter Review - Vol. 1

Hey guys. So, as part of my TV addiction and absolute laziness, I haven't reviewed pretty much anything as of late. I aim to remedy that now. Utilizing the brilliant style of Twitter, I'm going to do my reviews, but write really, really short thoughts on them. Besides, at this point, most of these flicks have been out for eons and anyone who wanted to see them have done so already. I won't limit myself to precisely 140 characters, but somewhere in that margin. This should be fun!


MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - GHOST PROTOCOL: Difficult to top Abrams' masterpiece, but Brad Bird somehow does it. Beautifully shot, hugely intense, breathtaking action bits, great comedy - easily best of the franchise, and helluva fun to watch over and over.

THE DESCENDANTS: First Alexander Payne film, and loved it. Clooney, Woodley, the whole cast - great greatness. Very funny, very emotional, very real. One hell of a memorable film.

HUGO: A love letter to cinema, the tone is wildly uneven, and despite being visually really, really pretty, there is no real emotional connection or sense of completion by films end. A series of connected scenes without anything backing it. Very meh. Hit Girl was good, though.

COLOMBIANA: More of an excuse to see Zoe Saldana in skin-tight outfits, it boasts lots of action and a battalion of cliches in a mediocre production. Fun to watch, but easily forgettable.

THE CHANGE-UP: Ryan Reynolds reaching Zach Galifinakis levels of insufferability, neither Reynolds or Bateman make this movie funny or all that good. Changing bodies by pissing? Facepalm. One saving grace? The exuding hotness of Olivia Wilde. Coulda been better.

CONTAGION: Just as effective as OUTBREAK in scaring the shit out of me. Was uber awesome watching A-Class stars get with the dying on camera, very effective, very chilling. Ended rather quickly, though.

MIDNIGHT IN PARIS: Very meh. Couldn't connect or care. Took a bit to realize there was actual time travel involved, otherwise thought bunch of Paris groupies played dress up. Best part? Kurt Fuller being Kurt Fuller. Otherwise, could care less. SCOOP was stronger.

THE ART OF GETTING BY: Teach me how to get by this film. What annoying emo dick of a kid. Not the best way to make us care about your protagonist, guys.

YOUNG ADULT: Weird. I understand where Cody was trying to go with this, but something about the flick feels 'off'. Mostly, there just should have been MORE. Ends prematurely, the story doesn't seem finished, even in the unfinished, ambiguous-movie-kinda-way.

A GOOD OLD FASHIONED ORGY: Surprisingly funny, though that's largely thanks to Tyler Labine, who easily steals the show in anything he's in. Worth a rental.

MONEYBALL: Worth a rental. Jonah Hill was good. How did Brad Pitt memorize all those bloody baseball statistics? Lots of scenes. Didn't weave together well. Needs trimming. Liked the Pitt/ex-wife bits, that was good.

THE IDES OF MARCH: Really, really, reaaally good once you get past the first 20 mins. of political mumbo jumbo talkie talk. Gosling, Giammati, Clooney, the whole gang - nothing short of awesomeness, and over a month later, the film still sticks with me.

FOOTLOOSE [2011]: Weird complaint, buuut not enough dancing. Friggin' FOOTLOOSE, gimmie some dancing. Lead looked like Edward Cullen impersonator. Main chick was pleasant. Why do I always sigh when I see Dennis Quaid in the credits? Decent script. Can't believe I liked it.

THE BIG YEAR: Understand the story, but it sort of lost itself. The end doesn't justify the journey. Jack Black sucks at V.O. Rosamund Pike is GORGEOUS. Steve Martin, make PINK PANTHER 3 already.

THE RUM DIARY: Johnny Depp playing Jack Sparrow in contemporary times! Good flick, but after 80 minutes of set-up, final 15 wraps up far too quickly. By films end, what's the point? Depp, hot girls, death of newspaper, rich blokes getting richer - what's the point?

STRAW DOGS: Just watch the last 20 minutes. Nothing else in the movie is worthwhile. True story.

WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER?: Why do I like you so much? Faris and Evans work off each other extraordinarily well. Yay! @Martin Freeman!

17 November 2011

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2

Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman, Tom Felton, Jason Isaacs, Maggie Smith, Bonnie Wright, Matthew Lewis, John Hurt, Michael Gambon
Written by Steve Kloves
Directed by David Yates
Release: 15 July 2011
Warner Bros., 130 mins., Rated PG-13

Plot: It's Harry vs. Voldemort as the ultimate showdown comes to the front at Hogwarts.

So this is it, this is the end. I chose not to review Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 when it first hit theaters in order to take some time and digest the film, and as time went by, it just made more sense to wait for the home video release in order to tackle the film in a more thorough manner. Now that time has come, and with it, the end of the Harry Potter adventure, and the end of anticipation for whatever’s next in the release pipeline.

To say there’s an emotional attachment to this final film is a bit of an understatement. Like many fans, I’ve been glued to the hip to Harry Potter since the first few books, and have diligently seen every one of the movies no fewer than ten times a piece. The character of Harry Potter, and his journey to overcome Lord Voldemort, has been as personal a journey for me as it has been for him. So what this film represents is the end of a magical era, and it’s a sad one. Months later, as I rewatch the film on home video, its power and emotional strength are still very much there. What I am to do here is really take a hard look at Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2, the good and the bad, and give one last goodbye to The Boy Who Lived.Right away, in the opening three minutes, David Yates makes some brilliant decisions. First, even before the company logo, a quick, forty-second recap of Voldemort’s ‘win’, his possession of the Elder Wand, the moment where any audience member not knowing anything about the book will be thinking, ‘Oh, shit, Harry’s screwed.’ It reiterates the importance of the wand, and also provides a quick refresh for anyone who forgot a detail or two. Secondly, we open the film very somberly by concentrating on newly crowned Headmaster of Hogwarts Severus Snape. No dialogue, just a couple of lingering shots of Alan Rickman playing Snape to utter perfection. By all means, his expression gives off the impression of an emotionless man, but thanks to the brilliance of Rickman, you can just tell there’s something behind his eyes, something sad, something off-putting. Opening the final film on Snape is a stroke of genius, and it’s presented so utterly beautiful, I can’t imagine a better way to bring the series to an end. And, of course, in the same way this is Harry’s movie, this is also very much Snape’s movie. Everything about him and his allegiances and choices are revealed here, so it’s fantastic to see him get his due. The openings of these last two movies have been fantastic: showing the kids preparing to leave their homes, and giving the spotlight to the “bravest man” Harry has ever known.

The next twenty minutes fly by at a blink of an eye. Harry is given some extremely important information about wand lore and allegiances by Ollivander (John Hurt), exposition given in a very engaging manner (kudos to screenwriter Steve Kloves for making what could have been a dull scene into something strong and, in a way, creepy), and meets with Griphook, played by an scene-stealing Warwick Davis. From the midnight release to the writing of this piece, I remain completely impressed by Warwick. His performance of Griphook is nuanced, and actually reminds me of Rickman in his ability to create an odd discomfort during the silences between words. As much as I like the Harry/Olivander scene, Harry’s bargain with Griphook is an exchange that never fails to remain gripping. Then we break into Gringotts, and break out thanks to a very pissed off albino dragon. Here we find out an interesting piece of information concerning Harry and the Horcruxes, an element I’m 90% sure isn’t in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2: Harry can ‘sense’ the Horcruxes, an device that is highly beneficial in that it limits exposition and cuts down on time.

The liberties Kloves takes to make the identification and destruction of Horcruxes easier I actually have no problem with. Actually, I find it rather brilliant. Something that will be said a lot and deservedly so is that, in my humble opinion, this is Steve Kloves’ best script of the series. There are tiny moments that make such an impact, and the way he adapts Rowling’s work is, at times, a stroke of brilliance. Apologies for getting ahead of myself, but while I’m on the topic, two specific parts Kloves incorporates I love are: in the Room of Requirement, Harry asking Malfoy why he didn’t tell Bellatrix he recognized him [note: in the book, I believe Malfoy genuinely couldn’t recognize Harry under Hermione’s jinx, although I may be wrong], and during the background heavy scene with Alberforth in the book concerning Albus’ past mistakes, Kloves sums it up so brilliantly by Harry stating very plainly, “I don’t care what happened between you and your brother. I trusted the man I knew.” It addresses that element from the book without outright dismissing it, and reinforces Harry’s trust in people and his belief in Dumbledore. Great moments.
After the Horcrux has been recovered, Ralph Fiennes is permitted to let loose his insanity as he slaughters all the goblins at Gringotts (including poor double-crossing Griphook). Fiennes is extraordinary in chilling audiences with an untamed Lord Voldemort, angry beyond comprehension and lusting for blood. Intercutting Voldemort’s wrath at the bank with the trio’s fall into the lake is a pretty good move, accomplishing two things at once. This sets up the rest of the movie: Hogwarts. Harry, tapping into Voldemort’s mind, gets a clue or two about another Horcrux at Hogwarts and knows he needs to go back, and Voldemort realizes he needs to start checking on his Horcruxes and keeping his snake, Nagini, safe.

Here we come to the Alberforth scene. Caesar himself Ciaran Hinds gives a wonderful performance as Alberforth Dumbledore. Thanks to some of the best makeup work of the series, Hinds looks like an exact replica of Michael Gambon. By all accounts, these two actors are, as far as I’m concerned, brothers. Physically, the similarities are uncanny, and Hinds even gives a similar speech rhythm. The scene with the trio and Alberforth could have made the film drag, but surprisingly, it doesn’t at all. And thanks to Alberforth, this brings us to…

The return of Neville and Harry’s come back tour to Hogwarts! Poor Matthew Lewis has been on the sidelines for the majority of the series (although, to be fair, he’s been given some great moments, specifically in Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix), but here he shines. Proactive, rebellious, mischievous, heroic – the buffoon the trio have grown accustomed to is no longer, instead replaced by an action hero, the leader of the Hogwarts resistance. Lewis shines during his speech to Voldemort, the perfect story beat for the character seven films in the making. Whatever his future prospects are, I sincerely hope Lewis continues to pursue acting. Deathly Hallows, Part 2 very much shines a light at the unsung heroes of the series: Snape, Neville and even Ron (c’mon, here’s given more to do here than ever before, I’d say).
Speaking of hero moments, Harry gets this AMAZING one when he walks out of an assembly and counters Snape, berating him in front of the students, and the remainder of the Order of the Phoenix arrive. It’s such a powerful, ‘Yeah Harry!’ moment. It’s like him being a rockstar, him saying, ‘I’m Harry Potter, dude, and I’m going to bring you and VoldeyFace down!’ On a more serious note, it's just a really powerful scene, Harry confidentially standing out amongst his peers and confronting Snape, and a minute later, that small exchange between Harry and McGonagall - another fantastic scene that makes me so completely happy seven movies later.From here on out, it's all war. And the only thing I'll mention about it, aside from the super obnoxious uber-dark coloring of the image (even the Blu-Ray is a tad too dark for my liking), is one minute and thirty seconds of awesomeness that amounts to what the CD track listings refer to as "Courtyard Apocalypse." The trio need to find Voldemort, and they run through the raging war happening around them to get to him. Alexandre Desplat is given full reign to make this sweeping, highly emotional sequence, effectively punching me in the stomach with its beauty, its chaos, its danger, and its adventure. The full feeling of war and its consequences are best represented in this minute and thirty seconds, I feel, than most of the other battle scenes. It's chilling, frankly. Another round of kudos and applause to director Yates and everyone on crew.

Now we fall into some super big sequences, and I’ll try to be as brief as possible:

- Harry goes to the Pensieve and Snape’s past, his choices, his allegiances, and his heroism is revealed. Some notes: Alan Rickman is magnificent. The editing is fantastic. The music is gorgeous. And the emotion is sweet, tragic, heartbreaking, and admiration. We fall in love with Snape and, in a way, condemn Dumbeldore’s betrayal. This scene is perfect, and the seconds when Harry comes out of the Pensieve I count as one of the most pitch-perfect, extraordinary moments of the entire damn series. Harry taken aback; Harry clutching his heart; Harry seemingly unfamiliar with his surroundings; Harry sitting down, the camera lingers from front and behind as this new information sinks in. Bloody terrific.

- The Resurrection Stone and the walk through the Forest. More of the best stuff the series has ever given. Not a single iota of a bad note here. Radcliffe shines.

- King’s Cross. Mostly good, but c’mon, what’s up with Harry saying “sir” and “Professor” to Dumbledore? By all rights, Harry should be FURIOUS. This man betrayed Harry, has, as Snape put it, been raising him as a lamb for slaughter. Dumbledore comes across as the biggest prick in the Potter universe at this precise moment, and Harry’s polite with this git? The book makes reference to Dumbeldore’s betrayal nearly being nothing compared to the news he had to die, but still, that bit of fiery, angry Harry from Order of the Phoenix should have come out and yelled at him. But instead the whole conversation is rather reserved, and doesn’t feel like it really goes anywhere. There should be talk about the Hallows, there should be a bigger emphasis on what Harry’s choosing to go back into, etc. A decent scene, but one that could have benefited from a greater emotional punch. That said, the withering, decaying piece of Voldemort’s soul was nothing short than awesome.

And the FINAL final battle begins! Harry and Voldemort locked in one hell of a brutal battle. Voldemort beats and punches Harry upwards and downwards. The brutality of their physical, wand-less battle is much appreciated, and adds to the heavy emotion of this final duel. This is the first time, really, that Harry and Voldemort just went crazy on one another. After all the shit that Voldemort’s done to Harry, after all the sacrifices, it’s just him and Voldemort. For Voldemort, all the rage of being thwarted by this young boy who possesses nowhere near the power that He does is given release. So it makes sense from a character and story point that Voldemort just doesn’t “Avada Kedavra!” Harry one last time, but instead decides to, dare I say, play with him. I fully applaud the choice to expand their battle, and it’s they hit so many right beats. Like one of the major departures from the book, when Harry and Voldemort are flying outside Hogwarts and crashing into the building, holding onto one another, their bodies become one. It’s one hell of an amazing visual, and it’s so completely perfect for this scene. Not only is it gorgeous to look at, but it perfectly visualizes Harry’s inner struggle/question for the last three or four films: how much am I like Voldemort? How much of Voldemort is in me? Since Order of the Phoenix, Harry’s been asking that question – with the utmost fear – a lot. And here we get to see that. Of course, with the exception of the whole Horcrux business, the two couldn’t be more different, as mentioned by Dumbledore and many others quite often, but it’s a wonderful thing that thread is brought up again in the middle of this intense action sequence.

But that marvelous moment passes, and the two fall to the courtyard. What follows is two minutes of extraordinary magic: A) Harry and Voldemort face to face in the courtyard, down and dirty, unrelenting in their attack, B) Ron and Hermione attacking and subsequently running from Nagini, and C) Neville getting his ‘hero’ moment. Complimented by Alexandre Desplat’s wonderful score and some terrific editing, this sequence of events is basically perfect. Now with Nagini gone, and the part of Voldemort’s soul in Harry has been obliterated, Harry is free to finish Voldemort off.
This is it. This is the moment. All seventeen years of Harry’s life comes down to this moment. And Voldemort, not understanding of what’s happening to his body, decides to ignore it, that he’s a more powerful wizard, and presses on. This monumental, gigantic, epic, emotional victory could have been one of the most spectacular, fist-in-the-air, ‘YES!’ yelling moments in cinema. Instead, it sorta comes off flat. And I think that sort of comes from a lack of coverage, of all things.

Yates’ penchant for wide shots serves him well when establishing locale and showing off the gorgeous set designs and scenery, but he fails to go in for the close-up when it would benefit him greatly. The battle at Hogwarts has many examples of this. The death of Fred would have more impact if his body wasn’t so obscured by his grieving family members. If we were given a shot of Fred’s lifeless body, head-on, it would be far more effective and emotional like the full shot of Lupin and Tonks, instead of coming across rather flat. Now in regards to Voldemort’s death, there are some medium shots, and then a close up of the Elder Wand flying out of his hand and then his disintegration. Composer Desplat does his best in making this the grand moment it ought to be, but I think by staying a bit too far away from Voldemort, from now getting close up to get that moment of ‘NOW he’s finished!’, they (sort of) robbed the audiences of this ginormous moment. Or, in a different scenario, Voldemort’s skin is cracking, Harry grabs the Elder Wand, and in one last spell, directs it at Voldemort, and Voldemort falls back, dead. Something that gives Harry the proper moment of victory, because right now, it honestly don’t feel like Harry delivered the final blow, and that’s an important part of any good guy vs. bad guy story, that final blow. As a friend of mine said, we needed that “final FUCK YOU, VOLDIE!”

Oh, and as a sidenote - because that's what this scene felt like - the Molly vs. Bellatrix was hugely disappointing. It's included in the film most likely because of fan demand, as is Molly's famous line, but it's presented here with all the passion of Rupert Grint enthusiastically kissing Emma Watson. Translation: none.

So I loved the battle. It was visually represented very beautifully, and the performances were extraordinary. But there was an emotional tie that was ultimately lacking. Unfortunately, it continues till the end of the film. Post-battle, in the partially demolished Great Hall, a moment that would have benefited hugely from jubilation, as in the book, instead feels awkward. After, what, 20 years in the timeline of Harry Potter, the wizarding world is free of Voldemort permanently? This is something that deserves celebration, that demands joy and yells of happiness and lots of pats on the backs and congratulations. I understand that Yates and crew wanted a more quiet, restrained, post-apocalypse stillness, but it just doesn’t work here. An element that could have helped it would be more naturalistic dialogue, instead of these awkward glances, hugs, and name giving. May feel right on paper, but it didn’t translate well.

And then the final scene on the bridge with our trio. Radcliffe has some great dialogue, and it was wonderful to have a scene with just the three of them, conquering heroes having survived a kill or be killed battle that decided the fate of the wizarding world. To just have these three is something extraordinary and brilliant. But that motherfrakking final shot. They’re posing. Hand in hand, posing. Not saying a bloody thing. Just standing there. On a bridge. I would have preferred a hug. It makes no sense. I can completely accept spells to give a soul a body, or instruments being vessels for aspects of a soul, or statues coming to life, but there is something wrong, awkward, and fake about these three standing there, not saying a thing, holding hands, and looking off in the distance. Don’t know if it’s just me, but it instantly pulled me out of whatever emotion that could have been grabbed from the scene, and just feels completely and utterly weird.

That said, I have no problem with the older Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, or Malfoy. The only nitpick I can give is that the quick Malfoy shot isn’t given any connection. Harry doesn’t glance at Malfoy or anything; the Malfoy shot literally is just thrown in there. Otherwise, fantastic final scene for the series, and a marvelous final shot. Harry’s happy and living the normal life. All is good.I could say a lot more, but then I'd feel like I'm babbling, so I'll conclude with this (and one kickass final poster that I desperately want to own):

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 is basically great. It doesn’t lag, the music is thrilling, somber, and action-y, the editing gives the film an unrelenting pace, the action is intense, and the performances are magnificent. Like truly magnificent. Looking at the two halves as one film – something I hope to do one day – it’s definitely the series at its most confident. Kloves, Yates, Haymen, and Warner Bros. know this is their last one, their last chance to get it right, and everyone delivers, from the bottom of the production totem pole to whoever’s at the top. With the exception of the things I noted, I could not have asked for a better film, and that extends to the first part, as well. This movie delivers.

Rating: 9/10 = A fitting end to the HARRY POTTER saga, it's full of action, drama, twists and turns, and is must-see entertainment.


If you haven't already, watch this NOW (!), then rewatch the entire series from beginning to end. Months later, how do y'all feel about the final film?

03 November 2011

Paranormal Activity 3


Paranormal Activity 3

Starring Jessica Tyler, Brian Boland, Chloe Csengery, Christoper Nhcolas, Lauren Blittner, Hallie Foote
Written by Christopher B. Landon
Directed by Ariel Schulman & Henry Joost
Release: 21 October 2011
Paramount, 85 mins., Rated R

Plot: Sequel sequel to prequel prequel.

For years, every Halloween the Saw franchise was the reigning victor in the box office, presenting a tightly woven narrative with gory death traps, making it a cash cow for the studio. In 2009, Paranormal Activity, an independent production made for a reported $15,000, dethroned Saw VI, rounding out its theatrical run with $107.9 million.

Despite no original plans to continue the series, Paranormal Activity 2 hit theaters the following October, surpassing its predecessor in box office and delivering more effective chills.

And now, a third installment enters theaters with a record breaking $54 million opening weekend. Suffice it to say, Halloween now belongs to Paranormal Activity.

Going back in time even further, before Paranormal 2, the third film (and second prequel) is set in 1988, shown through old, discarded VHS tapes, chronicling exactly what shenanigans young Katie and Kristi are up to with that pesky demon that will inevitably cause them trouble later in life.

Video recorded by Dennis (Christopher Nicholas Smith), boyfriend of the sisters’ mother Julie (Lauren Bittner), he sets up three cameras: one in their room, one in the children’s bedroom, and one downstairs covering the kitchen and living room (humorously duct taped to a fan). As the nights roll on, the cameras pick up unusual images and weird exchanges between Kristi and an invisible entity.

Paranormal Activity 3 is highly effective in its ability to build tension. The moving camera attached to the fan may be the single most brilliant invention of the entire trilogy, making audiences cling to every inch of the frame to see what may be coming and when.

This device is brilliantly used during a scene involving a ‘ghost’ and a babysitter. Although the film has a bit of a slow burn until the unusual phenomena begins, it does allow viewers to get to know Dennis and Julie, and even become fans of both of them, especially Dennis (whose reactions to everything are comedic gold). In fact, it’s with a long, intimate scene with them that delivered the most effective spine-chilling freak out of them all.

Another runaway success is the utterly natural, realistic performances of the child actors playing Kristi (Jessica Tyler Brown) and Katie (Chloe Csengery). Not one bit of their performance feels phoned in, and because of the level of realism with these two, when the demon becomes aggressive it’s absolutely horrifying. And not just because it’s a bit scary, but because we come to care for the kids and don’t want bad things to happen to them.

That’s quite the accomplishment when typically, audiences are or more or less rooting for the demon. The casting here is nothing short of exquisite, boasting the most likable and personable cast of the trilogy.

The film is one long tense production that culminates in a chaotic crescendo. It’s the scares and the characters that make Paranormal 3 a success, but that doesn’t mean it’s entirely perfect.

As opposed to the previous two, this one doesn’t feel quite as complete, and when the end credits roll, the theater was collective in their reaction of, “That’s it?” There should have been, and could have been, more to the story, or more scares. It just seems to end awfully sudden.

Following in the footsteps of Paranormal 2, a few more layers of its mythology is unraveled, this time involving a strange symbol that may be connected to the demon. The last film was very mythology heavy, but all its twists and turns made sense in the context of the narrative and added up to the original film’s framework really well. What’s brought to the table in the closing minutes of Paranormal 3 doesn’t nearly jive as well, coming out of left field more than making sense in the context of what has come before.

Paranormal Activity 3 isn’t perfect, but it’s highly effective in its scares, it’s tense from beginning to end, and offers the most likable cast of actors in the whole trilogy. Where the series will go from here is uncertain, but judging from phenomenal box office receipts, a fourth helping is all but certain.

02 November 2011

Red State

Red State

Starring Michael Parks, John Goodman, Melissa Leo, Kyle Gallner, Michael Angarano, Nicholas Braun
Written & Directed by Kevin Smith
Release: 01 September 2011
SModcast Pictures, 88 mins., Rated R

Plot: Three teens are held captive by religious fundamentalist Abin Cooper and members of his Five Points Church, and are meant to die for their sinning nature.

Right around the time Kevin Smith was prepping Clerks II, info starting popping up about a script he wrote that was unlike anything he had ever written. Called Red State, he called it a "different kind of horror movie." Here we are, two films later, and we finally have the film in our hands. All the hype surrounding it, all the anticipation, and it's finally here. And because of that anticipation and expectation, Red State unfortunately fails to be as good as it probably is.

The movie is good. Unlike many reviews suggest, the film knows exactly what it is. The pacing and clear story divide is very deliberate, and, I feel, actually quite effective. The story evolved from its thriller/horror roots and instead became an all-out bullet melee. Enjoyment aside - and I did, enjoy - the film just didn't seem to push the boundaries enough, for me. It's one of those instances where the film, good as it is, failed to deliver on its own premise. Three horny teenage boys caged by Abin Cooper and his ministry to pay for their sins in front of the congregation is a horrifying scenario, and Smith could have easily milked it to make everything more intense, more cruel, more effective. In fact, with the exception of a number of unexpected deaths, Red State seems to play it safe, weirdly enough.

To the films detriment, and it pains me to say this, but Abin Cooper and his flock don't come across as actual, dimensional characters/people. They feel like caricatures, the result of some sort of Looney Tunes sketch mixing some swearing and blood into the equation. I knew this was a possibility, but I assumed that Smith, being an intelligent writer and possessing a keen knack for writing exquisite dialogue and very real characters, would overcome such a hurdle. Unfortunately, because of the caricature feeling that comes from the people of Five Points Church, they don't come across nearly as threatening as they should, especially Cooper. I will say that all reports about Michael Parks being splendid in the role are indeed true, but that doesn't stop him from not coming across as a legitimate threat. It sucks Smith's script failed to give these characters dimension, but in the grand scheme of the whole movie, it could be argued it wasn't entirely necessary. By the fifty minute mark Red State becomes an all-out blood war, where every life is expendable. The characterization of Cooper's clan is secondary to the bullets and the plot points.

In the category of dialogue, Smith once again doesn't disappoint. Especially when the ATF come into the scene, the dialogue is classic Smith. One of my favorite exchanges of the year occurs around the 50 minute mark when Goodman and his right-hand man are trying to communicate with Cooper and his clan.

But all in all, despite my affection for Parks, my love for Kevin Smith, and my general good feeling towards Red State, it just doesn't feel like enough. Incomplete, would be a good word for it. And I don't mean to say that Smith should have lingered at the war zone instead of cutting to a dialogue heavy scene; I think the last act is fine. Just the whole movie doesn't reach the heights of greatness, of horror, of tension, that it should. All this being said, Red State is a movie that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend to fans of Kevin Smith. However, I wager it has a very specific audience, and a large portion of people will have no inclination to check out a film that has fowl-mouthed horny teens, crazy religious nuts, blood splatter, and really no message in the end. But hell, it's still worth seeing.

Rating: 7.5/10 - Not Smith's best outing, but there enough done right to make Red State worth checking out, from script to screen, it's a labor of love, and feels like it.

12 October 2011

Jessica Chastain Triple Feature: The Tree of Life, The Debt, The Help

Out of nowhere this gorgeous yet-spectacular actress Jessica Chastain showed up in, like, a bazillion movies over the summer, with two or three scheduled before the end of the year. This girl's everywhere. So, in honor of her awesomeness and prettiness, three of her flicks have been reviewed today. I should just make a mention that I laughed a lot when I read reviews of The Tree of Life Blu-Ray saying the mother was played by Bryce Dallas Howard. Oh, ha with the ha. Anyway, Jessica has the fortune of being in three very distinctly different (in a good way) films, and manages to be a demanding presence in each one of them.

Long review short - all three films reviewed below should be seen. Alrightey then? Onto the awesomeness of Andy reviews!

The Debt

Plot: Lies and deceit from a 1960s mission haunts the survivors in the present.

I was forced into The Debt for some quality mother/son time, and it was surprisingly worth it. All I knew was that it was a thriller, and Helen Mirren was in it (which is always nice). And as the movie got going, I saw that Sam Worthington was also present and accounted for, mumbling his lines as per usual but luckily they’re to a minimum. And then, in the first few minutes, it’s Julius Caesar from Rome (Ciaran Hinds), back from the dead only to be dead again as soon as he arrived! This sets itself up for the main mystery: the awesome Tom Wilkinson tasks Helen Mirren to solve a problem that could have some serious repercussions on them in the present, something good ol’ Ciaran Hinds just didn’t want to be a part of. It was by this point I also realized it was a mystery and a thriller.

And once we flashback to the younger versions of Helen Mirren, Tom Wilkinson, and Ciaran Hinds to see the stunningly gorgeous Jessica Chastain (in the first role I ever saw her in), the brute Sam Worthington, and Xena-alumni Marton Csokas, The Debt becomes a film you can’t take your eyes away from. It’s the 1960’s, and the three characters are united to bring down a big bad Nazi guy who killed a bunch of folks – but not before inflicting horrible, horrible forms of torment. Worthington resigns himself to standing around pinning after Chastain, occasionally saying a line or two and remaining all around stoic. Csokas seems to enjoy himself as the handsome lead who just wants to complete the mission successfully. And Ms. Chastain – well, she definitely has that being pretty thing down, but lo and behold, she is a marvelous, tremendous actress. There are two or three scenes where, for the sake of the mission, she allows herself to be touched by the Nazi they’re targeting, and her reactions: they are the type of things that stick to your mind long after the film is over with.

When The Debt cuts back to contemporary times with our older leads, it’s not nearly as exciting as watching the 1960s counterparts do everything they can to see the mission through thick and thin, but Helen Mirren carries the last act heroically. She confronts of a demon from her past, engaging in a fight in a bathroom that is as brutal as any Jet Li film. Not as creative and well-choreographed, no, but there’s a certain amount of rising tension that stems from their encounter, and when they finally draw blood on one another, it’s pretty gruesome.

When all is said and done, The Debt works. I was grabbed by the narrative, although I wasn’t too fond of the ‘twist’ that brings us into the third act, and when I left the theater, I can honestly say I enjoyed myself. The 1960s flashbacks, which occupy a good 60% of the movie, is definitely its strength, but the last ten minutes are, perhaps, the most memorable long after you leave the theater (and, let’s not forget, Chastain’s awesomeness). To put another way, this is a thriller I’ll have in my home video collection.

Rating: 8.5/10 – An engaging mystery/thriller with boasting a standout performance, a tense mission, and some super engaging character dynamic that flares up in the flashbacks but sorta fiddles in the present.

The Help

The Help is one of those unexpected movies that creep up on you. In my case, I had zero interest in seeing it, despite the casting of future wife Emma Stone. However, when the opportunity to see the film for free presented itself, I am never one to pass up such an offer. And I am not remotely disgruntled about seeing it. The Help was fun beginning to end, thanks largely to a smart script and some wonderful performances.

First, attention must be brought to the two outstanding performances of the film: Octavia Spencer as Minny, a maid who always has some witty remark to say and isn’t always successful at biting her tongue. Spencer’s facial reactions, her mannerisms, and most of all, how she delivers her lines make her the most memorable aspect of the film. Her “eat my shit” scene will forever be one of the summer highlights (and that reminds me, the mother of Bryce Dallas Howard’s character Hilly, Sissy Spacek, is just as hilarious in this moment). Giving Octavia Spencer a run for her money is Jessica Chastain as Celia, a woman who has no idea about anything and whose own naiveté and free-spirited self provides just as many laugh out loud moments as Minny. Halfway through the film, the two characters unite in one house, and every scene with the two of them together is priceless. Their dynamic makes this movie.

As for my dear Emma Stone, who I love and cherish, she surprisingly felt very much like a side character. Now, I understand the movie’s called The Help, and thus the primary focus is on Viola Davis’ Aibileen and Octavia’s Minny, and Stone’s Skeeter Phelan is more a conduit to get their story told to the world, but I feel that Stone’s character wasn’t given enough room to breathe to become her own person. Instead, her trademark Stone quirkiness (which is at a minimum) accomplishes the job, more or less. And in regards to feeling like a side character, Skeeter’s love interest subplot is hardly worth mentioning, because the film surely doesn’t seem interested in it at all. Those seven minutes of screentime amount to nothing, and could easily be exercised from the film without missing a single beat.

Bryce Dallas Howard’s Hilly was also great, with Bryce giving a greatly comedic performance: funny when stupid crap happens to her, obnoxious when she gets all prejudice, and obnoxious when she gets all Stepford Wives-y. It’s because of these actresses’ that The Help is successful, that there’s a heart and soul to it.

To be frank, and I might get some flake for this, but Viola Davis just didn’t cut it as Aibileen. Her character never felt honest, and because of that, I just didn’t care about Aibileen at all. Minny, Hilly, Celia, Skeeter (sorta), even the maid who asks Hilly for some money to pay for her kid – all those characters I cared for beginning to end. Maybe it was the script, or the sort of tired performance from Davis, but Aibileen just didn’t cut it.

The script’s well written, full of humor and drama (although The Help feels more humor-y then drama-y), and doesn’t overplay its hand. As in, the comedy doesn’t go too farfetched, and the drama doesn’t feel too Hallmarkish. As I said, Skeeter’s romantic subplot could have been exercised entirely, and perhaps Aibileen should have been given a bit more life to her instead of feeling fairly paint-by-the-numbers. All in all, The Help was a good movie. The ladies make it memorable.

Rating: 7.5/10 – There’s a few clunkers here and there, but for the most part, THE HELP is a resounding success, made enjoyable by the wonderful performances from the female leads who are hilarious and heartfelt.

The Tree of Life

Plot: Space, something, something, earth, something, something, angry father, something, pretty!, something, something, dinosaurs?, something, opera music pretty!, something, something, WTF? I think whoever couldn't follow the series finale of LOST will effectively have their brains blown out watching this.

The Tree of Life is a difficult movie to discuss. There are images circulating in my head two weeks after seeing it, images I’m sure I might never stop thinking about. But as for the actual content, I don’t feel anything but disappointment, really. When I look back at The Tree of Life, I don’t contemplate over whatever the hell Terrence Malick was trying to convey, if anyone. I just think of the striking visual imagery, the dynamic of Brad Pitt’s strict stereotypical 1950s father and the careing and giving mother, played by Jessica Chastain to their eleven year old son Jack, who must have one hell of an Oedipus complex.

Whatever Castor saw in his evaluation of Malick’s screenplay, whatever amazing feelings or thoughts Malick inspired in his apparently brilliant script, I don’t think it’s here in the finished product. Hell, with the exception of the O’Brien family crazy house, there’s very little emotion or sense in the whole enterprise, I feel.

In regards to the cinematography, well, in a word, it’s stunning. Yes, to say that each shot is like a painting come to life would not be an exaggeration. Even close ups of characters or dinner scenes have a rich freshness to them, as if they’ve never been shot from whatever angle Malick desired and each new shot is something entirely unique onto itself. The camera definitely calls attention to itself. Malick’s like a child, so amazed by the world and where he could film, the camera is positioned anywhere and everywhere he could think of, moved in any fashion possible. This lends itself to a kinetic energy that is exciting and interesting. When the film slows down for the more dramatic scenes, the ones that typically include characters whispering instead of talking at a normal chit chat voice, Tree of Life is just as visually stunning. There are so many times during the Creation of the universe sequence that I was just amazed at how they filmed this. There is truly some of the most amazing cinematography in Tree of Life.

But that all comes to naught if there’s no emotion – or even point – to the movie. Now I entered the film knowing what I was getting into. I knew that Malick loves nature, that he would film the world in ways that have never been done before. I knew, based off Castor’s script review, that there are moments of contemplation, made deliberately for contemplation, that this isn’t just your typical run-of-the-mill movie and forces you to think. But, honestly, I think that was left on the page. I don’t feel any of that translated onto screen. It comes across as a heartless, directionless movie. Acts or shots that are supposed to have meaning just don’t. The whole last 20 minutes – hell, everything with Sean Penn’s grown up Jack – no number of theories will convince me there’s something worthwhile there. If there is any emotion, anything worth thinking about, it’s the hour chunk with the O’Brien family as a young Jack deals with adolescence and his desire to not become his father. Whatever big themes, ideas, or statements Malick was trying at – just ain’t there.

That said, though, Tree of Life is one of those flicks that when someone reads a review, they shouldn’t make a decision based off that. As you can tell, I didn’t like The Tree of Life nearly as much as other parties did, finding the flick a bit heartless but visually beautiful. There’s a huge possibility that I misread scenes, or maybe something just went over my head and the reader will encounter something life changing when they see the film. At the very least, Malick’s controversial experience should be…experienced. Does it all add up to something? Does the last 10 minutes make a lick of friggin’ sense? Would you re-edit the first hour like I would?

For a better (or complimentary) look at the meaning of life or whatnot, I’d say check out Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain.

Rating: 5.5/10 - If there's something there in the script, then I would strongly recommend Malick to restructure this film to give what needs to have meaning meaning, to give life to his script instead of shooting pretty pictures and cobbling them together in hopes of it making sense.

14 September 2011

Conan the Barbarian (2011)


Conan the Barbarian

Starring Jason Moma, Stephen Lang, Rachel Nichols, Rose McGowan, Ron Pearlman, Leo Howard, Bob Sapp
Written by Thomas Dean Donnelly, Joshua Oppenheimer, Sean Hood
Directed by Marcus Nispel
Release: 19 August 2011
Lionsgate, 112 mins., Rated R

Plot: Conan kills his way to the sinister king Zym who killed his father and massacred his village.

Remakes, remakes, remakes. But y’know what? I don’t mind a remake of Conan the Barbarian. The original 1982 film with Arnold Schwarzenegger as Conan is less than perfect, and the property is interesting enough that modern audiences just might find themselves enjoying the ride, so all in all, I’m happy to see the Barbarian on the big screen again. So how did it fair?

Like the original, Conan the Barbarian 2011 is a revenge story. As a boy, he watched his father burn to death right in front of him, and he vows vengeance to kill the man and everyone connected to his father’s murder. 20 years later, said man who did the killing is now a King and is on his way to achieve Godhood: he just needs to kill some “pureblood” girl to complete the spell and he’ll be all powerful and stuff. Really, the plot is just loosely there. This film is about Conan killing his way to the bad guy, leaving a trail of bodies behind, and the audience having a fun time watching. So, it definitely succeeds in that regard.

Taking over for Schwarzenegger is the muscular Jason Moma, who brings a sense of fun to the role and is entirely believable as a kickass action hero. Then again, it’s not like he’s entirely foreign to the role, after slicing some heads in HBO’s Game of Thrones and saving universes in Stargate: Atlantis. Watching Moma exact vengeance, woo the gorgeous female heroine, and take his bloody revenge is the best aspect of the film and entirely worth the price of admission alone. Basically, Moma owns. As the love interest (which is weird for being a monk), Rachel Nichols is the object of the Bad Guy’s desire – humorously named Zym [note to bad guys: don’t name yourself Zym; I kept wishing the ‘ittle green alien from that Nick show would appear and zap Zym to pieces] – and although she is important to the plot, she unfortunately isn’t given much more than to look pretty and be in distress (although she is given a moment or two to fight, which is appreciated).

The bad guy is hilariously performed by Stephen Lang (Avatar), who indulges in overacting like nobody’s business. He and Ron Pearlman, who plays Conan’s late father, must have arrived on set either for the paycheck or the bloody fun of it. Lang’s bad guy Zym is aided by his daughter Marique, played by Rose McGowan (Charmed), a sorcerer whose makeup is absolutely frightening to look at. Note to ladies: if you don’t want to get hit on during Halloween, congrats, you found your costume.

Conan 2011 is competently directed by Marcus Nispel, who is no stranger to remakes (Friday the 13th, Texas Chainsaw Massacre). His take is less atmospheric than the original (which was longer paced, created dread for Conan’s victims), but it is grittier and bloodier. Grit aside, it does seem a bit more fun. And that’s the thing about Conan 2011 that I love and don’t love: it is fun and enjoyable, but it could have been so much more. So it all comes down to this: if you’re looking for a sweeping epic with a brooding barbarian lusting for revenge, it doesn’t exactly deliver. If you want a fun, action-packed flick that is highly entertaining and doesn’t require a lot of thought, than Conan delivers. Unfortunately the box office return as rather dismal, and the outlook for a sequel is rather bleak, so go out and enjoy Conan while you can.

Rating: 7.5/10 = Not bad entertainment at all, but there is definite room for improvement. That said, CONAN is fun, and the sword fights are pretty cool. Plus, Jason Moma rocks as Conan. If these reasons are enough, than CONAN's your movie.

07 September 2011

Shark Night 3D


Shark Night 3D

Plot: Over-age stereotypes vaca in digital shark infested waters.

I’ve come up with a half dozen different ways to start off this review, but they all seemed to be a way too wordy and failed to really hit home what I wanted to say. So here it is: Shark Night 3D sucks. It really, completely, 100%, honestly does. If anyone watches the Syfy Channel anymore (now that’s a rant for another day), I guarantee you’ll find more enjoyment from their Original Movie crapfests. They excel at bringing Z-grade storytelling, ‘acting’, special effects, music, the whole bit. Yet despite the fact they make really, really bad movies, I’d rather give ‘em a go before watching Shark Night again.

What did I expect? I expected sharks on a human-chomping frenzy. I expected a movie to live up to its title. I didn’t pay for the ticket with the hope I’d be met with dimensional characters or a halfway solid plot. Hell, I’d be plenty satisfied if the plot was paper thin, so as long as we got the sharks. The title says it all right there: Shark Night. The poster promises shark bites. We did not get this. The creative team behind Shark Night couldn’t even follow through with the premise.

I want shark attacks, and what’s here instead are quick five second shots of some of the most painful big budget digital effects in recent years. Oh, and a dozen or so dorsal fin shots that never hold the same menace as that 1975 film. Point is, the sharks are hardly in this movie. Instead we’re treated to human beings that I reluctantly attribute the concept of ‘characters’ to, personifying the very definition of stereotypes.

Again, if the creative team gave us sharks – and lots of ‘em – I could care less about the ‘nerdy’ guy who we recognize as a nerd because he has glasses but has abs of steel that would make Captain America jealous, or the black guy who is using the nerd just so he could pass class while concentrating his efforts in sports. Or the redneck hillbilly stereotypes. Or the gorgeous blond girl with a fuzzy past and intimacy issues. Or the super, super, super senior college student played by an actor I’m pretty sure is in his 40’s. I could overlook a number of these ‘elements’ if they just gave us some bloody sharks!

Alas, the cumulative runtime of them onscreen is probably no more than 5 minutes. I think there’s one genuinely decent scene with the sharks, but that’s about it (if you really have to see it, I’ll leave this nondescript so you can enjoy it). So very little in the way of sharks, cardboard cutouts of individuals often referred as ‘characters’ in good movies, crappy digital effects, a ridiculous script, it all comes down to this: is it at least fun?

Honestly, no. Not even in a ‘this-is-so-so-bad, it’s-sorta-good’ kinda way. Piranha 3D somehow achieved that; My Bloody Valentine 3D accomplished just that in spades. The final judgment of this reviewer is to skip Shark Night 3D at all costs. [And yes, I did see this in 3D, and boy was it not worth it; sorta makes me want to go back and time and see Jaws 3D just to compare] If at some point you are forced into going or decide to sacrifice yourself by seeing it, just do yourself a favor and stay ‘till after the credits: there’s a music video that is far more entertaining than the feature itself.

Rating: 2/10 - Watch anything else. Syfy Channel Original junk, SHARK ATTACK 3, what have you; just not this. Unless you're doing your own Rifftrax commentary! Upload that. Should be neat.

24 August 2011

Fright Night


Fright Night

Starring Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, Imogen Poots, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Tori Collette
Written by Marti Noxon
Story by Tom Holland
Directed by Craig Gillepsie
Release: 19 August 2011
DreamWorks, 106 mins., Rated R

Plot: Charley Brewster investigates his next door neighbor, Jerry, who happens to be an vampire intent on getting his killing a goin.

Take DISTURBIA but instead of a serial killer, the neighbor is a VAMPIRE serial killer. That's the basic premise. But once the premise is settled in, and it's up to Charley and his hot girlfriend to save the town from Jerry and his cunning nefariousness, they ain't so similar anymore. For one, FRIGHT NIGHT boasts this odd charm about it. Sometimes, it seems as though the scripts winking at the audience, acknowledging the vampire genre and its current marketable state (e.g., TWILIGHT, which even gets a mention!), and other times, it's as if FRIGHT NIGHT is going full on satire/overboard by spewing CG blood all over the place, a la KILL BILL. And somehow, the film balances a comedic, not-so-serious tone, with a dead serious, shit is going down vibe without one or the other contradicting or really pulling a person out of the experience.

I attribute all this to the brilliant Marti Noxon, screenwriter of this 2011 reboot, and veteran of Joss Whedon's masterpiece BUFFY, THE VAMPIRE SLAYER and mastermind of the short lived FOX series POINT PLEASANT (review here). Thanks to the very clever script and some great performances which clearly say, 'this script is fun, I wanna have fun, let's have some fun', FRIGHT NIGHT is lots and lots of fun.

Frankly, I didn't quite know what to expect going in. After all, never saw the original, and dunno if I want to now after seeing this (although I gather they are two entirely separate experiences). But what we have here is a horror film worth watching. There's Colin Farrell as vampire Jerry, and he can play sinister. Granted, if I was in the directors chair, there are some changes I would make to his performance, but overall, Farrel brings on the creepy and the sinister, making Jerry a frightening presence despite the name. Definitely near the end, where Jerry's patience is running thin and he just wants to rip some throats, Farrel definitely delivers the "GRRRRR!" During the scenes where he's actually trying to be charming...well, damnit, he's charming. The awesome Anton Yelchin who wowed me in CHARLIE BARTLETT, ALPHA DOG, STAR TREK, and TERMINATOR SALVATION continues to "wow." I love this guy, and you should love this guy. Perfect comic timing, and a perfect understanding of drama. Any casting director can't go wrong with this guy. And David Tennant. The Doctor in DOCTOR WHO himself, walking around in eye liner, a robe, a wig, and swearing frequently in his signature Scottish accent. Loved him. Brilliant. Hilarious. Owned the film right out of Colin Farrel's grasp.

I'll say it right now, with all the biasesies of the universe, David Tennant owns this movie. He doesn't pop up until quite a ways in, but when his Peter Vincent persona does make his debut, it's great fun. He's a drunk, he's a fake, and when he's actually confronted with real vampire shit, he pussies out and allows others to fall victim so he can live. Luckily, David Tennant being David Tennant, he didn't take the role just so he can wear eye liner and a wig: he gets his badassery on, and it's glorious when it happens.

Not like I'm over selling that, by any means. Another surprising element was there being a strong female lead present. Imogen Poots plays Charley's girlfriend but-maybe-not-really-a-girlfriend Amy,

Worth mentioning before I sign off this review, but I elected not to indulge in the 3D prices. Sorry folks, but I just ain't into that anymore. Unless something ginormous and game changing comes around. But as my 2D picture played, there were multiple instances that might benefit from 3D, and the director happily throws items at the camera to create that "Woah!" effect. So what I'm saying is that if you wanna take the 3D plunge, it just might be worth it. Not a guarantee, but at the very least, it appears as though they're trying. If you decide the 2D route, I promise you aren't missing much, and the flick works just fine as is.

In review: David Tennant was awesome as Peter Vincent. The movie is a brilliant balance of serious vampire mayhem and comedy "ha-haness". Loads of cartoony bloodshed. Faithful to vamp mythology with the exception of one 'ittle thing. TWILIGHT riff. Farrell freakiness. Yelchin greatness. Imogen hotness. Fast paced and clever. Well worth your time.

Rating: 9/10 = FRIGHT NIGHT is all about having fun at the movies. It can be genuinely creepy at times, but it relies more on jokes, cartoonish blood, and a quick pace and that's just fine with me.

Friends With Benefits


Friends With Benefits

Starring Justin Timberlake Mila Kunis Patricia Clarkson Jenna Elfman Bryan Greenberg Richard Jenkins Woody Harrelson
Written by Keith Merryman, David A. Newman, Will Gluck, Harley Peyton
Directed by Will Gluck
Release: 22 July 2011
Screen Gems, 110 mins., Rated R

Plot: Jamie and Dylan engage in a strictly sexual friendship minus the romantic entaglement thing, but of course, those pesky feelin's come out bubblin'....

Chemistry and script. In order for these romantic comedies or dramas to succeed, you absolutely one hundred percent need these two. Of course, every film requires these components: a shit movie would inevitably follow. However, when dealing with this specific genre, there’s certain expectations and troves the film must abide by. 96% of the time (pulled the number out of my ass; not official by any means) girl ends up with boy, the film ends with a kiss and a pop song that reassures the audience that everything will be alright, and the couple presumably live happily ever after. The two leads – er, characters – realizing their attraction for one another, overcoming any hurdles in their way, and ending up together is the genre’s DNA. Watching that same formula repeated infinite number of times can be entertaining for only so long, so there you have it – chemistry and script. Without those two supremely important elements, your romantic comedy or drama is going to fall flat on its face, be a load of utter bullshit, and be excruciatingly difficult to watch.

Earlier this year, the topic of two friends entering a strictly sexual relationship minus all the emotionally touchy-feely lovey-doveyness came out to mixed results. No Strings Attached featured two likable leads, and was actually entertaining despite the gigantic odds against it. And although I enjoyed it, upon further reflection and especially after seeing this, it didn’t quite deliver on its promoted premise. Plus, Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher can’t hold their own against the comedy greatness of Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake.

I don’t say that out of biased love for Kunis who is beyond gorgeous or enjoyment of Timberlake’s music (which I don’t actually like), but because Kunis and Timberlake posess genuine chemistry, and the screen sizzles with energy and excitement when the two are on the screen. Often, the writers/director throws in a scene or two of the characters just sitting around talking about whatever amuses them, and they giggle and laugh and find common ground. It’s meant to be a character building moment, but hardly ever do they come across as anything but contrived moments forcing the audiences to find personality in these cardboard characters. Not the instance here. Maybe it’s the writing, maybe it’s the directing, or maybe it’s simply Mila and Justin, but dialogue and character interaction is one of the many strengths FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS has in its arsenal.

Another great component is that it takes the SCREAM route. The conventions of the romantic comedy are discussed, ripped apart, and mocked more than once in the movie. Hell, you even got Jason Segal and Rashida Jones in a faux romantic comedy (in the world of BENEFITS) that indulges in every cliché imaginable: setting, dialogue, characters, music). Funny aside: I momentarily imagined the Segal/Jones enterprise as another ingenious marketing tool for THE MUPPETS; but different companies and al that sorta doesn’t make that possible….) I don’t think this is going to be a huge spoiler to reveal this little bit, but in the end, Mila and Justin end up together. The finale is a true romantic cliché. But it works. The characters and film acknowledge them, and move on. It’s a part of the story, it doesn’t dictate the story.

That sense of fun is all over the flick. I laughed, chuckled, and grinned often. The chemistry between Timberlake and Kunis is perhaps the strongest and authentic all year. The script is self-referential, crude, dirty, and clever all in one. No, FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS isn’t the embodiment of romantic comedy perfection, but it’s a pretty darn stellar film when all is said and done. I loved these characters, and I didn’t want the ending to come because I didn’t much fancy the idea of parting with them. I don’t know if the characters will stay romantically involved, but hell, it’s guaranteed that the sequel – following the demise of that relationship or the continued growth of it – would be just as entertaining and hilarious as the beginning of it.

I have some nice things to say about the film, indeed. As for negatives, the only thing that I found myself displeased with was the ridiculous-yet-mandatory crux in the relationship. That thing – event or phrase or what have you – that separates our lovers from fully indulging in their romantic notions. Basically, one is pissed off and the other one is stubborn or sad and don’t communicate. In the end, there’s the resolution of happiness. It’s difficult to tackle that annoying clichéd obstacle, but similarly to the whole ‘handling-a-tried-and-true-formula’ it all depends on how the writer(s) tackle the matter that makes the difference. Unfortunately, they aren’t all that successful in delivering a believable, realistic obstacle. It feels very forced, and that’s an immediate pull out.

Of course not all will love FRIENDS. I went in with low expectations. Frankly, the prime motivator here was Mila Kunis. She’s hot, she’s feisty, and she knows how to deliver comedy. It’s just a surprise that not only did Timberlake deliver a great performance and Woody Harrelson was hilarious in his underused role. Low expectations help, and in this case, I probably shouldn’t hype it up too much. Just go in with the hope of a fun, raunchy flick, and you’ll get exactly that.

In the case of FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS versus NO STRINGS ATTACHED, FRIENDS wins. The characters are more real and personable, the script is clever and funny, and most of all, I enjoyed my time more.

Rating: 8/10 – FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS succeeds in presenting two immensely likable characters accomplishing the impossible: making us believe in this scenario, these characters, and their words with absolute conviction. Loads of fun, don’t miss.

29 July 2011

Captain America: The First Avenger

Starring Chris Evans, Hugo Weaving, Tommy Lee Jones, Hayley Atwell, Stanley Tucci, Dominic Cooper, Sebastian Stan
Script by Christopher Markus & Stephen McFreely
Directed by Joe Johnston
Release: 22 July 2011
Marvel Studios, 124 mins., Rated PG-13

Plot: Scrawny, shorty Steve Rogers is selected to be the first Super Soldier to win WWII, but ends up facing an enemy far more powerful than they realized.

Captain America is The Man. He’s the character who represents what it means to be a hero. He epitomizes patriotism – the little man who wants nothing more than to fight for his country, to fight for freedoms and liberties, to stand up against bullies, and to show the red, white, and blue in a funny outfit that just might outfunny Superman’s. Captain America is Steve Rogers, a dude who physically is no way capable of being in a battlefield, let alone leading men. He is courageous, generous, polite, stubborn, and full of vigor to fight the good fight when necessary. Unfortunately, Captain America is also a bit of a one-note character that doesn’t lend himself to be all that interesting. Amazingly, director Joe Johnston and the (probably) many writers onboard crafted a film that – although not great by any means – is more entertaining than it has any right to be.

Right off the bat, I gotta say, Chris Evans did a wonderful job. He embodies Steve Rogers so freakin’ well, it’s a bit weird. Unlike Ryan Reynolds who is able to bring his trademark wisecracks but not fully capable of embodying Hal Jordan, Evans is perfectly able to indulge in his brilliant comic timing (when applicable; the funny is far and few in between) all the while completely being Steve Rogers. A while ago an little something like that would have gone unnoticed by me; guess that goes to show that GREEN LANTERN did make a impression – just not the right one. Anywhoozles, I suggest the casting directors on these Marvel films need raises – there has been some spot on casting 1999: the X-MEN movies, Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Hemsworth and his six pack, Sam Jackson, and now Chris Evans. There’s a lot of brilliance going on behind the Marvel film department. Another standout performance, thanks to a standout, powerful female character is the gorgeous Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter, Rogers’ love interest and basically boss. Here the infatuation between both parties feels organic instead of the contrived “I wanna hump you!” vibe you get from Natalie Portman’s lustful glances at Thor. Ms. Atwell, and Ms. Carter by extension, are great additions to the movie, and are just as strong and memorable as a Super Serum mascot.Just as great but used less is Tommy Lee Jones who can do this military role sleepwalking, but surprisingly seems to be having a bit of fun with it. At the very least, it’s Jones that delivers the best lines of the film.

The action scenes are wonderfully done. Around the hour mark Steve goes behind enemy lines to liberate some military hostages, and it’s a thrilling sequence as the facility starts to explode around him. We’re also treated to a montage of Captain America fights as he gains popularity among the U.S. military and strikes fear for the German and Hydra division. Sure, I wouldn’t have minded a bit more exploration in Steve’s missions, but I’m satisfied enough with what we were given. The final fight between Steve and Red Skull is also impressive(ish), sorta coming off INCEPTION like as the two punch each other around a descending ship. Ultimately there just isn’t enough action beats in the movie.

Which is a weird thing to say cos I really liked the first 30 minutes of build up to Steve becoming all Super Serumed. I enjoyed seeing the digital small Chris Evans (which really wasn’t all that distracting) get his face punched in and not back away from a fight, or mumble when talking to a gorgeous military woman, or be all ‘I don’t like bullies’ to Dr. Abraham Erskine (Tucci). All that stuff was good; the perfect amount of time spent on setting up Rogers and Howard Stark and Erskine’s Super Soldier genetics. And then I absolutely loved when Captain America became basically a war publicity whore – thrown out there to big crowds to encourage civilians to support the war monetarily, or have some movies based off his character as he kicks some Nazi ass. Having the Captain do this with his abilities first, before becoming the hero we all know about, was genius, and one of the best parts of the movie.

The best part of the movie is right after Steve gets imbued with his new powers, and the movie – highly immersed in the sort of grandiose 1940s/1950s action movies – cultivates the clichéd and contrived dramatic beat of the bad guy throwing a kid off a building or something, but this time the bad guy throws the kid into the water. It’s used time and time ago, cos of course Batman or whoever is gonna let the bad guy go so he can catch the kid. But CAPTAIN AMERICA has a clever script. Rogers looks to the water and the kids says, “Go get him! I can swim!” Motherfrakking brilliant, and the biggest laugh of the movie.

Just to make a quick note: concerning rewatch value, I saw CAPTAIN AMERICA twice in one week. With the exception of the great hostage rescue action piece, and the montage of the Captain in battle, the film actually was a bit boring. Not even Hugo Weaving’s amusing German accent was enough to fully sustain my interest. It’s unfortunate, especially considering the enormous rewatchability of THOR’s messed up family dynamic, or IRON MAN’s drunken hero.
In the end, CAPTAIN AMERICA is worth seeing. Of course it is, if you’re following the Marvel superhero films. As has been noted on nearly every site, this is the last flick before Joss Whedon delivers THE AVENGERS to the world next May, so attendance feels basically mandatory. As a standalone movie, THE FIRST AVENGER surprisingly works quite well. The nods to the past (THOR) and future (AVENGERS) is nicely balanced without one element overshadowing another, and the film definitely has its own legs. Ultimately it’s not my favorite production from Marvel Studios, but that is truthfully no fault to the writers, directors, actors, etc. It’s just that Captain America, the character, just ain’t interesting enough. Or at the very least, extend the runtime to allow us more Steve Rogers in the suit. All that said, hopefully Joss can infuse some dimension into the character. After all, Rogers is thrown into an entirely new environment as the film closes, so Joss has more to work with than the writers here. But all in all, complaints aside, I enjoyed my time.

One last comment: why the hell do the world-ending missiles HAVE to be labeled? “New York”. “Berlin”. Mega Facepalm.

Rating: 7/10 = As a pre-AVENGERS flick, it’s a must see, and although everyone involved in this production quite obviously love the material and put their best work into it, the titular hero just doesn’t grab the viewer enough.

06 July 2011

Transformers: Dark of the Moon [3D]

Starring Shia LaBeouf, Josh Duhamel, John Turturro, Tyrese Gibson, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Patrick Dempsey, Kevin Dunn, Julie White, John Malkovich, Frances McDormand, Leonard Nimoy
Written by Ehren Kruger
Directed by Michael Bay
Release: 29 June 2011
Paramount, 155 mins., Rated PG-13

Plot: An Autobot spacecraft landed in the moon years ago, now its contents will bring about worlds end.

July 2007, Michael Bay “wowed” and amazed me with TRANSFORMERS, the first film of the franchise based off a successful Hasboro action figure line and animated television series. That movie was so beautifully crafted, after each viewing, I wouldn’t be opposed to another. The entire movie flew past me as a young and impressive Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox ran from giant digital robots that by no means looked or felt digital; for all I knew (if I didn’t know better), Michael Bay and producer Steven Spielberg were given tips from the government about an authentic alien species that scans earthbound technology (in this case, cars) and adapts. Haters can hate all they want, but absolutely nothing will break my unabashed and boundless affection for that first movie. It was, in a world, (bloody) fantastic.

Obviously, high expectations for the sequel, TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN. A great first film, and the trailers for part two promised a darker picture with a interesting scenario, loads of action, and a revenge plot (and occasional readers of this blog will recognize my love for revenge plots), I went into the midnight showing hoping to be wowed. In some cases I was, but my enjoyment was skewered by the presence of two utterly obnoxious Autobots that despite my best wishes never fell in battle, an unfortunate and unnecessary shot of John Turuto’s ass that I will never fully eviscerate from my memory, and perhaps a too convoluted script for its own good. There are still parts of ROTF that I love and watch frequently (especially the scenes with Sam’s parents, which are always priceless), but the movie itself, frankly didn’t meet the possibly momentous expectations from the first one. Although there is a definite feeling of letdown, I try not to be too hard on it; the film is, after all, a casualty of a Writer’s Strike, leaving the producers and director a detailed outline more than a script. So with a lackluster sequel, and growing public distaste of Michael Bay reaching unprecedented proportions, TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON is hitting theaters with a rather weird position.

One, Michael Bay and company had to redeem themselves for a lackluster and misguided sequel, providing a movie that maintained the same fun and humorous vibe of the first one and insane action sequences from both while creating a good enough, uncomplicated story. Second, audiences are (or rather now, were) rather skeptical about venturing into a third after the dismal second, and with the eye-candy of Ms. Fox gone, would the power of robots battling each other still be appealing to a wide demographic? Third, this is more than likely the last film for its big name stars – Shia, Josh, Bay – so DOTM had to deliver a satisfying enough conclusion to their character arcs and say adieu to the visual aesthetic Michael has cemented in the cinematic TRANSFORMERS world.It delights me to grin-fully say that TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON is a worthy sequel. There’s intense, insane, awesome action scenes that only Mr. Bay could realize so beautifully; there’s the perfect balance of comedy, drama, action, and story; and above all, DOTM was enormously fun. ROTF had plenty of fun, but its problems were quite apparent and ultimately sucked one out of the viewing experience; DOTM has no such problems [although I was petrified by John Malkovich’s orange-looking face, like something out of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3]. The movie fulfills the Autobots vs. Decepticons expectations by giving us an epic, Apocalyptic storyline where it truly is a lethal, kill-or-be-killed environment. It gives our characters plots that make them absolutely integral to the story, and ultimately integral to the success or failure of saving the planet. Even Sam’s sexy galfriend Carly eventually becomes more than eye candy, making a choice that has some predictable and surprising consequences. Point is, if this is Bay and Shia’s last film, and maybe even the final TRANSFORMERS production (unlikely that may be), they couldn’t have closed the series better.

Well, sure, they could. Maybe something more conclusive than this, but, um, what should be taken away from this is that they did good.

Now, by this point I’ve seen DARK OF THE MOON twice, and its 155 minute running time had diverse effects both times. The very first midnight screening last week, every second was spectacular and the film flowed very well. I wasn’t antsy, I wasn’t disinterested, and I felt no compulsion to find out what’s going on in the world of Facebook. In a word, I had a blast. Weirdly, my second time wasn’t as fun. Perhaps it was the circumstances: a sore throat, sucky back, there/not there headache, but DOTM sure as hell felt as long as it was. Sure, the jokes were still funny, and the visuals are possibly the best in the business – no denying that – but the film seemed to drag. Thing is, though, reviewing the scenes and events of the film, what on earth could Bay have cut? Yes, there were lots of comic scenes that, in theory, could be cut without losing necessities of plot, but it wouldn’t be a TRANSFORMERS movie without those comedic scenes/elements; it’s half the charm of the trilogy. So part of me wants to complain about the movies length, but in retrospect, I honestly don’t know what to cut. They could condense the plot down to the bare minimum, but it also wouldn’t be a TRANSFORMERS flick without all those obstacles Sam and the girlfriend face.

Anyway, running time aside, DARK OF THE MOON works. It nearly redeems the mistakes of REVENGE OF THE FALLEN, and it’s an absolute joyful time at the theater.Perhaps excited for his last adventure as Sam Witwicky, Shia LaBeouf is very much having a blast. He gets to make out with a Victoria Secret lingerie model, which I’m sure involves some hard acting, run fast through obliterated Chicago streets, get the crap beat out of him and dish it out as much as its thrown at him, and enjoy another verbal jest with his parents (or is it all ad-lib?). Whether he actually cares about the franchise or not, Shia has always delivered strong performances, I feel, and this is no exception. Furthermore, he is given a nice arc this time around, wanting to matter in the world again, not just be a regular Joe. After all, heReplacing Megan Fox after a heated quarrel shortly before or after the release of FALLEN where the actress was let go, Rose Huntington-Whiteley isn’t bad at all. Its obvious acting isn’t her strong suit – and indeed her beautiful British accent is heart-melting enough to nearly overshadow her flaws – but she fulfills the requirements of the role, and she does it well. Moreover, her character is stronger than Mikayela, more mature, confidant, and (occasionally) has some balls. As for the Megan Vs. Rose duel that’s been around since Whiteley’s casting, well, I guess I would favor Fox. Just got a thing for brunettes.
Patrick Dempsey stunned me with a far more complex character than I expected (though my expectations were targeting something near a MADE OF HONOR 2-quality), easily becoming one of the films acting highlights. Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson are obviously having a blast spouting off funny one-liners and shooting really big guns, and I love ‘em for it. The franchise, if it continues, won’t be the same without them…

<…nor would it be the same without Michael Bay, for that matter. His visual style, color timing, tone, and personality are all over these three films. Just imagine how utterly different the next flick would be under someone new, even if it’s Spielberg himself. Love the guy or hate him, the TRANSFORMERS trilogy is Bay’s directorial crowning achievement, I’d say (and this is without having seen THE ROCK), and it will/would be a odd experience watching TRANSFORMERS 4 without the Man Who Made it Possible. Just respect what the guy accomplished, is all.>

As for the special effects…well, what is there to say? Damn well perfect. The best of the business. Flawless. Detailed. Gorgeous. The special effects are to a point where those digital creations are no longer simply human generated Autobots or Decepticons, and the city destruction isn't manufactured from the mouse clicks of a pressed-down finger, but those Autobots and Decepticons and city destruction scenes are real and authentic feeling. It's amazing, really. The 3-D wasn’t bad, either.

[For those wondering how I’d rate the 3D flicks I’ve seen, here they be:

1. My Bloody Valentine
2. Avatar
3. Transformers: Dark of the Moon
4. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
5. The Final Destination

Bet you didn’t expect seeing a horror flick there, first (and last), eh?]
DARK OF THE MOON also features one of my favorite set pieces/scenes in any movie ever: the crumbling building scene. It’s not a spoiler, cos it’s featured in the trailer. I love, love, love, love, LOVE it when our heroes are trapped in a building that is about to go down, and Michael Bay did not disappoint at all in delivering an intense action piece. Lives are lost, crazy shit must be done to survive, and a collapsing building has never been more visually beautiful onscreen. It’s just so fun to watch the heroes figure out what to do next, and when they are sliding on the outside glass: holy freaking crap intensity, man! Basically, one of the best scenes of the series.

Maybe this being the last of the Bay TRANSFORMERS films he thought it best to go out with a bang, actor-wise, but there are so many people that make appearances that it became a fun game and surprise every time. Of course there’s Leonard Nimoy voicing Sentinel Prime, and at one point near the climax, a long-loved STAR TREK line is even freakin’ used. At the midnight theater I think only one other person laughed; it was depressing. Scott Krinsky, “Jeff” from the TV series CHUCK, shows up for one very memorable shot; mega extra Jesse Heiman (who you can also see near Jesse Eisenberg in THE SOCIAL NETWORK) walks behind Shia, looks at the camera, pauses for two seconds, and continues walking (!). It was the ultimate extra moment, man [if you want to know more, check out this brilliant video); Ken Jeong continues to seize his current famousness by showing up for a scene; and the awesome Alan Tudyk is given the opportunity to show off his unbelievable hilarious talent as John Turturro's bodyguard. Seeing who was in the movie was almost as fun as the film itself!

All in all, DARK OF THE MOON was a fun experience. Epic in scope, a lot happens in those 155 minutes which you’ll either be completely engaged in or a tad bit bored. This is the end of the world, giant robots style, and Sam Witwicky is the only one who has the balls to stop it. Next to Lennox, of course. The TRANSFORMERS films don’t desire the spite they’re given, and Bay deserves kudos for how far he pushes the envelope with action pieces and really freaking awesome cinematography. If this is the last of Bay and Shia, adios, sirs, you did great. Thanks for giving us three memorable action-packed movies that made me go “wow” again. Good luck on your next projects

For those few still deciding whether or not to see DARK OF THE MOON still, I say take the plunge. It’ll be worth it.

Rating: 9/10 = Redeems REVENGE OF THE FALLEN, and is a kickass, adrenaline-filled experience that will not disappoint.