Movie Reviews (Archived)
Blades of Glory
In Blades of Glory we have two male figure skaters played by Will Ferrell and Jon Heder. Will’s character is an oversexed, womanizing sort and Heder … is the exact opposite. They’re two of the best in the world, but through a series of circumstances I won’t spoil, they are banned from men’s competition and they soon lose all purpose in life. However, after discovering a loophole in the rules, they return as the sport’s first male pairs’ figure skaters.
The movie is absolutely ridiculous, but I laughed all the way through it. The gag overshadows any real storyline, though they tried to make the progression of Ferrell and Heder hating each other to working as a cohesive team as fluid as possible. This isn’t an instant-classic like Anchorman or as funny as Old School, and Ferrell’s shtick is a little worn out with this particular character, but, like I said, it did have some funny moments that made it easy to overlook the film’s shortcomings.
Hot FuzzBrought to you by the same blokes who gave you Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz is the same brand of humor, though it parodies a different genre.
Hot Fuzz is about a workaholic London police officer who makes his department look so bad because they can’t keep up with his arrests that they send him off to a quaint little village where, supposedly, nothing ever happens.
Well, as you probably figured, there is more to this village than there seems and when gruesome murders occur, our hero won’t rest until he gets to the bottom of it.
Hot Fuzz, like Shaun of the Dead, is considered a comedy, but there are very few “laugh out loud” moments. You’ll find yourself more amused than anything, and I don’t mean that to sound like it’s a bad thing. And, just as Shaun of the Dead parodied the zombie movie, Hot Fuzz parodies all the super-cop buddy movies. I think if you liked Shaun of the Dead, you’ll probably enjoy Hot Fuzz, though the novelty has worn off with their latest offering. If you didn’t like Shaun of the Dead, I doubt if you’ll sit through Hot Fuzz and its two-hour running time.
Oh, one more thing. I am ecstatic to report that Hot Fuzz has Timothy Dalton as part of its cast, and it’s the first time I’ve ever enjoyed watching him in a movie. He’s hilarious (but not in a “laugh out loud” sort of way).
The Bourne UltimatumHUGE Bourne fan! HUUUUGE! That said, The Bourne Ultimatum wasn’t quite as good as the first two, and I’ll tell you why (without spoilers), but it’s still better than most of what’s out there.
The good—awesome, awesome, awesome action sequences. Incredible stuff. Damon is as intense as ever. The locations are still gorgeous and realistic. While there are obviously special effects, none of it seemed so outlandish that it couldn’t happen in real life. Sure, Bourne must have nine lives, but it’s not like someone couldn’t survive all the car crashes and such. Not likely, but also not impossible.
The bad—I had a headache when I saw it with my wife, and the shaky-cam shooting style got a little nauseating. Literally. But, that’s my fault, not the movie’s. We finally get some answers about Jason Bourne, and they can’t help but be a bit anti-climatic. We so love our mystery men, and once they cease to be a total mystery, they get a little bit more like us, and let’s face it, most of us are kind of boring. Furthermore, I really miss Bourne’s love interest, Marie. Without her, I think an important component of Jason Bourne is missing, and he’s less relatable as a result.
So, in summation, while I loved the action, Damon’s acting, and the locations, I just didn’t care about the plot of The Bourne Ultimatum, and the plot is the soul of any movie.
The Simpsons MovieI should establish that while I occasionally enjoy watching the TV show, I am not a die-hard Simpsons fan. I probably haven’t seen even a third of their total shows, so when the movie came out, I thought it looked pretty funny, but I was a bit concerned it’d be so convoluted in its own history with in-jokes and show references that I wouldn’t know what in the world was going on (i.e. Harry Potter movies).
I’m happy to report that my concerns were unfounded.
Yesterday was our third anniversary, and so we decided to check out The Simpsons Movie basically because nothing else looked good. We both initially thought we’d probably see it on DVD, but, hey, when you want to see a movie, you want to see a movie, right?
We both laughed nonstop through the entire thing. Some of it was highbrow humor, most of it was lowbrow humor, but all of it was funny, and that’s all we wanted. Most Americans know all they need to know about the Simpsons before going into the film. Even if you don’t watch the show regularly, you likely know Homer’s an idiot, Bart’s a hellion, Marge is a loving mom and caring wife, Lisa’s a responsible activist, and Maggie’s a … well, a baby. And even if you didn’t know this, it’s quickly made apparent.
Most surprising of all was the fact that it had a coherent plot with actual foreshadowing and character development. I didn’t require such things for this particular movie, but it was a nice surprise. I figured it would simply be a series of gags, one bit after the other, but they actually had a storyline that made sense!
All in all, this was definitely worth seeing on the big screen, and I really felt like we got our money’s worth.
Reno 911!: MiamiI’m a big fan of the television show on Comedy Central. My wife and I love it. Unfortunately, as so often is the case, the TV show didn’t translate well to the big screen.
In thirty minute episodes of the television program, we are privy to several “calls” where the sheriff’s department can run up against just about anything. And, if the scene isn’t going particularly well from a comedic standpoint, you don’t have to wait long for a shift in setting and a new “call” that is funny. And, by the end of the show, a plot line with an actual conclusion has somehow emerged amidst all the zaniness.
The movie, however, tried to run one coherent storyline with a few of the smaller “on a call” scenes. Reno 911!: Miami simply doesn’t work in this format. Yes, there were some genuinely funny scenes, but nothing compared to the television show. The storyline felt forced and drawn out, and, honestly, wasn’t really that funny or entertaining. Everything felt big, over produced, and murky.
Furthermore, half of what I love so much about the TV shows are the recurring criminals the sheriff’s department have to corral. We only got one of them in the movie, and he didn’t play a large role at all. And without the actual city of Reno, Nevada, much of the allure of this series disappears.
Finally, I’m not afraid of a little controversy or bawdiness, but this thing was raunchy. I didn’t understand why we had to have a prolonged scene of almost all of the Reno sheriff’s department masturbating. Granted, a few seconds might have been funny, but the scene was way too long and a bit too detailed, which, in essence, sums up the problem of the entire movie. It’s also hilarious to hear all the beeps canceling out the profanity on the TV show, but when you hear the actual cursing in the movie, not so funny anymore. Just a bit gratuitous.
My suggestion, rent the instant-classic television shows on DVD, avoid the movie.
Harry Potter and the Order of the PhoenixPrepare yourself for the ultimate sacrilege. I’ve read none of the Harry Potter books. Zero. Zilch. Nada. So therefore, all of my working knowledge of the boy wizard comes from my wife, who’s a big fan of the books, and the movies.
I’ll be honest. I didn’t care for the first three films. I’m not a big fan of movies starring young kids. However, the fourth film really impressed me and, while I was lost through most of it, I found it interesting and fun.
I wish I could say the same about The Order of the Phoenix.
This movie felt absolutely rushed and made little sense. I have no doubt that for those who read the books it was amazing, nor am I telling those people that they are wrong. However, for the movie audience who haven’t read the books, this thing was rather boring and seemed to go nowhere. The ending was probably one of the most anticlimactic conclusions I’d seen in some time, even if it is supposed to lead to a sixth.
Now, just let me say this: It is not the fault of the actors. The kids do a great job, the grown-ups even better. Very good acting, indeed. But, somewhere along the way, the powers-that-be decided the Harry Potter movie franchise would be solely aimed at the book audience, and so while portions of the 800-page books are left out, the book audience is able to fill in those gaps. The movie audience is not. And considering that half the world reads the books, this is probably a smart decision by the powers-that-be.
And so, in summation, I didn’t really like the movie. From what my wife tells me about the book, it could have been super cool. The whole concept of the plot in the book is riveting, and judging from how much my wife liked the movie, that came across to the book readers. However, if the movie stood alone, as it does for one such as me, it lacked any soul of its own, and it really wasn’t very fun at all.
For the non-book readers, there was very little movie magic.
Transformers
Before we begin, let’s just get one thing straight—this movie is based on a toy line from well over twenty years ago.
A TOY LINE.
So, if you’re going into this movie expecting Citizen Kane or The Godfather, please, think again. If there’s one thing that drives me crazy, it’s people dissecting summer blockbuster action movies like they’re art house films. They’re not. And Transformers is as big of a summer blockbuster action movie as you’re going to get. And it’s based on a toy line. Repeat: a toy line.
That said, this baby actually was much better than I anticipated. While the plot was just the sort of thing you’d expect to keep the action going full throttle without any speed bumps (like coherence), there were actually some very strong attempts at giving each human character a very distinct personality. I actually was surprised by the charm and charisma of Shia LaBeouf who definitely gave this film its heart and soul. Shia’s parents were a riot, and appearances by legitimate actors like Jon Voight and John Turturro gave the film some acting credence it didn’t really need—but I like the effort. Bernie Mac also makes a hilarious appearance.
But, let’s get to what this movie was really about—Transformers. They were awesome! I have no idea what a robot turning into a car would actually look like, but what I saw in the movie seemed pretty spot on. Moreover, I love the fact that the robots were actually to scale. Meaning, if a robot turns into an eighteen-wheeler, when that baby stands upright it’s going to be pretty big. Bumblebee, coupled with Shia, stole the movie by far (as I’m sure they were intended to), but nothing beat Optimus Prime voiced by Peter Cullen, the guy who did it back in the cartoon from the eighties.
Somehow, the digital artists made these robots fit seamlessly into the scenes with the live actors. It honest to God looked like they were really acting alongside the real folks. That sort of stuff can drive me crazy if it looks fake and I usually have a good eye for it, but they passed with flying colors.
Now, I realize the old schoolers out there are upset about the modifications made to their favorite cartoon characters, and to them I say, “Get over it.” It’s a movie based on a toy line. While they didn’t resemble their former cartoon selves in the least, the upgrades were necessary for the complex age we live in. And I have to say, those freaky robots honestly looked like they could turn into something. There were layer-upon-layer of gizmos and parts on them that were always spinning or percolating; it was visually most impressive. I will give the haters one inch, though, it got kind of hard to tell everybody apart except for Optimus Prime (very blue) and Bumblebee (very yellow). All the rest, in robot form, sort of blended in with each other. Hard to tell the good buys from the bad.
I also thought it was sort of funny that there were only three female parts in this movie, and two of them were, as the kids would say, pretty smokin’. (The third role was Shia’s mom.) Most of the men, though, were fairly on the nerdy side. Funny, huh? Do the marketers know their target audience or what?
Finally, I appreciate a subtle, disciplined, contemplative film dealing with the nuances of the human condition, but sometimes I need those big summer ka-boom action movies. Transformers director Michael Bay is the Leonardo da Vinci of over-the-top action movies, especially the summer blockbuster variety. I mean, this guy brought us The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and Bad Boys I and II. Oscar winners? Well, no; but they sure were fun to watch.
In summary, the Transformers looked awesome (if not always recognizable), the action was spectacular, the acting better than expected, the plot exactly-as-expected (but it kept the action going; it kept the action going), the humor surprisingly well placed, and the charisma of Shia LaBeouf proved a nice surprise (we’ll see more of him in the next installment of Indiana Jones). If you’re into this sort of movie, you will not go disappointed. But, for the love—try to remember: it’s based on a toy line. A TOY LINE!
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s EndSo, as most of you know, for ten months of the year I am a high school English teacher. This gives me great insight into many different aspects of life, including which movies are winning the admiration of youth culture.
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End did not score well. This initially confused me, because while I thought Dead Man’s Chest was entertaining, many high school students loved it with a passion I didn’t understand. So when they came in, some literally the next day, after seeing At World’s End and lamented the demise of their favorite movie franchise, I thought to myself, “Netflix.”
Fortunately for me, my wife and I wanted to go see a movie and At World’s End was about the only thing that stuck out to us. I’m glad it did. In my opinion, the professional critics and the more astute high school students were wrong. At World’s End was wonderful.
I liked everything about this movie. The special effects were the best yet, the acting was fun to watch (especially Depp’s, whose return to quirkiness with Captain Jack was much needed), and, most importantly, the story finally made sense and wrapped up many plotlines.
We finally get to see something relatively interesting done with Orlando Bloom’s character, Will Turner; Bill Nighy’s Davy Jones turns out to be far more complex than anyone imagined; Geoffrey Rush’s Captain Barbossa is a flat-out joy to watch; and the Keith Richards’ cameo was instant-classic. The movie had action, humor, character development (finally!), and some dramatic gravitas (not so much to ruin the fun tone, though). Really, for me, At World’s End captured everything I enjoyed about its two predecessors, and truly felt like a continuation and conclusion of those two other films.
One major complaint I heard from the critics was that there was simply too much going on, and yes, there were several plotlines being dealt with, but I never thought it was too convoluted to enjoy. Be aware, however, that I wasn’t holding it accountable for much. In my mind, this is a fun summer movie based on a Disney attraction, so I made sure simply to enjoy the ride. Were there some aspects I didn’t totally understand? Yeah, but I got the overall idea. It certainly didn’t ruin my viewing experience.
All in all, I thought it had the fun of the first one with a far more complex treatment of storyline and character. Best of all, it concluded all the plots that had been introduced in the other films, ended very symmetrically with the beginning of The Curse of the Black Pearl, and even left itself open to some interesting possible sequels.
Which reminds me—make sure you sit through the credits.
Pan’s Labyrinth First of all, we just have to establish that Guillermo Del Toro is one of the best directors in the business. Not one of the best international directors—one of the best directors. The movies that I’ve seen from him always overflow with richness and style. It’s obvious he treats his craft as an art.
That said, let’s talk about Pan’s Labyrinth. I have to admit, judging from the trailers, I thought this was going to be a fantasy-laden film. Pan’s Labyrinth was anything but. There were some moments where our young main character, Ofelia, interacted with the fantastic, but the vast majority of the movie is set in a very real and very violent world.
This very real and very violent world is set in the Spanish countryside of 1944. Ofelia and her mother are on their way to live with a captain responsible for eradicating a group of resistance fighters hiding in the woods. The captain is not Ofelia’s true father, but the baby within her mother’s womb is the result of his advances. It’s obvious very early on that the real monster in this movie in the captain, and I think the theme may be that there is more horror in real life than any fantasy we may take part in.
I remember reading some were disappointed that Pan’s Labyrinth dealt more with Ofelia’s mother, the captain, and the resistance fighters than with the fantasy elements of the film, and while this surprised me as well, it did not make me like the film any less. In fact, the tension of this violent and horrific camp had me on the edge of my seat the entire film. But, be aware, if you’re looking for a fantasy romp, I’d say only fifteen percent of the movie takes place in Ofelia’s fantasy world.
And that brings up another point. The story lends itself greatly to the idea that perhaps the fantasy aspect is nothing more than the imaginings of a young girl. It’s very early established that Ofelia is one for fairy tales, and given the fact that she is browbeaten by the captain upon their introduction, it’s not hard to believe that she develops a safety zone for her to retreat within. I may be alone in this thinking, however.
Be aware, also, that while this is a violent film, actual scenes depicting violence are far and few between. But, when those moments are displayed, watch out, they are very graphic and very authentic. But again, I think this may be a message that violence in the real world is worse than any scary make-believe story. It reminds me of a man I once knew, who, upon discovering my superstitions, told me he has enough things to fear in the real world without worrying about a ghost showing up in his house. Wise words.
I definitely recommend this movie. I thought the English subtitles would bother me, but in fact they did not, and, if anything, I think it made me appreciate the subtle body language of the actors all the more. It’s just a beautiful film with a potent message. Give it a view.
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
There are some fanatical Fantastic Four comic book fans out there, and you’ll have to take into consideration that I’m not one of them. I always found them a little lame, and yes, I have been browbeaten on a regular basis by people trying to convince me of the errors of my ways.
That said, I really enjoyed the first Fantastic Four movie. In know, go figure. I thought it was lighthearted with some cool special effects. Not all comic book movies have to be grim and gritty, right? I knew the Fantastic Four were a family, and I thought the first movie really captured the essence of that dynamic.
So when I saw the trailers for Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, I thought it looked pretty cool. Again, I’m not a huge Silver Surfer fan. I never got why a cosmic entity rode a surfboard through the cosmos. Anyway, when I saw the Human Torch chasing the Silver Surfer through the streets of New York, I decided this was one of the few summer movies I absolutely HAD to see in the theater.
Well, I saw the flick today and I’ve got some good news and bad news.
The good news—it was a pretty good movie. What I liked about the first one continued in the second: funny dialogue, interesting character interaction, and nifty special effects. The Silver Surfer looked (no pun intended) out of this world.
The bad news—you’ve already seen all the best parts of this movie in the trailers. Literally. I get pretty upset when the studios do this sort of thing. As an author, I understand the importance of building buzz in the hopes of capturing an audience before release, but this was just ridiculous. I pretty much saw the whole movie in the trailers that were put out over the last few months. Bummer.
Then what finally got my undies in a bunch is that fact that—
**MINOR SPOILER WARNING, PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK**
—after many, many promises by the execs and creators of the film, the actual figure of Galactus made no appearance at all. There were grave concerns that he was nothing more than the cloud of dust shown in the previews, but the creators swore the audience would not be disappointed, Galactus would appear in all his glory.
Not so.
He was just a big dust cloud. Impressively executed, but we did not see the figure made famous Marvel Comics. I’m not even a rabid Fantastic Four fanboy, and I was pretty miffed they cheated me out of my Galactus fix. I can only imagine what the die-hards are saying.
All in all, fun movie, the Silver Surfer rocks, no Galactus, and you’ve already seen the best action sequences.
p.s. If Galactus appeared after the credits or something, would somebody tell me so I don’t feel like a moron? Thanks.
Ghost Rider
I am all for movie studios going hog wild with comic book properties. Most of these characters have literally decades of stories to pull from, so the quality content is there. Most of them are visually stimulating because of the nature of their genre. And most of them, no matter how far down the echelon from Superman or Spiderman, have an interesting story about why they do what they do.
However, the danger of the comic book movie is ample. For one, if the moviemakers do not truly understand who the character is and who the potential audience is, we have an impending disaster on our hands. Secondly, you cannot take a comic book movie too seriously if you’re the moviemaker; but on the other hand, you also cannot treat it as irrelevant and laughable. Thirdly, you must, must, must avoid all the clichés that we expect in a comic book movie, because what is written in print and drawn on the page does not always translate to living actors and moving pictures. And finally, you absolutely positively do NOT have to give us an origin story to make us understand the character’s motivations. Origin stories are overrated and becoming more so with every comic book movie released.
Okay, so after all that, Ghost Rider wasn’t terrible. It also wasn’t good. It was both good and terrible. It was both terrible and good.
They totally nailed the “look” of the Ghost Rider. They also got his bike one hundred percent right. Homeruns on those accounts.
But, they only had one person who could act in the movie, and that was Nic Cage. And, as much as I love quirky Nic Cage, the director needed to reel him in a few times. Everyone else’s acting was clichéd out the wazoo and difficult to watch.
At times the look and the tone of the film were perfect for a movie about “the Devil’s bounty hunter,” but then it did not keep that look and tone consistently. The director (who also directed Daredevil, a movie I liked very much despite its flaws) simply seemed to lose track of what kind of movie he wanted to make. Was this an origin movie? Sort of. It starts with a young Johnny Blaze, but then it jumps twenty years to a thirty-sevenish Nic Cage as Johnny Blaze. And then the progression continues with plots from twenty-years ago. Why give us the literal footage of Johnny Blaze as a youngster? In my mind, they wasted about twenty-five minutes of my time.
And this is what finally irritates me about comic book movies when done poorly. Every single comic book movie does not have to literally show us the origin of the character. The audience can connect the dots. I don’t know about you, but if I’m going to see a comic book movie, I don’t want to wait forty-five minutes to see the comic book character. I want the movie starting out with a great sequence of that character, and if you want to drop some dialogue or give us some QUICK flashbacks of an origin, fine—just don’t make it an origin film.
Wow, I’ve really gone on a rant. Sorry about that.
Ghost Rider. Sometimes great, mostly bad. Cool costumes, cool special effects, some cool locations, but the acting is bad, the story is downright awful, and it generally couldn’t decide what it wanted to be other than a cesspool of comic book clichés.
The Fountain
A beautiful film—absolutely beautiful.
Please, if you watch this, you must approach it with an open mind and look at it as a work of art, for like any other work of art, it leaves you with plenty of opportunity to interpret it in a variety of ways and requires more than a little mental interaction. Rarely have I seen a film where the visual consistency and mindfulness of aesthetics so prominently played a role in the unfolding of the story.
Be warned, however. This is not a movie to sit down with a bag of popcorn and have a good time. This is an artistic statement worthy of study and contemplation. I have a great deal of trouble envisioning someone in the hopes of simple escapism sitting through The Fountain because it really is fairly demanding. But I hope you’ll believe me when I say it is most rewarding if you commit to letting it unfold without judgment. Let it finish before you make up your mind. Like most anything of value, it must be reflected upon as a unified whole, and trust me, you’ll find yourself thinking about it long after the initial viewing.
Just beautiful.
Smokin’ Aces
Okay, I waited quite a while for this baby to come in through my Internet rental provider, so I had rather high hopes. My mistake.
I equate this movie to the empty calories of your favorite junk food. Oh, so very yummy, but usually leaves you worse off than you were before. Could I take my eyes off of it? No. Did it have anything of value to add to the art of moviemaking in any way, shape or form? No.
Even so, I hate to admit it, but I still enjoyed watching it. Gratuitous violence, extreme profanity, a plot with so many holes a mouse would think he’d died and gone to Mouse-Heaven, and acting that would put Halle Berry’s performance in Catwoman to shame, God love me, I still enjoyed watching it. Oh, what is happening to me?
On a high note, though, Jason Bateman, for the full three minutes of screen time he got, totally rocked! Love the Bateman!
So, if you like Pulp Fiction without the craftsmanship, Smokin’ Aces is right up your alley.
Spider-Man 3
(I’m almost sure there are no spoilers in this review, but read at your own risk.)
From the get-go, I thought Spider-Man 3 looked a bit … crowded. I had no idea how they were going to incorporate new angles with Sandman, Venom, and Gwen Stacy, as well as follow up on logical story progressions with Peter Parker, Mary Jane, Harry Osborn, and Aunt May.
Well, in short, the movie lived up to my expectations … it was very crowded.
However, that’s not to say that I thought it was bad.
In fact, I really enjoyed it. It moved hyper-fast, with so much going on I literally had to stay on the edge of my seat to keep up with everything, but I did have a lot of fun watching it.
What I enjoyed the most was the superb acting, but that’s also what makes me the most regretful about Spider-Man 3. Any one of the film’s multiple plots could have been a very satisfying movie in and of itself.
James Franco has finally matured as an actor and I found his Harry Osborn both charming and utterly creepy. He really held his own with Maguire. I can’t say I cared for his Goblin outfit, but the conflict between the two characters easily could have made for a great film, especially with the chemistry between the two actors.
Thomas Haden Church, always wonderful, brought a depth and sensitivity to Sandman that I wouldn’t have thought possible. He instantly made me care about the character but his entire subplot was rushed and the audience was totally cheated from what also could have been a remarkable movie by itself. The Sandman effects, by the way, were out of this world.
Finally, I’m not a huge Venom fan. I’m not against the character, but I’d much rather see Spider-Man’s classic villains brought to celluloid life. That being said, I think Topher Grace did a magnificent job with the Eddie Brock character, and the visuals of Venom, while perhaps not everyone’s bag, were pretty disturbing and therefore fun. I’ve always thought of Grace on par with Maguire in terms of being squeaky-clean, so it was nice to see his arrogant and unlikable Eddie Brock. In my mind, Grace stole many of the scenes. That being said, the whole black suit/Venom angle could have been a move all by itself as well.
Instead, they mashed all three of these rich plots together into something that felt like Dr. Frankenstein had gotten into movie making. Spider-Man 3, while visually captivating and a true action movie, lacked all of the heart and characterization of Spider-Man 2, and lacked the sheer exuberance of Spider-Man 1.
Man, it really sounds like I didn’t like Spider-Man 3, doesn’t it? I honestly enjoyed it very much; I just would have liked to see each of these plots, and actors, given their due.
Children of Men
A more startling version of our apparently impending dystopian future I cannot imagine. Children of Men disturbed me greatly because it completely did not deviate from a very realistic, and some would say unavoidable, future.
The premise of Children of Men is masterful in its simplicity but the complications that arise are never-ending—the human race is no longer able to produce. Imagine a world where there are no children born anymore and it’s not hard to imagine a world without hope or reason for living.
I have to admit that much of this movie made absolutely no sense to me, but that in no way impeded my enjoyment. I actually believe the murkiness of some plot points served the audience better because, like many of the citizens in the setting, there is utter confusion and general uneasiness at every corner. For example, it never clearly explains why humanity cannot reproduce any longer. While it would have been nice to know, that makes the audience every bit as uncomfortable as the characters in the film. We don’t know any more than they do.
Children of Men stars Clive Owen, Michael Caine, and Julianne Moore, so as you can assume, the acting is superb. When a young pregnant woman shockingly appears, a terrorist group fighting for the rights of refugees who have fled to Great Britain enlist the aid of Clive Owen to help her reach the mysterious Human Project overseas. Again, nothing but the overall highlights of this plot are revealed, but like Owen, we don’t need to know the details. He just needs to keep himself and the last hope of humanity alive long enough for the first human to be born in eighteen years.
This movie is truly unsettling and very violent, but it will captivate your interest and, if you’re like me, you’ll still be thinking of it days later. I like to think this world of ours will one day become a peaceful utopia, but I’m truly afraid Children of Men may be what awaits us all.
Casino Royale
Okay, so as much as I enjoyed the previous James Bond movies, at no point did I actually think any of them (yes, ANY of them) had the sort of hand-to-hand combat abilities the characterization would lead you to believe. James Bond was supposedly a human weapon along with being a lady charmer, and while most of the actors pulled off the latter quite well, the former always left me a little … unsatisfied.
But hey, who cared, right? I mean, we had all those crazy gadgets! Sure, Roger Moore couldn’t throw a decent looking kick to save his life, but he had one tricked-out car! But I’m afraid even that got old. As our technology advanced in the real world, Bond’s gizmos didn’t seem so incredible anymore, and when they tried to up the ante on them, they just came out looking ridiculous (invisible car, anyone?).
As I saw it, they only had once choice. Get rid of the ludicrous weaponry and focus on the man. And in order to do that, they had to get a man. Not just a man who looked good in a tux, but a man who could actually make you believe he could kick your tail with virtually no effort at all.
Enter Daniel Craig.
I always liked this guy (see Layer Cake), and I knew they’d found the right Bond the moment they picked him. Bond was originally intended to be a bit of thug. Sure, the ladies loved him, but his attitude toward them was rather one-and-done. He was cold, calculating, and he didn’t mind spilling blood to get what he wanted. He had a license to kill, and he wasn’t afraid to use it. He’d been in some scraps, and his face showed the history of those fights.
With Casino Royale, that’s the Bond we get through Craig. The action is amazing, absolutely amazing, and it’s so amazing because it is mostly physical action. The near-opening scene will have your eyes bulging, and it’s mostly just a foot chase! Craig is truly an athlete with a physically superior body, just the sort of thing you would expect from a secret agent of Bond’s caliber.
Thankfully, the technological aspect to Bond was kept to a minimum and none of it seemed unrealistic or over-the-top. It still played a role, mind you, but nothing that makes you slap your forehead and yell, “You’ve got to be kidding!”
Yes, the story runs a little long, and yes, it gets more than a tad confusing at times, but who cares! I was mesmerized with Craig the entire time and the story, while certainly not mind-blowing, was more than entertaining. I actually found it surprising they took some time to lay some character groundwork for Craig to work with.
I realize I border upon hyperbole, but Casino Royale may just be my favorite Bond movie ever—EVER.
300
When I first saw the preview for 300 several months ago, I knew that this would be a film that would have the same impact upon the industry as did The Matrix and the original Star Wars. It looked so unlike anything else out there!
Guess what, folks? It finally came out last week, and it delivers. 300 was a visual feast from start to finish. Moreover, it was quite compelling!
Granted, I’m not going to say it will win any awards for story or acting, but I have to tell you, the acting was much better than I expected. Gerard Butler had me convinced he was King of the Spartans. That guy just seethed power and passion! Plus, it actually had much more story to it than I thought it would. Bonus, right? At no point did it feel drawn out or overextended, yet it still came in at feature-length.
I was a bit concerned going in because of Frank Miller’s connection to this film. Miller, who created the source material, is known for his gratuitous violence. I feared 300 would resemble Sin City in its ridiculously over the top displays of brutality. Anyone remember the scene where a man had his testicles pulled off in Sin City? Yeah, that’s when I decided that movie was not for me.
Not to worry, friends, while 300 was very vicious, the violence, like everything else in the movie, was so hyper-stylized that it at no point even resembled reality. I think that was a good call on the makers’ part.
Hyper-stylized—that’s how I would describe this film. Truly a joy to watch. Some people are complaining that its too testosterone-fueled, there’s too much yelling, too much machismo, but you want to know what I think? When done in such an interesting manner, I see nothing wrong with those things every once in a while. I mean, if you’re going to see an action movie, don’t you want action? Don’t you want fervor? I do. I was so in the moment, I didn’t even notice all the yelling. To me that means it must have fit perfectly within the scenes.
The director of 300 is supposedly in line to direct the film version of Watchmen. Let me just say that if he does half as good a job on Watchmen as he did with 300, I’ll be very happy indeed.
My only question is, where did those warriors in ancient Sparta get all the ab-rollers? Seriously, every dude in this movie had a sixteen-pack for a stomach.
Borat
I would have really enjoyed Borat had I not seen seventy-five percent of it already in the promotions. Even the majority of the extra footage had been aired, despite their claims.
Hey, I know, I know … I should have gone and seen it in the theater as soon as it came out. It’s my fault for waiting for it on DVD.
Even so, it still was pretty hilarious. Some of the scenes that weren’t appropriate for television were especially funny/disgusting.
If you like Borat, you’ll like this movie. If you don’t understand what he’s about and demand a tight plot, I think you’d rather watch something else.
Surprisingly, I Don’t Rave Reviews To Every Movie I See, and Here’s the Proof
I know it typically seems as though I write glowing reviews for a lot of movies. The fact of the matter is that, like all of us, my time is limited so I typically write only reviews for those movies I actually enjoyed. My wife and I watch many, many movies on DVD, so it’s hard for me to let you know about every single one of them, especially those that failed to move me in some way, shape, or form.
So, here it is! Here’s a list of all the movies I’ve seen in the last six months that I didn’t feel compelled to write a review on. Prepare for an onslaught of nastiness…
The Brother’s Grimm – Terrible acting, terrible story.
The Ice Harvest – Cusack usually good. Movie bad.
Corpse Bride – I actually enjoyed this one. Great animation with a fun premise. Burton is gold in my mind.
The Weather Man – Nothing special about it. At all.
Munich – I actually had to turn it off. I can take some violence, but this just got to be way too much for me. I understand violence is a part of our world, but I just wasn’t in the right frame of mind to watch this one.
Broken Flowers – Hate to admit it, but it bored me to death. Had to turn it off.
The Producers – Had to turn if off. Very, very annoying.
The New World – Bored me to tears. Didn’t watch the whole thing.
I Heart Huckabees – I actually loved this one. I sadly simply never found the time to write a review on it. Really good movie, but only if you’re into postmodernism and metafiction.
Fun With Dick and Jane – Run away from this movie as fast as you can … and don’t look back. I’ll be praying for you.
Ultimate Avengers 2 – About as good as the first one, and that’s not very good.
Date Movie – Utterly stupid and insipid.
Memoirs of a Geisha – I know I’m supposed to like it, but I found it very difficult to sit through.
The Da Vinci Code – A heartless copy of a fun book.
Stay – Darn it! I actually really liked this brain tease as well, I just never found the time! Rent this one if you get a chance, I thought it was very engaging and it had some excellent acting.
March of the Penguins – See Memoirs of a Geisha
The Invincible Iron Man – Vincible. Very vincible. (I’m pretty sure that’s not a word, but alas …)
Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut – If you’re that into Superman, you’ll get a kick out of this. It’s how the sequel was originally supposed to be, before director Donner got canned halfway through.
Lady in the Water – I won’t mention the director’s name because it’s obvious he’s in the business of promoting himself over his art and I’m not going to assist him what that, but let’s just say that this movie was wrong on every possible level. It’s one thing to subtly give yourself a quick shot on screen if you’re a director, it’s another to make yourself an integral part of the plot, especially when you act as well as my dog Lady, and she’s been dead for 27 years (true story).
Beerfest – I can’t very well chide this movie when I’m the one that sat through the whole thing, but I am not proud of that fact. If you’re actually drinking beer yourself, this will probably seem hilarious. If you’re sober and you like it … God help you.
Marie Antoinette – Again, visually interesting at times, but rather snore-inducing.
A Scanner Darkly – Crud! I really wanted to write an in-depth review on this one. Long story short, rent it if you’ve got nothing else to see. Kind of cool, kind of discombobulated, but definitely hard to take the eyes off of.
Okay, the bloodbath is over. Hope you enjoyed learning I, in fact, don’t like every single thing I see. Disagree with some of my choices? Feel free to sound off!
Stranger Than Fiction
I love metafiction when done correctly, and Stranger Than Fiction is a prime example of metafiction delivered well.
Metafiction is when the story has some element that is acutely aware it is a story or else there may be a work of fiction within the work of fiction; in other words, it goes beyond the normal structure and style of traditional fiction into some experimental realm. When executed soundly, metafiction can be thought provoking and illuminating. When delivered poorly, it can seem gimmicky and amateurish.
I’m happy to report that Stranger Than Fiction is absolutely a work of art and a success. In this film, Will Ferrel plays an IRS auditor named Harold Crick who begins to hear someone narrating his very life. He eventually realizes that he is the character in someone’s story and this someone is planning to kill him off at the end. Harold soon meets his author and tries to talk her out of killing him, but only after growing into a person he always wanted to be. I won’t spoil the ending for you, but let me say that I wanted Harold to live so desperately that I couldn’t stand it, yet I also knew that his death would be the death most of us would want (if not by old age, of course).
This all doesn’t sound like a work of art, does it? Trust me when I say it is. Unlike Jim Carrey’s many attempts, Will Ferrel skillfully pulls of a sensitive and understated role. You literally care about this man, and it is purely by Ferrel’s unassuming acting. I don’t want Ferrel to give up comedy, but it is nice to know can he play a role like this. There was a depth in his eyes I previously didn’t think existed.
This movie had me laughing as much as it had me fighting back tears, and I’m not a crier. I was most pleasantly surprised at how much I loved this movie. I strongly suggest you check it out.
On a side note, I bought the soundtrack to this film some weeks ago after hearing it was awesome. I didn’t care for it at the time, but now that I have the actual movie to associate with it, I love it! Isn’t that strange?
The Departed
My wife and I finally watched The Departed last night and all I can say is that it was an electrifying and outstanding movie. I initially was hesitant to watch it because I heard it was very violent, but the violence actually was neither terribly gratuitous nor gory. Still disturbing, mind you, but not in an over the top way.
The story itself was wrought with tension and very, very engaging. I literally did not know for sure what was going to happen next, and that was a nice feeling in today’s movie world. Though the film lasted two and a half hours, it flew by surprisingly fast.
The acting absolutely was superb and I am not exaggerating. Jack Nicholson made me laugh, he creeped me out, he made me feel sorry for him, he made me hate him. Matt Damon more than held his own and, while he still played the emotionally restrained type that is beginning to plague his career, he did a great job. DiCaprio has left behind his teen heartthrob image once and for all, and he truly shined as he gave us an emotional depth and complexity that made me thank God I wasn’t in his character’s shoes. Baldwin, while his part was smaller, was hilarious in a totally underplayed manner. The one who stole the show, though, was Mark Wahlberg. While his part also was rather small, he stole every, and I mean every, scene he was in. I will be rooting for him at tonight’s 79th Academy Awards for Best Supporting Actor.
I tell you, I hope Scorsese finally wins for Best Director. I believe this film easily could have been just another cops and robbers movie, but Scorsese made us care about each and every one of these guys, and that’s something special. I even wouldn’t be too upset if it beat out Little Miss Sunshine for Best Picture.
Hollywoodland
I’d heard this was a very good movie and, as it turns out, I heard right.
If you’re not familiar with the story of George Reeves, he is the man who played Superman in the old television series. I mean, the OLD television series from the fifties. Well, anyway, Reeves supposedly died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head because he was so distraught at the fact he’d been typecast as Superman and couldn’t find any other work once the series ended. However, there have been theories abound that he did not in fact commit suicide, he had actually been murdered.
Thus, in comes Hollywoodland. This movie deals with a private investigator, played by Adrien Brody, digging into the life of George Reeves, played by Ben Affleck, in order to find the true cause of the actor’s death. What he unearths is a longstanding affair with a studio executive’s wife played by Diane Lane. He also discovers that Reeves eventually left Lane’s character for a younger woman.
Of course, you’re seeing all the angles on how and why Reeves died. The only question is, does Brody’s character find the true cause of death?
At times this film is very difficult to follow because of some disjointed story elements as well as an affinity on the actors’ part for mumbling. However, overall, the plot is very good and the acting really is superb. Lane and Brody are always exceptional, but even Affleck, perhaps sensing urgency to prove himself, puts on a heck of a performance. He more than holds his weight with Lane, but his scenes with Brody, as you can imagine, are few.
I recommend this film.
The Illusionist
Everything about this movie worked, and I am not exaggerating when I say that you should make it a priority to see it as soon as possible.
Ed Norton stars as an illusionist, a man who makes the seemingly impossible possible. Jessica Biel is a duchess and childhood love interest who currently finds herself locked into an undesirable relationship with a crown prince. When the two happen across one another during one of Norton’s shows, the real conflict of this story begins. How can they get away from the murderous crown prince and start a life together?
The always-superb Paul Giamatti plays the police inspector who is reluctantly the crown prince’s lackey and responsible for bringing down Ed Norton’s character after Norton makes the crown prince look like a fool in a variety of ways.
I believe Ed Norton to be one of the world’s most underrated actors and he truly shines in this film. He exudes confidence and genius just millimeters below a humble and patient exterior, and even when his story seems to be at an all-time low, in the back of your mind you still have perfect faith that he will win out in the end.
Jessica Biel’s character, sadly, could have been played by anyone and while she is a true beauty, I don’t feel she brought anything original to the table. Of course, when you’re playing opposite Norton and Giamatti, it’s hard to shine. I do respect her decision to take part in such a potentially intimating film. Thank goodness she’s moving way from films like Blade: Trinity and Stealth.
Speaking of Giamatti, he is beyond fantastic. Like Norton, the audience senses so much of who his character truly is with his subtle facial expressions, sighs, and grunts. Giamatti does his best acting without uttering a single line, and the scenes with both he and Norton together were a true joy to behold.
Set in Vienna around the time when the nineteenth century gave way to the twentieth, the film’s costumes and cinematography are mesmerizing and inspiring. Some people feel the story has supernatural elements, but I believe Norton’s character was such a master illusionist that everything he did had a very scientific explanation, though some of you may be bothered by the fact that, like any good magician, his secrets remain largely unrevealed. For me, the story became a bit predictable in the last third of the film, but I was more than able to cast that aside and simply enjoy a riveting and magical experience.
Next time you rent or buy a DVD, I suggest you put this one on the top of your list.
Little Miss Sunshine
If you haven’t watched this movie, you have no idea what you are missing.
The plot is rather simple: a father who is a failure at motivational speaking discovers that his daughter believes she has a great shot at winning the Little Miss Sunshine pageant. Because of circumstances you’ll discover in the movie, the father, his wife, his wife’s brother (who recently attempted suicide, played by a surprisingly low-key Steve Carrel), his father (a drug user, but lovable nonetheless), his wife’s son (who has taken a vow of silence), and their young daughter load up in an old, decrepit van and make their way across the country, all in the hopes that they’ll be taking home the title of Little Miss Sunshine.
Of course, the family interaction is the heart of this movie, especially because we have several very complicated characters who only grow in their complexity as the movie progresses. Sometimes this movie is gut-busting funny, sometimes it is heartbreaking, and that is what I love so much about it.
Again, I cannot recommend Little Miss Sunshine highly enough.
You, Me and Dupree
Those of you who have been with me for a while know that I’m a big Owen Wilson fan. I really like more of his eccentric Zoolander, Royal Tenenbaums, and Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou stuff, but I also enjoy his good-buddy stuff like Wedding Crashers, I Spy, and Starsky and Hutch.
You, Me and Dupree definitely fits into the latter category with Wilson playing the thirty-something friend who refuses to grow up. Of course, when Dupree hits an all-time low, just-married buddy Matt Dillon allows him to move in with he and his new wife played by Kate Hudson.
For the first half of the movie we get some pretty by-the-numbers stuff with typical loser-guy and responsible-guy humor. However, the movie really begins to pick up speed toward the end and the Dupree character becomes much more rounded, and therefore engaging.
By no stretch of the imagination would I say this film broke new ground, and though the first half was fairly mundane, Wilson saved the last act and thus left us feeling like we’d seen a pretty funny movie.
Strangers with Candy
Delightfully demented and hedonistically hilarious, if you were a fan of the eccentric Comedy Central television series, you will absolutely love this prequel. Stephen Colbert, of course, shines.
Cars
I have to admit that when I saw the trailer for this film, I had absolutely no confidence in it whatsoever. I simply didn’t think they could possibly come up with a compelling storyline based upon a world inhabited solely by living cars.
However, being the animation junkie I am, I still had to give it shot once it hit on DVD. I’m happy to report that I could not have been more wrong.
I loved this film! The animation was top-notch, though I never had any doubt as to that. Even better, though, was the fact that it actually had a very engaging and heartwarming story! Being the severely masculine tough guy that I am, I have no qualms revealing that the ending of the film actually brought the slightest amount of moisture to one of my eyes. Thankfully, I have far too much machismo for that moisture to have evolved into a full-fledged tear.
I don’t have any children of my own, but I have to imagine that I would feel totally confident showing this to my kids. I can’t think of a better movie for a youngster to learn from. It’s been too long since I saw an entertaining film that reminded me how wonderful it is when people put others first.
Mission: Impossible III
You know, I have to tell you, I didn’t hate this movie. I know Tom Cruise somehow went from being America’s favorite son to its most popular antichrist, but J.J. Abrams, the director of the film and creator of hit shows like Lost and Alias, managed to put together a pretty good little action movie.
And, please don’t fool yourself, that’s all M:i:III is—an action movie. But, it’s exactly the kind of action movie I want to see. There were moments when I literally couldn’t take my eyes off the screen because there was so much happening and my pulse pounded so hard. Car chases, fight scenes, explosions, boom! bang! zoom! vroom! Awesome stuff . . . if you’re into action movies.
Now if you’re not into action movies, this baby still has a saving grace—Phillip Seymour Hoffman. He’s the bad guy of the flick, and when he’s on screen, he is baaaaaad, and I mean that in a good way. The only problem is, he’s really not in the movie that much. On the other hand, we (obviously) have lots and lots of Tommy boy. And you know, here’s my thing with Tom-Tom, I don’t think he’s a terrible actor. I mean, The Last Samurai is a fantastic, fantastic, fantastic movie. I just think that Tom the man has gotten bigger than Tom the actor, and so we can no longer differentiate between the two. I think that happens to the best of them. Not that Cruise is the best of them by any means, but you get the point.
At any rate, as I watched M:i:III, I didn’t see Ethan Hunt, I only saw Tom Cruise. There’s Tom jumping off a building. There’s Tom being slammed into a car. And so on. But I didn’t have a problem with that, because I wanted to see an action movie and that’s what Tom and J.J. gave me.
Unfortunately, I really enjoyed the first two thirds of M:i:III but I have to admit the last third truly fell into the venomous waters of cliché. It just got kind of hokey and felt as though it betrayed everything it had been up to that point.
Nonetheless, if you’re an action movie person, except for a few attempts at trying to find America’s next catch phrase and a tired ending, M:i:III is definitely worth a rent.
A Prairie Home Companion
Movies like this one make me question my artistic integrity. I mean, I comprehend the man who directed this film, Robert Altman, is a living legend. I understand some of the biggest and most respected names in the entertainment business such as Streep, Jones, Kline, Keillor, Tomlin, and Reilly were more than willing to take smaller parts to be a part of it (I have no idea how Lindsay Lohan landed such a big role . . . maybe to try to bring in a younger market). I know I’m supposed to totally love it.
I just don’t.
I don’t love it. Sure, I enjoyed the vintage Altman dialogue and pace, I loved watching the ensemble acting, I even felt myself “wowed” by Streep’s singing; however, I simply didn’t like the movie.
That makes me sad.
It makes me sad because it means that somebody is missing a beat. Either the movie missed a beat, or I missed a beat, and I don’t like those possibilities. I wanted to like this movie, you see, I really, really wanted to like it.
I just didn’t.
The movie is basically about a radio program filmed before a live audience in a massive theatre, a dinosaur concept in the age of television. Unfortunately, this is the program’s very last night on air, though the audience doesn’t seem to know that nor do all the of the cast, it seemed. Well, there are many, many different things going on backstage, none of which come anywhere near a plot. I looked at my wife at one point and said, “Is this all improvisation?”
The actors were wonderful, the singing proved engaging, but the story simply didn’t add up. If you’re into musicals and don’t mind a lack of a story with a definite beginning and ending, you may very well enjoy this movie. Otherwise, you should probably give it a pass.
The Break-Up
I’ve argued in the past that I believe Jennifer Aniston could be a very good actress if only she’d start taking meatier roles like she once did with The Good Girl. I really feel like the last several movies I’ve seen with her have been the same character over and over. She’s become like the Tom Cruise of female actors—a victim of her own popularity. Granted, I get that America wants to see her the same way in every movie, I understand she’s a lock for big box office, but I still don’t like it.
I’ll also admit that Vince Vaughn does the very same thing, yet it doesn’t bother me so much. Is that a double standard? Yeah, it probably is, but in my mind the main difference is that I like the fast-talking, joke-making Vince Vaughn and I don’t like the semi-whiny, always-the-victim Jennifer Aniston. (I’m talking about the characters they play, mind you, not the actual people. I have no idea what their true personalities are like.)
Anyway, let’s talk about The Break-Up. Vaughn and Aniston stick to their typecasts and play the usual. The story line is pretty simple—they meet and fall in love, buy a condo in Chicago together, break up over a lack of communication, and then the “laughs” ensue.
Notice the quotes.
The quotes are there because other than a few truly gut-busting laughs, this movie was very, very stressful to watch. Aniston and Vaughn spend much of it yelling at one another or doing things to upset the other. It really had a lot of tension, more tension than I wanted from my comedy on a Saturday night.
One thing that I love about this DVD is that to even get started you have to pick a side—are you with him, or are you with her? That’s a nice touch, because I think you can’t help but pick a side as you watch this film. Of course, my wife and I were siding with two different folks and we were having trouble convincing the other why they were wrong.
The supporting characters really made this film. Jason Bateman (always gold) was barely recognizable, and that’s what I love about him. Vaughn’s buddy Jon Favreau played Vaughn’s buddy in the film and the dynamic displayed in Swingers still exists. Aniston’s brother in the film was truly hilarious, and Vaughn’s brothers were also very amusing.
So I guess the real question is if I would recommend this film to you? Well, that depends. If you’re a Vaughn or an Aniston fan, you dig their usual style of performance, and you don’t mind top-of-the-lung yelling, I think you’ll be pleased. Otherwise, I might give this one a pass.
Rumor Has It
Terrible. Absolutely terrible. Until Jennifer Aniston turns down the big checks and takes on some edgy, meaty roles, she will forever be typecast as Rachel from her old sitcom. This movie was bad on so many levels, I can’t even go into it. Avoid like the plague.
Proof
This particular movie sent me through a myriad of emotions. For instance, I love Anthony Hopkins and have been a Jake Gyllenhaal fan since Donnie Darko, so their specific performances I very much enjoyed.
Gwyneth Paltrow has always been kind of hit and miss for me, and, as par for the course, she was hit and miss for me in this film as well.
Let me give you a quick summary of the film without spoiling anything. Hopkins plays a man who was at one time a preeminent mathematician. He completed his greatest work all before the age of 26 and since then has slowly been suffering from mental problems. As an old man, his daughter, played by Paltrow, is forced to care for him, dropping out of college in order to do so.
Hopkins dies before the film even starts but we’re treated to him through many difference scenarios in which I will not go into. However, one of his students played by Gyllenhaal takes it upon himself to search through Hopkins’ old notes for any slivers of lucidity. He does indeed find a notebook filled with the work of a certifiable genius, but when Paltrow claims the work is hers, things get very interesting.
Hope Davis plays Paltrow’s sister and believes Paltrow is suffering from the same dementia that plagued her father. Paltrow doesn’t know what to believe, nor does Gyllenhaal.
This story is wrought with emotional edginess. In fact, at times it became very uncomfortable as Paltrow and Davis’ characters yelled and screamed at each other as completely opposite siblings. Moreover, Paltrow spent a great part of the movie being quite unlikable. While I appreciate her effort at playing against type, it still didn’t totally work for me.
However, that being said, I did have a nice time watching the movie, especially because, as with A Beautiful Mind and Good Will Hunting, I never thought a film utilizing mathematics as a plot device would pique my interest. I recommend giving this film a try.
The Matador
I have to tell you, this movie was a breath of fresh air. I’ve always been a Pierce Brosnan fan, but even I had to admit he tended to play the same type of character. Cool under pressure. Suave. Debonair. Always straddling the line between hero and anti-hero. And while I’ve never considered Brosnan an exceptional actor, I certainly appreciated the charm and magnanimity he oozes through the silver screen.
Well, I’m happy to admit that with The Matador, we have all of Brosnan’s positive attributes, but this time, the man is playing against type, and he’s doing it expertly. Oh sure, he’s still a lady-killer, but this time it’s sometimes literal as he is a paid assassin knocking off corporate types. Brosnan is sometimes suave and calculating, but he’s also sometimes cracking up and buckling under the pressure from a lifetime of taking lives. Eccentric is an understatement for Brosnan’s character, Julian Noble. It is truly a pleasure to watch Brosnan go out on a limb and succeed in playing an imperfect and memorable character.
Greg Kinnear plays an unlikely friend of Brosnan as the two happen to bump into each other and become chums in Mexico City. Kinnear is a down on his luck businessman, and after many lies on Brosnan’s part, the two finally bond. In fact, when Brosnan finds himself in trouble, it is Kinnear and his vanilla life that Brosnan goes running to for help.
A truly quirky film, I cannot recommend The Matador enough. It has the sort of dark comedy aspects of a Grosse Pointe Blank, yet at times there existed truly deep characterization and somewhat dramatic moments. On top of that, the camera angles, locations, and overall style are a joy.
Give this one a shot (no pun intended). You’ll never see Brosnan the same way again.
Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby
We all knew this was going to be a silly one. I mean, Will Ferrell, while absolutely one of the funniest men in the movie business, is not known for his intellectually stimulating material.
That being said, I thought this move was hilarious. Yes, there were moments that made no sense whatsoever, moments that were purely there for laughs. The plot was threadbare at best, but still cohesive enough that there did actually exist a storyline with some real characterization. In other words, if you’re a “story” person, you won’t be completely left out.
Make no mistake, though, this movie was all about the laughs. Ferrell performed at his best, John C. Reilly was surprisingly funny, even Michael Clarke Duncan showed us some comedy chops. But, in my opinion, Sacha Baron Cohen nearly (I said nearly) stole the show. His French racecar driver as a villain to Ricky Bobby had me rolling. Of course, if you’re under forty you probably know Cohen better as Ali G or Borat. I was also ecstatic to see an actor playing the part of a “friend” to Cohen’s character. I won’t spoil who it is, but this grossly underrated performer was much welcomed in my book.
All in all, this film is every bit as funny as Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, and, dare I say it, made much more sense as far as a storyline went. If you’re a Ferrell fan, you’ll be most happy. If you’re not a Ferrell fan, first of all, what’s wrong with you? Second of all, you may find yourself tolerating the movie and even emitting a chuckle or two.
Shopgirl
Based upon a smart novella by Steve Martin (yes, that Steve Martin) this film is about a young woman played by Claire Danes who has moved to LA in the hopes of furthering her art career. She takes a job at Saks nestled away behind a glove counter. Bored out of her mind, she eventually meets a quirky young font artist played by Jason Schwartzman (who’s stock is quickly rising in my book) and dates him basically for lack of nothing better to do.
Eventually a much older character played by Steve Martin takes and interest in Danes’ character and they get very involved. However, Martin’s character is afraid of commitment and so he keeps Danes always at a distance. The problem for Danes’ character is that Martin provides her every want, but does not provide her every need, which is the need we all have, the need to be loved.
Superb and idiosyncratic acting made this a joy to watch, though I, as usual, enjoyed the book more than the film. This is not a fast-moving film, but it is a great character study and the actors’ chemistry and charisma jump off the screen. Martin was the weakest of the three, but he still did an admirable job.
Closer
Apparently the stage version of this film was a hit, and thus, they decided if it was a hit on the stage it would only be natural for it to be a hit on the silver screen as well. I’m afraid I couldn’t disagree more.
This film essentially dealt with four people who couldn’t make up their minds who they wanted to be with. I seriously felt like I was watching a teen drama, but all those things that can sometimes make a teen drama cute were noticeably absent because we weren’t dealing with teens, we were dealing with adults in their thirties and so their behavior was just depressing.
Sure, this sort of thing probably happens in real life, but I don’t want to see it on the screen. This film was slow, depressing, pointless, and ultimately anticlimactic. I can’t believe Julia Roberts and Natalie Portman agreed to star in it, and I have to say that Jude Law and Clive Owen are propagating my theory that English movie starts love playing immoral, sniveling men in today’s films.
The Libertine
This is a film starring Johnny Depp that deals with the 17th century poet, John Wilmot. A true period piece, the costumes and sets were amazing. The cinematography was stellar as well, as it truly looked as though all interior shots had no more lighting than several very bright candles. In other words, there existed an ever-present flicker.
I suppose the acting was very good, but I enjoy a zany Johnny Depp more than a straight-laced, deplorable Johnny Depp. Of course, he as the libertine, and a libertine is one who is morally unrestrained, so you can imagine who likable he was.
Ultimately, I didn’t think much of the story and I felt the film rather boring. If you enjoy period pieces and/or anything dealing with John Wilmot, this may be the film for you. Otherwise, I think you could stand to pass on this one.
After the Sunset
Hey, this film is what it is. Directed by Brett Ratner and set on an island paradise, you couldn’t help but enjoy it for the fantastic shots alone. We’ve got a charming Pierce Brosnan and Salma Hayek as retired jewel thieves hanging their hats on a lovely island far beyond the FBI’s jurisdiction. That doesn’t stop Woody Harrelson, the FBI agent they regularly made a fool of, from hunting them down to make sure they really are out of the game.
We’ve got some really, really fun moments between Woody and Pierce and Salma is as smoldering as ever.
While this film didn’t break the mold by any means, it was fun to watch and moved along at a fairly quick pace. I’ll even give it props for a little twist at the end that made it all worthwhile.
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
As you probably know, the critics have been making this movie walk the plank . . . bad joke, I know, it’s what I do. Anyway, despite the critics’ best efforts, this thing has been a cash-making sea cow. Again, bad. I know.
Here’s the thing, this movie was fun. Period. It was fun! The props were incredible, the special effects were out-of-this-world, the costumes were great, the pacing was quick, Johnny Depp was hilarious, and the cinematography was outstanding. In other words, everything that worked in the first film worked for the second.
Consequently, just like with the first film, there were plot holes that could sink a ship, but hey, let’s employ our suspension of disbelief and have a nice time, shall we? Orlando Bloom, of whom I am apparently a “hatah,” gave yet another wooden, stoic performance, but you just have to expect that sort of thing from him. He would do well to follow in Depp’s eclectic footsteps or else he is in terminal danger of being typecast for the rest of his career.
Yes, this is a middle film. Sometimes middle films leave you feeling satisfied, like The Empire Strikes Back, and sometimes they don’t, like The Matrix Reloaded. Dead Man’s Chest falls somewhere in the middle. Luckily, we don’t have long to wait for the next Pirates film, so very soon we’ll simply think of them as one seamless saga.
The movie moves very fast despite its 2.5 hours of running time and it really is very entertaining. I particularly loved the fact that so much of the first film is brought back for the second, even things that were just mentioned in passing. I’d tell you to go see it right away, but I have a feeling you already have if its box office earnings are any indication.
Match Point
This may be some form of sacrilege, but I’ve never seen a Woody Allen film. Never. I don’t even think I’ve ever watched ten minutes of one. So why did I decide to check out Match Point? Simple. I’ve never seen a Woody Allen film.
Full of tension and immoral behavior, Match Point was an exercise in discomfort. The story is about a former professional tennis player turned instructor, named Chris, who eases his way into a rich family after Chloe, the daughter in the family, falls for him. However, he soon finds himself lusting after the rich family’s son’s fiancé, named Nola, and becomes obsessed with her. He marries Chloe before the son, Tom, unexpectedly breaks it off with Nola. Our tennis player now feels he has every right to pursue a relationship with Nola, despite the fact that he is now married to Chloe who desperately wants a baby. From there the suspense ensues, and while this film was wrought with predictability, it also had some nice moments of genuine surprise.
One thing that bothered me is that some say it’s a story of a man who gets involved in the darker side of high society. No, that’s not true at all. It’s the normal man who is the villain here. He is the one turning his back on his wife and pursing an extra-marital relationship. The rich family is quite helpful and pleasant throughout for the most part. I believe this is a story of how anyone can become a monster when they let their lust and envy control their actions.
Match Point was far too long, coming in at just over two hours. It easily could have been trimmed back. There were moments of just waiting for something substantial to occur.
The acting was adequate, though not terribly charismatic. Of the two main characters, Scarlet Johansson, who plays Nola, is satisfactory but Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, who plays Chris, seems like a Jude Law clone in terms of demeanor. I actually got confused as to whether I should be rooting for or against Rhy-Meyers’ character. He was sometimes quite likable and at other times smarmy, and at still other times overtly nefarious. As far as the rest of the cast, I actually enjoyed all of the minor characters far more than the two stars.
Overall, the ending of the film is quite engrossing, but the rest of the film sort of plods along. As I said, there is tension throughout, not because of a suspenseful storyline, but more because it just made me uncomfortable to watch a man flirt with ruining an innocent family over his own base desires.
Is this a typical Woody Allen film? I have no idea. Not terrible, but not much beyond being just good.
The World’s Fastest Indian
I believe that some movies are bound to be good based upon the actors involved alone. Now, this is not a perfect formula, but it works for me more often than not.
That being said, when I saw that Anthony Hopkins starred in The World’s Fastest Indian, and after I learned the movie was a true story about an old man from New Zealand who had customized a 1921 Indian motorcycle in order to break a land speed record in 1967, well, I was sold.
Though there were not nearly enough scenes with the actual racing of the Indian, I couldn’t help but fall in love with Hopkins’ character. The story mostly deals with his charm and eccentricities, of which there are many, and his difficult plight in getting from New Zealand to Utah, where the land speed races were held. Just like most old men, no offense to the old men out there, Hopkins demanded everyone repeat everything they said to him as he turned a good ear to them, he mumbled, he crept along, and he seemed to have that general body language that only an old man can have.
Though it’s a true story and you can easily look up Hopkins’ character’s name, Burt Munro, on answers.com, I won’t ruin the ending for you. I will say, however, that it is truly an inspirational film that had my wife weeping at its end, and, don’t tell anyone, brought a little tiny bit of moisture to my eyes as well.
Failure to Launch
There are three things in this world I never wanted to see: Colin Farrell’s vd report, Star Jones’ stool, and Terry Bradshaw’s bare naked butt. Sadly, after seeing his film, one of those things is burned into my mind’s eye forever.
You know, I didn’t mind this movie. I actually thought the premise was pretty good. Sarah Jessica Parker plays a woman who offers her services to help parents get their grown sons out of the house. Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew McConaughey’s charm sizzles off the screen and there are some truly funny moments. Yeah, the cheese factor is high (so high the air is rare), and you’ll need to tape a pillow to your forehead you’ll be slapping it so much with the last twenty minutes, but I’ve seen worse (Must Love Dogs, anyone?). Give it a shot if you’ve got nothing else to watch.
Underworld: Evolution
Do you like vampires? Do you like werewolves? Have you ever wondered if a vampire and a werewolf/vampire hybrid could have sex? If the answer is “yes” to any of the above, then Underworld Evolution is for you!
Okay, so this movie was a little light on story and logic, even less so than the original, but hey, if you’re into cool, ninja-like monster fighting, you’re going to love this bad boy. It had everything I wanted from it: great special effects, cool cinematography, and elaborate action sequences. What it didn’t have, however, was enough of a variety of vampires and werewolves. Unlike the original film, which made use of many, many characters even if not well developed, Evolution focused more on only a few characters, but they still remained rather under-developed, so that was a little disappointing for me.
All in all, I had a good time with Underworld: Evolution. It didn’t pretend to be anything it wasn’t and I appreciated that about it.
Superman Returns
*minor spoiler warning*
Let’s get something straight: Superman is, by nature of his super powers, always in danger of being utterly boring. Everyone likes Superman, but few people think he’s terribly interesting. Let’s face it, how much suspense can a Superman story have when the guy can lift mountains and get shot in the eye with bullets and be fine? So, if you’re going to jumpstart a Superman movie franchise, you’d better bring something different to the table.
And Bryan Singer, the director of Superman Returns, has done just that.
You all know the premise of the story for Superman Returns. It takes place five years after the events of Superman I and II from the late seventies and early eighties (but pretend those movies only happened five years ago). Superman III and IV have been erased from existence.
Superman left Earth five years ago and has returned to a world that has moved on without him. The love of his life, Lois Lane, is engaged and has a small child. In fact, she has won a Pulitzer for writing an article about just how little Superman matters. Of course, the heart of this story deals with Superman trying to adapt to the changes that have occurred with the woman he loves. Does he respect her new life, or does he try to win her back? This is truly a fight that Superman’s powers will not give him an advantage with.
Now, does that mean that Superman Returns is just a sappy love story? Not at all. There is action to spare in this film, and finally, finally, technology has caught up to what we all want to see from Superman. You will believe a man can fly. You will be cheering from your seat.
I thought our newest Superman, Brandon Routh, did just fine. Yes, Singer is paying homage to Superman I and II, but I didn’t see Routh as simply imitating the iconic Christopher Reeve. There were consistencies with the character of Clark Kent and Superman between the two actors, and I think that is done to satisfy the audience who enjoyed the previous films. But let’s understand something: Superman is a big, dark-haired, blue-eyed, square-jawed guy. Of course Routh and Reeve are going to look similar! They both played Superman! Their both big, dark-haired, square-jawed guys!
Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor was great. He harnessed the comedic timing of Gene Hackman from Superman I and II, but he also brought some real danger to the character. At times I laughed hysterically at Spacey, and at other times he gave me nervous chills, and I had no problem with that.
Kate Bosworth was not given a fair shake as Lois Lane. With the small possibility of spoiling a small part of the film, Lois sucks as a mother. Seriously, she’s got to be the worst mother of all time. My wife and I both walked out of that film saying, “Wow, they really painted Lois Lane in a poor light, didn’t they?” I think Bosworth is a decent enough actress, she just didn’t have a great depiction of character to work with.
I took slight issue with a major component of the film that presents itself near the end, and I won’t spoil it, but it certainly rubbed me a bit wrong. However, I understand this is a Superman for 2006 and they are desperately trying to make him a character in need of emotional resolution, so I’m not going to make a big stink of it. I’d rather have a Superman with change I don’t care for than the same old stereotypical Superman that everyone would get tired of after a few movies.
There were also many, many plot holes, but as my old Shakespeare professor use to say, “We must employ the suspension of disbelief.” In other words, don’t think about things too hard, just enjoy the show!
I’ll tell you this, the music made the film magical. The intro was just like the intro to Superman I and II, and that was a perfect touch. I literally had goose bumps as that wonderful John Williams’ theme song started up with some updating by composer John Ottman.
In other words, for me, this movie worked, despite some early concerns. The special effects were magnificent, the costume and the small “s” shield were just fine, the acting was more than adequate, and the movie had real heart, especially because it embraced the Superman movies that came before it.
It definitely lived up to my expectations and then some.
The Human Stain
I picked up The Human Stain only because Sir Anthony Hopkins stars in it and I’m a fan of his work. However, also starring in this movie are Nicole Kidman, Ed Harris, and Gary Sinise, and they all give terrific performances.
The basic premise is that a college professor says something in class that is mistaken for a racial slur. He ultimately quits his job out of protest, and the shocking news utterly changes his relationship with his wife forever. He eventually finds himself in a relationship with a woman who seems to be further down the socio-economic structure (Kidman), and they must deal with her estranged and demented husband (Harris). I really can’t tell you much more about this film without spoiling some major plot devices, but let me just say that there are some fascinating insights into Hopkins’ character through flashbacks to his youth. I will also say that in the beginning of the movie everything seems rather random and pointless, but by the end of the film, it has all served a purpose, revealing a story that will truly provoke your deepest thoughts.
Again, Hopkins, as usual, was magnificent. Kidman was barely recognizable due to her drastically different body language and huffy, American accent. Ed Harris plays a man significantly disturbed and Harris pulls it off with such subtlety that I honestly saw insanity when I looked into his eyes. Sinise was the only character that troubled me just a bit. He seemed only to be on the fringe of the story, and while I thought Sinise did an impressive job, I never really truly understood the point of his character.
I genuinely recommend this movie. I don’t remember hearing much about it when it was in the theatres, and that’s probably because it has a rather controversial and daring premise. There are some brief scenes of nudity as well as harsh language, so take that into account.
X-Men: The Last Stand
So the fanboys and the critics have been telling me that X-Men: The Last Stand is awful, yet the movie going audience has been flocking to this baby. Like the responsible movie fan I am, I had to see for myself. Read on for my spoilerific review of X-Men: The Last Stand…
I have to tell you, when Bryan Singer, the director of the first two X-Films, left to direct Superman Returns, I was a little concerned about the fate of our favorite mutants. I don’t have any antagonistic feelings toward the replacement director, Brett Ratner, like so many people seemingly do, but I believed the quality would drop just a hair because Singer was so loyal to the source material.
Ratner, on the other hand, is loyal to making a summer blockbuster.
What I mean by that is that X3 is an entertaining, fast-paced, short, action-filled thrill ride. What it is not is an in-depth story with well-rounded characters. In fact, Ratner seemed to feel quite comfortable with breaking routine X-Convention, especially any foundation the first two films laid.
That is part of what made this film so fun, but also part of what made it so frustrating. Let’s just get a big spoiler out of the way: Ratner kills off some major, major characters in X3. So many big characters that an X4 seems pretty unlikely. The heart of the X-Men are gone, and they were gone pretty early into the film. That being said, I knew then and there that all bets were off and no one was off-limits. That certainly increased the tension and suspense for my movie going experience.
But, the deaths of the characters were so out of place, so out of character, they truly seemed forced and rushed. And that is my ultimate summation of X3—forced and rushed. It had great moments, some were actually genius, but overall the film had many, many holes. The sheer number of heroes and villains required four hours of story to avoid any shortcomings, and as the film lasted only an hour and forty-five minutes, well, you can imagine how crammed things got.
However, what worked, and worked wonderfully, were the special effects. If you want to see these mutants using their powers in all the glory of your wildest imaginings, you will not be disappointed in X3. It truly felt like a comic book come to life. You get to see the powers of Iceman, Beast, Phoenix, Colossus, Shadowcat, Pyro, Magneto, and Juggernaut in their full glory, just the way you want to see them. The only problem is you just don’t get to see enough of them.
Would I recommend this film? You bet I would. The spectacle and special effects alone are worth it. The acting of Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellen, Kelsey Grammar, and Patrick Stewart are top-notch for those moments where they’re actually allowed to act.
I think if you are a hardcore X-Fan you will be very disappointed with the directions they took with some of the characters in X3, but if you look at it as just another summer action movie, you’ll be more than entertained.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
I am ashamed to admit that I have never read Douglas Adams’ The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, so I may be about to commit the ultimate heresy.
I loved this movie.
I thought it was witty with a nice blend of camp and social commentary, and the acting was spot on. At times the special effects were utterly simplistic, and at other times they were groundbreaking.
I found myself smiling like a fool through the better part of this film. I just found it completely charming and fun. Sure, I caught the implications the author was making about where we’ve been and where we’re going as a race, but I’ve never had so much fun doing so.
By far my favorite performance was by the man playing the President of the Galaxy. I don’t know if he meant to do so or not, and I don’t know how this character was written in the book, but he seemed to be channeling a certain Texan we all know and love.
Seriously, if you want to see a charismatic, witty, silly film, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is for you.
All fans of the book who hated this version of their beloved work may feel free to e-mail me, so long as you are moderately polite in doing so.
Good Night, And Good Luck
I must admit that the premise of this movie is not the most exciting of plots. A reporter, Edward R. Murrow, takes on Joe McCarthy, the father of McCarthyism. However, I’d heard rave reviews of the film, both from friends and from the critics, and so I thought I should check it out.
It was stupendous.
The story itself, especially in today’s climate, was nothing less than inspirational. A few men dared to stand up for what was right, despite the repercussions, and eventually a tainted politician fell as a result. The director, a surprisingly talented George Clooney, kept the pace perfect and mixed his filming with actual footage seamlessly.
Most impressive, however, was the lead actor who played the newsman Edward R. Murrow, David Strathairn. I am completely unfamiliar with this man’s work, and I had never heard of Edward R. Murrow before this film, but Strathairn was nothing less than completely magnanimous and charismatic as the reporter. He played Murrow as deadpan, intense, and low key, and it worked perfectly. I completely understand his nomination for Best Actor at the last Academy Awards.
Along just being a great movie, this film provoked a lot of thought about what’s going on with today’s politics, the reporters covering the news, and television and its purpose. There is a strong message being conveyed, a message that I happen to agree with. See the movie and tell me if you agree with it as well.
Walk the Line
I knew nothing about Johnny Cash, literally, before watching Walk the Line. Seriously. I knew only one of his songs, “Ring of Fire,” because they used to play it all the time in college at a local bar where we played pool. Other than that—zilch.
That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie Walk the Line, and I’d say it was primarily because of Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon’s performances. I don’t have any idea what Johnny Cash and June Carter looked like or sounded like at their prime, but I sure as heck knew it wasn’t Joaquin and Reese I watched on the screen. Those two actors actually became their characters, and it showed.
More impressive, they did their own singing. Joaquin did an admirable job, and Reese sounded like she could be a bona fide country star. Keeping in mind that they released a soundtrack using the actors’ actual voices, I think that tells you the quality of their work.
Again, I didn’t know anything about Cash before watching this, so I didn’t find anything particularly shocking. I think it was Jon Stewart who called Walk the Line the country version of Ray, and I think I can see how he’d make that comparison. Both films centered on the marriage and addiction problems of the protagonists.
All that being said, I really think Walk the Line may have deserved Best Picture. Its nomination was certainly warranted. I believe Joaquin Phoenix gave a top-notch performance, perhaps deserving the Oscar he didn’t get, and Reese Witherspoon deserved her Oscar and then some. Whether you’re a Johnny Cash fan or not, I highly recommend seeing this film.
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
I loved this story as a child—adored it, in fact. My fourth grade teacher read us the complete Chronicles of Narnia series over the school year, and I contribute this, along with comic books and my parents reading to me consistently as a wee lad, to my love of reading and writing as an adult.
Let’s acknowledge that I had very high hopes for this film. The previews were enough to make me tear up a bit because of the pure happiness they evoked. The happiness of seeing something that had only existed in my imagination suddenly thrown onto the silver screen elated the little boy that still very much lives within me. It was magical.
I have to say that while this film made my heart swell throughout for a variety of reasons, I was not completely enamored with it. There are several reasons for this, some that have nothing to do with the film, some that do.
First of all, any time something is given tangible form externally from your own imagination, it never lives up to expectations in its entirety. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was an excellent film, but it still did not match what I had dreamt as a child, and very little ever does.
Secondly, the actress that played Lucy (the youngest) was by far the better of the four children. I’ve never particularly enjoyed films that starred children (with the exception of The Goonies), and this was no different. I had very explicit images of Peter and the rest, and none of them matched up. That, plus the fact that, as stated, three of the four children were simply not very good actors, seemed to drag the film down just a bit.
Thirdly, the voice of Aslan was not the voice I had heard within my mind when I was sitting in grade school. Nothing against the actor that played him, I simply expected a voice that thundered and reverberated; Aslan is a lion, after all. The polished, soft-spoken voice that emitted from the mouth of Narnia’s savior was just a little too gentlemanly for my taste.
Now, keep in mind, this film was forced to compete with the remembrances of childhood, and that is a competition that will rarely prove victorious for the opponent. I know I’m judging the film unfairly, I admit that, but I simply can’t help it.
Now, on to the positives: the special effects of the film were wonderful and primarily seamless. Bear in mind that much of this was computer graphic animated, and I’d say that they did a superb job of blending the live action with the CG. Costumes and locations were spot on, and the battle scenes were truly magnificent. The adults did a very nice job with their acting, and I’m guessing the children will grow into their roles if given an opportunity, much as the chap that plays Harry Potter.
I was satisfied with this film, but I was not awestruck. I would certainly recommend seeing it; it is worth the price of admission, no doubt. I believe C.S. Lewis would have been satisfied with this adaptation as well, though I have to wonder what would have happened if they’d gotten a Peter Jackson or a Steven Spielberg to direct it.
Here’s looking forward to many more Chronicles of Narnia!
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
I’d heard really good things about his movie staring Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet, so I was fairly excited to watch it. I’m afraid that, while I thought it wasn’t bad, it hardly lived up to expectations.
The concept of the film was rather interesting, if not completely original. Who hasn’t wanted to forget a love gone bad? But, the idea that science could now provide the method for doing so was very fun. I suppose the biggest issue I had with the film was that its second act seemed to drag on and on. The introduction held my interest, the conclusion was great, but the middle just sort of trudged along for me.
Jim Carrey was great. Not a bit of over-the-top silliness at all. I really wish the public would give this guy a chance at being more than just a comedian. He really can do well in the serious roles. His character is just so understated and sullen, hard to believe this was Ace Ventura. Kate Winslet did a nice job, as usual. The supporting actors were very good as well, and those included Kirsten Dunst and Elijah Wood.
I think what I liked best were the locations. They were just so . . . real. I mean, the doctor’s office looked just like a hole in the wall office. The apartments were a mess. The streets were dirty and the city was noisy. Even the ac