bdkjunkies
bdkreviews
bdkreviews
 (5 BDKs) WHAT ARE YOU DOING STILL SITTING THERE READING THIS CRAP--GET OFF YOUR ASS AND GO SEE THIS MOVIE RIGHT NOW!!!!! |
(4 BDKs) Go see it in theaters if it interests you. Try to catch a Matinee if you are unsure. |
(3 BDKs) RENT THIS MOVIE, but do not see it in the theaters. |
(2 BDKs) Watch it on cable!!! |
(1 BDK) Watch it on cable if you have time!!! |
The Twilight Saga: New MoonGenre: Drama/Fantasy/Horror/Romance/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating:   Check out my interviews with stars Edi Gathegi and Jamie Campbell Bower The film is completely full of itself and loses track of the serious story, focusing more on glorifying the characters as sex objects. This sequel appeals more to the demographic (young teenage girls) than the last film did. It was as if the Beatles were doing a live show in the theater, anytime one of these characters would take their shirt off or appear on screen. It got to the point where I felt lost and not connected to the story anymore because they were focusing more on making the audience sigh and gasp. New Moon is going to be a film that will help me become a better critic. This is a film where I am going to have to separate my disappointment, which was based on extremely high expectations, from the actual quality of the film. From a disappointment standpoint, the film is a major let down from the first one, which I found to be intense and powerful. There was such great chemistry between the characters of Edward and Bella in Twilight and that, to me, was completely lacking in the sequel. In the first film, their love felt so painful and real. You knew it would be tough for the two to be together but they somehow make it work. I once heard someone say that Twilight was essentially "Romeo and Juliet" meets vampires and that could not be further from the truth. So much so, that the filmmakers of New Moon placed a "Romeo and Juliet" book right by Bella's pillow as she wakes up in an earlier scene of the film. Now, looking at it from a quality standpoint, it is not a horrible film in the least. The special effects are completely ramped up this time and you get well edited action sequences that will definitely satisfy people. You can tell the film was done on a higher budget (according to movieinsider.com - this one cost $50 million as opposed to the first film's budget of $36 million) and the cinematography was 100% better. I will say that the acting quality went down in my opinion. I almost feel like these actors have now realized how big of a deal this franchise really is. Therefore, they seem to overact a lot throughout the film and it got to a point where it seemed like they were overacting. There was some quality cinematography and great montage/action sequences. Well, we already knew Chris Weitz could direct relatively decent polar bears in The Golden Compass, so why not give the guy a shot at directing some great looking werewolves in New Moon. Weitz takes the directing chair over from Catherine Hardwicke and then Weitz will hand it over to 30 Days of Night/Hard Candy director David Slade for Eclipse; the third book and film in the series. All films are based on the novels written by Stephanie Myer. In case you missed the first film in the series, Twilight tells the story of Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) and Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart). Cullen is a vampire who, in this fantasy world, can walk in the daylight and has no fangs. Yet, he sparkles when he is exposed to sunlight. Bella is moved to a small town called Fork, where she falls in love with Cullen, who also attends her high school. Cullen is reluctant at first, considering the fact that she is a human, but they can't help their love for each other. The first film ends with a battle of the vampires where Edward is forced to kill a vampire named James (Cam Gigandet), which then closes with a cliff hanger that shows us that James' girlfriend, Victoria, will be back for her revenge. New Moon picks up right where Twilight left off. Edward and Bella are madly in love and it is now her birthday and she has been invited to the Cullen's for a party. Keep in mind, the Cullens do not feed on humans; only animals. Unfortunately, Bella gets a paper cut at the party, leading one of the vampires in attendance to almost attack her. This scares Edward to the point where he feels it is necessary for them to be apart. He says his goodbye and mentions that he will never see her again. This obviously kills Bella and leads her to seek friendship from her old friend Jacob (Taylor Lautner), where she learns quick that if she feels adrenaline or danger, that Edward will pop up in her mind to tell her to not be reckless. Considering that Jacob is a good mechanic, she brings a couple of beat up dirt bikes to his place to fix. This forces her to spend time with Jacob but she has no clue of his dark secret. As she continues to be reckless and put herself in danger, Jacob is getting dragged deeper and deeper into a werewolf cult. Meanwhile, Edward is long away but when danger comes calling, he will be immediately affected. Let the love triangle begin! The film also also stars Peter Facinelli, Dakota Fanning, Edi Gathebi, Jamie Campbell Bower, Michael Sheen and Ashley Greene. The biggest issue with the film is how uneven, slow and monotonous it was at times. It felt like it was all over the place and that it did not have a main focus, much like this movie review you are reading right now. The monotonous angle comes from the fact that the entire opening act deals with how Bella and Edward can't be together. Then, it proceeds to Bella and Jacob and they go through the same issues because of his werewolf issue. There are many scenes that occur between these characters where they are professing their love for one another and it just got old fast. Also, what was up with the gratuitous shots of Jacob taking his shirt off or Edward walking in slow motion. It was obvious that the producers wanted to milk the audience for what it was worth. To me, these shots hurt the film and came off as distracting and cheese. They were like the cheesy slow motion shots you would see on "Baywatch", except instead of Pamela Anderson you have Jacob walking around without his shirt on while wearing a pair of jean shorts. It just felt very over the top and just begging for little girls to scream about it. That to me was distracting from the film's serious story line. What happened to the chemistry? In the first film, I was so involved in Bella and Edward's struggle to be together. From the minute this movie opened, I felt that chemistry was lost. When Edward is telling Bella he can't be with her, I didn't feel it emotionally. Maybe it was the word choice or maybe it was the acting. Either way, I didn't feel it there. I felt a little at the end of the film but nowhere near the emotions I felt while watching the original film. On to the positives. The fight sequences and werewolf transformations looked amazing. Weitz definitely had some great shots in the film. One in particular that blew me away, occurs after Edward leaves Bella. She sits in front of her window of her room while the camera turns around her at a 360 degree angle. This camera spins around three or four times as the months pass and we see how the weather outside changes to signify the new month. That shot was very well done. There is also a great montage sequence that occurs between Bella, Victoria, Jacob and Bella's father, Charlie. The music and way this sequence was edited was very well done. Overall, I was a bit disappointed. The Twilight Saga: New Moon receives a 2.5 BDK rating, unfortunately. Back to Top |
The Blind SideGenre: Drama/Sport Released: 2009 Rating: I would like nothing more than to sit here and tell you how awful this film was. That I was so bored and that I could not stop laughing because of how cliché and formulaic it was. I would love to go on about how awful Sandra Bullock's accent was and how awful the cheesy one-liners were. See, I could do all of that but I would be lying to you. Those are all feelings I had when I saw the trailer and they are now washed away. The only feeling I have now is that I just saw a great story portrayed on screen with a, excuse my french, bad-ass performance by Sandra Bullock. Bad-ass you ask? How could that be? Well, this was a character who was absolutely relentless, caring and would stop at absolutely nothing to protect her family. Even if that meant standing up to a group of people that could clearly kill her, just so that she could protect her son. The Blind Side tells the true story of Baltimore Ravens offensive tackle, Michael Oher. Before he signed to a professional football team in 2009, he had an extremely rough start to his life. He grew up in a bad area of Memphis called Hurt Village, where his mother was addicted to crack and his father was non-existent. We learn early on in the film that his father actually killed himself by throwing himself off a bridge. Oher (portrayed by Quenton Aaron) was practically homeless at the age of 17. Having nowhere to go, he is admitted to a private high school in the hopes that he would play sports. One night while walking around looking for a place to keep warm, Leigh Anne Touhy (played by Sandra Bullock) is driving home with her family. She notices him on the side of the road and with her good heart, offers him a place to stay for the night. This night turns into much more and the Touhy family invite him to become part of the family. Leigh Anne recognized his talent and placec him on the high school football team where he started to excel. This is the story of how he went from having nothing to having everything. The dynamic of the film lies within the Touhy family. Leigh Anne and her husband Sean (who is played by Tim McGraw) took this child into their home, without knowing anything about him. They just felt it was right to help him out. Even the children, S.J. And Collins were willing to let him into their family. Now for the film's purposes, it was a very sped up process. I am sure in real life, the transition was not as smooth as it was portrayed in the film. S.J. (played by Jae Head), is the younger child of the family and he immediately clicks with Michael. They have this younger/older brother type bond. I must say that S.J.'s character provided the film with some great comic relief. He was absolutely hilarious and had some great lines. He added that perfect balance of comedy to this very dramatic story. Sandra Bullock came off as one of the more realistic mothers I have seen in a long time. She really reminded me of my own mother in the sense that she was so caring for her children. She would do anything for them, especially a child she had never met before in her life. She was willing to give up this rich life style that her family had, to help raise and protect this child who had absolutely nothing. Considering her husband owned and operated a chain of Taco Bells, Pizza Huts and KFCs in Memphis, the family was rather well off. Bullock was just so commanding and definitely the leader of that family. Even the husband knew that and he was just along for the ride. Besides the obvious, the film is very sports oriented and if you live in Washington D.C., you are going to love the opening sequence of the film. It contains a great voice over by Sandra Bullock, whose southern accent was not annoying, where she explains how a blind side relates to a quarterback on a football team. The example used contains footage of John Riggins and Joe Theisman during a game where Lawrence Taylor injured Theisman because his blind side was not protected. The other great angle on sports were all of the real college football coaches who appeared in the film. There is this hilarious montage sequence of college coaches from LSU, Tennessee, South Carolina, Ole' Miss, etc. Anyone who is a sports fan is going to love this scene. It was great to finally see Lou Holtz joke around. Listen, this film follows every cliché and formula imaginable but the story is so sweet and heartfelt that you can't help but enjoy yourself. Each time Sandra Bullock is on screen, she is absolutely relentless and forceful. She really took this role seriously and you can tell this is one of those roles she will always remember. Even Quenton Aaron was great and this was one of his first staring roles. I have read interviews that he had to drop 100 pounds of weight to get the part. People keep asking me how Tim McGraw was in the film. To be honest, I know the name but I had no clue what he looked like. Therefore, the entire time he was playing the dad, I had no clue that was him but his performance was fine. I give The BLIND SIDE a generous 4 BDKs. Make sure you stay through the credits for a great digital photo album of the real family and Michael Oher. Back to Top |
The Boondock Saints II: All Saints DayGenre: Action/Crime/Drama/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: In short, the sequel is not as good as the first but serves as a fun and exciting action adventure follow up. After waiting ten years, the Saints are finally back and this time it appears that they have gone to a comedy academy. This film definitely had more of a lighter tone than the first, which sometimes helps it and sometimes hurts it. It is obvious that this film was made for fans of the first film and writer/director Troy Duffy definitely puts a ton of references in for the fan boys. Let me say right off the bat, that The Boondock Saints was the ultimate college movie for me. I used to watch it all the time and just bow down to the action sequences. There was nothing better than watching Willem Dafoe put on his head phones and listen to opera music while dancing around a crime scene. And of course, who could forget the famous firefight scene with Willem Dafoe, Billy Connelly, David Della Rocco, Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus is one of my favorite scenes of all time. That scene, alone, is better than the entire first film. It is a scene that I can watch alone and just break down into tears because of how bad-ass it is. The film picks up where the first film left off. If you continue to read further down in my review, I give a synopsis of the first film. It has been eight years since the MacManus (Flanery and Reedus) brothers paraded through Boston taking out mob bosses, drug dealers, etc. Connor and Murphy are now living in Ireland with their father (played by Billy Connelly). A priest is murdered in Boston, in the exact same execution style as the Saints. The executioner uses two guns to the back of the priests head, leaving pennies on his eyes. This obviously upsets the Saints, so they make a trip back to Boston to clear their name and take on the bad guys once again. Along the way, they pick up a hilarious sidekick, named Romeo (played by Clifton Collins Jr.—he might be the best EYE actor ever), who is apparently a huge fan of the Saints' work. He serves as the comedic relief for the film, replacing their good friend Rocco, who was killed in the first one. Throughout the film, we are treated to great flashbacks to their father's life and we start to learn why the Saints were chosen to take out the mob bosses, drug dealers and the scum of the world. You also get two nice surprises at the end. My biggest issue with the sequel is the character of Eunice Bloom, played by Julie Benze. The first film struck so many nerves because of Willem Dafoe's amazingly unique performance. That is a tough act to follow and now there is a new cowboy in town; no pun intended. Benze's character has an awful southern accent that just seemed a bit to over the top for my taste. There was a joke in beginning of the film where a police detective uses the F word in her presence. She goes on to say that you can't break that rule when you first meet her and from that point on, she awkwardly adds the F word in to all of her dialogue. This comes off as awkward and pointless. The film actually builds on itself and gets stronger as the time goes on. The film's opening is a bit sloppy and director Troy Duffy definitely shows off his new directing techniques with fast paced editing and quick camera shots. We quickly learn that this film is not taking itself seriously, as we are treated to gratuitous shots of Connor and Murphy taking showers with rock n' roll music playing in the background. That to me was Troy getting a good laugh out of the audience. The film's strong points lie within the back stories of Ill Duce (played by Billy Connelly). He is the Saints' father and everything to do with his side of the story is amazing. Duffy shot these scenes with an old style filter, where we are taken back to Italy where he was raised. We quickly learn how their father's life was shifted one night and how The Boondock Saints came to life. That to me was great closure and a great back story to know. It also plays an important role in the film's ending, which was truly a treat. The last twenty minutes of the film were pure bliss. The first film pretty much went straight to D.V.D. because of the Columbine shootings occurring right before the film's release. The government wanted to crack down on violent games and movies. Considering the nature of the original film, no film company would purchase the movie, forcing a straight to DVD release. Fortunately for Troy Duffy, the film went on to gross over $100 million on DVD alone. There is just something about vigilante justice that has always interested me. Any time I see good people killing off terrible people in films, my brain somehow shifts to the mindset that what they are doing is correct. In the first film, the Saints are taking down mob bosses, drug dealers and just downright, awful people. In case you have not seen the first film, The MacManus Brothers consist of Connor (Sean Patrick Flanery) and Murphy (Norman Reedus). They get into a bit of trouble in the first film before being sent a message from God that their purpose on earth is to wipe out bad people. They start doing just that, going from crime boss to crime boss, killing them all off. This splits the community, much like it splits the audience. Is it right or wrong what they are doing? If they are keeping murderers off the street, is that such a bad thing. F.B.I. Agent Smecker (played by Willem Dafoe) eventually caves and starts to help the boys out and actually assist them in the final murder of the first film, where the Saints are reunited with their father, A.K.A. Ill Duce (played by Billy Connelly). This final murder takes place in a courtroom while a crime boss is on trial. All three say their family prayer before putting three bullets into the back of his head. Duffy always plays some bad-ass music behind these murder scenes and it was that style that brought a lot of fans in. I give this film a 3.5 BDK rating out of 5. If you are a fan of the first film, like I am, you will have a fun time. There are so many inside jokes and references to the first that it made me feel like I was part of a secret fraternity. I had seen the first one so many times that I even picked up on the simplest of jokes. A character in the film uses the word symbolism in a scene, which was an obvious reference back Dafoe's hilarious pronunciation of the word in the first film. I did miss the back and forth between Bob Marley and Willem Dafoe, but they do expand on Marley's part in this film and he is still rather funny. Back to Top |
2012Genre: Action/Drama/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: Believe it or not, this film was worse than Transformers Revenge of the Fallen. 2012 felt like it lasted for 2012 minutes and then some. Not only were the effects mediocre but the script, acting and overall experience were just horrendous. Yes, there are a couple of scenes with great effects and minor intensity but not enough to save this film from disaster. The rest of the film is a laughably worse version of other Roland Emmerich films that we have already seen. 2012 is essentially the exact same film as The Day After Tomorrow and Independence Day. They just replaced it with different actors and changed the setting. Instead of Will Smith, we have John Cusack taking on the cliché role of the father who is never there. It was honestly as if Roland Emmerich reached into a bag and pulled out every cliché possible, mixed it in with visual effects and then plopped onto the film reel. The film is entirely too long for it's own good and makes a complete mockery of itself and its actors. The cast also includes Chiwetel Ejiofor (Love Actually, Children of Men), Oliver Platt (Lake Placid), Thandie Newton (W.), Woody Harrelson, Danny Glover and Amanda Peet (Saving Silverman). There has always been this myth that the world would end on December 21, 2012, at least according to the Mayan Calendar. To give the film some story, we start off in 2009 where in India; a scientist has discovered that our earth's core temperature is rising. He passes this news off to a geologist named Adrian Helmsley (Ejiofor). Based on this news, they realize that the world will come to an end in the year 2012. This news is brought to the President of the United States (played by Danny Glover) and a plan is set in motion where the higher ups of the world will be made offers to be on a special vessel which will help the survival of the human race. The only problem is that it will cost one billion Euros and only the elite can afford such a price. Move to 2012 where we meet limo drove/author Jackson Curtis (Cusack). He plays your typical cliché father who his divorced from his wife (Amanda Peet). They have two children together and of course she has already moved on to another husband. He decides to take his kids to Yellowstone Park for a family vacation and finds that the Government has taken over this land. There is smoke coming from the ground and it is about to erupt. There he meets a "crazy" man named Charlie (Harrelson) who happens to be a radio broadcaster. He knows the world is coming to an end and has a map of where these vessels are located. As the world starts falling apart, Jackson and his family embark on a mission to the vessel locations to save themselves. In the beginning, the film is self-aware that it is a disaster movie, making stupid jokes about the end of the world. Even characters make references to other "disaster"-type films. One of my favorite awful lines was when Cusack is refers to their current plane and says "We're going to need a bigger plane." I literally wanted to put my face into my hands and leave the theater. There was even a band on a cruise ship singing a song about the end of the world. It all seemed a bit laughable but it does turn and become a serious thriller, which is one of the reasons the film did not work. This is a disaster film that relies heavily on special effects and action sequences. If you don't have effects that look great, why put them in? I couldn't believe some of the amateurish effects I was seeing. There were scenes where I honestly though that Terminator 2: Judgement Day, which was made in 1991, looked better than scenes in this film. All of the blue screen effects were awful. That is where Emmerich needs major improvement. Anytime it is just a shot of destruction or water piling over a city, he doesn't have an issue. You have seen all of the best shots in the trailers though. Obviously, this is a trailer based film and gains a ton of interest based on that 2 and a half minute clip. So of course he meant to put the best looking things in the trailers. I will give him credit for an amazing 5-10 minute sequence where Cusack and his family are escaping California. Both sections, when they are in the limo and the plane, were very well done. The biggest issue with the action scenes is that everything happens at the perfect time. You knew that every intense scene would be alright at the last second. When they are driving through California as it is being destroyed, they miss everything right at the exact moment. That even happens during every flying scene. I understand that the director is trying to build tension for the audience that way but once you do it three or four times, your audience will adapt to the structure. He needed to change it up a bit. Emmerich always includes scenes where characters call loved ones that they haven't spoken to in ages, to wish them a farewell. This literally happens in every one of his films! I think back to Jeff Goldblum's phone calls in Independence Day. There are at least five or six of those in this film. I just don't understand why he keeps making the same picture. 2012 receives a 1.5 BDK out of 5. Wait for it to come on T.V. Back to Top |
PreciousGenre: Drama Released: 2009 Rating: Right after Precious ended, I stopped and talked to the publicist to give my thoughts on the film. I then immediately took my phone out of my pocket, opened up my contacts section and scrolled down to "home." I have a cute little picture of my mom and dad holding our poodle, who is called Rudy. I hit dial and my mom answers and I start rambling about how much I appreciate how well she raised me and that I am grateful that I had a home to go to that I was not afraid of. I thanked her for the fact that my father and her treated me right and let me be free with my education. I hope that this film has a similar impact on others. The film is based on a novel called Push by Sapphire and tells the story of Clarice "Precious" Jones (played by Gabourey Sidibe), a 16 year old girl with two kids (one already born and the other on the way), hopes and dreams. The issue is that her kids' father have the same father as "Precious". Ever since she was three years old, her father and mother have been abusing her, physically and verbally. Precious' first child lives with her grandmother because her own mother (played by Mo'Nique) won't allow "it" to stay there. She calls the child "Mongol", which is short for Mongoloid because it has Down-syndrome due to the incest factor. This all sounds rather pleasant so far, right? To be honest, I would say that Precious' home had similar evil connections to the dark pits of hell. After getting suspended from school, Precious' principal informs her of an alternative education called Each One Teach One where she can get her GED. The only issue is that she has never truly learned to read or write. Her mother has been on welfare for most of her life and has only filled Precious’ life with negativity about education. Her mother feels that she does not need an education and that she, like her mom, could skate by on Welfare. She constantly tells Precious how dumb, fat and idiotic she is and that education is a waste of time. This all changes when Precious meets Ms. Rain (Paula Patton). Ms. Rain teaches the AB course at "Each One Teach One," where she prepares students for the GED. While continuing to be abused by her mother, Precious attempts to turn her life around. Doors begin to open for her as she sits down with her social worker (played by a dressed down Mariah Carey) each week. I know a lot of press have been talking about Mo'Nique's Oscar worthy performance and yes all of the hype is 100% true. It is one of the finest performances from an actress I have ever seen. I can't remember the last time I saw a rawer, realistic and down right disturbing performance from an actress. It is easily on par with Heath Ledger's supporting acting role last year and is the sure win for the 2009 Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress. I almost want to say that is so much of a lock that I will quit movie reviewing if she doesn't win. When the film ended, I was speaking with a fellow critic (Brandonfibbs.com) about Mo’Nique and he said he would consider it among the top villains he has seen. That is what started up my thoughts on Heath Ledger. Her performance has that same scene stealing effect on the film that Ledger’s Joker did in The Dark Knight. It was that same relentless evil where you know the character will never change. They were just both inherently evil. Yes, a lot of the attention is on Mo'Nique but I feel like more people should be focusing on the performance from Gabourey Sidibe, who plays "Precious" in the film. This girl has never been in a feature length film, yet carried and dominated an entire picture where emotions are flying all over the place. You will be depressed one minute and laughing the next. Her facial expressions and delivery were completely on point. I have never seen an actress that had facial expressions that powerful. She carried all of her negative weight on her face. Besides the performances, the movie is extremely well directed by Lee Daniels, who beautiful recreates Harlem in 1987. He gets the grittiness and dirtiness of the city down pat. I really enjoyed the jittery camera angles and minor details throughout; such as turning windows into T.V. Screens or having pictures in a photo album come to life. Considering the film is based on a book, the filmmakers did a great job with Precious' voice over. To be honest, the way her voice over was read, it made me feel like I was reading the novel. It was one of the few films that actually felt like it stayed true to the source material. I have not read the book, but now I feel like I have. Precious is one of the more powerful films of the year and will make you appreciate your family and the life you have had so far. The film receives a 4.5 BDK rating out of 5. Note: I did not put this in my full review because it is a bit nerdy but I want you to pay attention to a particular scene where Mo'Nique is talking down to the character of Precious. This happens towards the beginning of the film and Precious is standing on top of the stair case and Mo'Nique is at the bottom yelling at her. It was a very unique shot because normally the person who is doing the down talking is shot at a higher angle. Lee Daniels shot this from a lower angle making Precious look like she was the truimphant one. Just an interesting side note I wanted to share with you. Back to Top |
Pirate RadioGenre: Comedy/Drama/Music/Romance Released: 2009 Rating: Pirate Radio's biggest star is it's amazing soundtrack. Writer/Director Richard Curtis gave each of the cast members an I-pod with eight play lists each containing thirty songs each. The music covered the time period in which the movie takes place, which was 1966. During an interview with Richard Curtis, he told me that he was sent to boarding school and would listen to this exact rock station when he went to sleep at night. There is even a shot during the beginning of the film which shows a child listening to the station under his pillow at night. The film tells you that most radio stations only played small amounts of music and therefore, this illegal pirate radio station decided to broadcast all of the good rock n' roll, 24 hours a day. Each hour had a live DJ which are played by the multiple stars of the film. Pirate Radio stars Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Bill Nighy, Tom Sturridge, Talulah Riley, Emma Thompson, Nick Frost and Kenneth Branagh. This was a different film for Richard Curtis, as he makes more of a personal film of a story that means a lot to him. Yet, considering his earlier work, he still throws in the love triangles. His earlier work has included Love Actually, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Notting Hill and Bridget Jones' Diary. The main character of the film, Carl (Tom Sturridge) is sent to live on this boat because he gets in trouble at home. His mother (Emma Thompson) sends him out to the boat to find answers. While aboard the boat that rocked (no pun intended), he meets a wide variety of DJ's and woman. Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Nick Frost are among the DJ's that spin their own variety of rock. The film takes us through love triangles while the government tries to shut the boat down, even though they have upwards of 25 million listeners. The film contains a lot of laughs but the greatest part is the soundtrack. All of the music from that era, i.e. The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Beatles. That was the golden era of Rock N' Roll and it was a shame that the government was limiting music being played in the UK. There is bit of controversy surrounding the film, as it did come out in the UK back in April of this year. It was released under the title of The Boat That Rocked and then edited down to the U.S. Title of Pirate Radio. I believe parts of the film were cut out that the producers felt would not appeal to U.S. Audience but I do not for sure, as I have not see The Boat That Rocked. This is a great true story with a ton of great laughs and classic moments. Working in radio, I could completely understand how important it was to have good radio. Throughout the film, you get to see some great inside radio bits. One of my favorites was the scene where Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character wants to use the F word. Now we all know that word is not allowed on the radio. There is this great dialogue that takes place about his character using the word and it turns out to be one of the funniest scenes of the film, right next to seeing Nick Frost totally naked. I give PIRATE RADIO a 3.5 BDK rating out of 5. Back to Top |
A Christmas Carol (2009)Genre: Animation/Drama/Family/Fantasy Released: 2009 Rating: Zemeckis brightens up the screen with beautiful effects but had trouble bringing anything new to this already amazing story that we have heard a million times before. This is a very tough review to write considering the amazing source material and Zemeckis' brilliant touch on it. The only problem is that knowing the story so well has its limitations. It limited me from being able to feel the danger of Scrooge's character. I wanted to feel his need to change and become a better person but I didn't feel that at all. I knew that everything would be alright in the end. And no, that is not a spoiler. The book and story has been around for ages. That being said, the film is beautiful and Zemeckis' use of 3D effects and motion capture is rather brilliant, which is why this is such a tough review to write. The story, which was even done earlier year as a romantic comedy (Ghosts of Girlfriends Past), is the classic tale of showing how much you should appreciate your life. Ebenezer Scrooge (played by Jim Carey) absolutely despises Christmas and only wishes negativity on the people who want to celebrate the holiday. As we see, he is very guarding of his money and property. He is such an "ass" that he struggles to let his co-worker, Bob Cratchit (played by Gary Oldman), take Christmas Day off of work. We all know that Cratchit's son, Tiny Tim, is struggling and needs his father around, but Scrooge is clueless and is only worried about the business. Being the curmudgeon that he is, he goes home on Christmas Eve by himself and is then visited by three ghosts throughout the night, each as the bell tolls 1 o'clock. Luckily, all the ghosts were voiced by Jim Carey, so he is essentially being visited by different tempered versions of himself. He gets the Ghost of Christmas Past to show him how happy his past life was. That is followed by the Ghost of Christmas Present to show him the problems he causes in his present crumudgeoness. Finally, he is visited by the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come to show him how his actions will impact the lives of others and his own. My problem with the movie comes from the fact that I have seen this story a million times. There honestly was nothing new added to the source material. All this film is, is a different persons take on the story using amazing visuals and 3D effects. The foreground effects that Zemeckis used were phenomenal, especially when Ebenezer is walking through the snow in the beginning. You feel like you are getting snowed on because the 3D of the shot completely engulfs your vision. Those aspects of the movie were amazing. The source material is amazing as well, so how could the film be bad? I wouldn't call it bad at all. I would just say that I was bored throughout because I knew everything that was coming up. I do want to say that this film is not for little kids. It contains so many dark themes and there are some pretty horrific images. Though, it is a Disney film, I don't think this was made for anyone under the age of 10. Even I was blown away by some of the material. Death was a major theme throughout Dickens’ novel and Zemeckis really drives that home. We see some pretty horrific imagery and frankly, I would not want my young child seeing this. On a positive note, Zemeckis' motion capture is purely genius. The fact that Carey, Gary Oldman and the rest of the cast were actually connected to all of these wires is mind-blowing. The attention to detail on their faces and movements is so humanistic that Gary Oldman's digital character looked exactly like him in real life. What we are seeing is the actual movement of the actor in digital form and it is breathtaking. I really wish Zemeckis would have added something new to the story. It was as if he wasted all of these effects just to bring the audience the same story they have seen a million times before. I am still going to give the film a 3 BDK rating based only on the effects. You are better off renting another version of the story or going to see a live production of the story. Wait for the rental on this one. Back to Top |
The Fourth KindGenre: Horror/Mystery/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: Have you ever seen a movie that you thought was pretty good when you walked out but once you found out the truth, you liked the film even more? Without giving anything away, let me say that I appreciated this film on a different level once I came home and researched the story. It just seemed much more intricate. There are two scenes in this film that are so scary that I literally started to cry because my body was not sure how to react to what I was seeing on the screen. My body was completely unsure as to what emotion to display, therefore my eyes just started watering. That being said, most of the films scares are more of the thrilling nature instead of the violent nature that we generally see. Now, based on the trailer for this film, actress Milla Jovovich comes on screen to address the audience, exactly like she does during the beginning of the film. She proceeds to tell the audience that what we are about to see contains real footage and scenes that are based on real events. There has been much controversy surrounding whether or not this real and after doing research I have figured out what is true and what is not true. Though, I am not going to spoil anything here in my review and keep this strictly as a critical stand point on the movie itself. Director Olatunde Osunsanmi has a real gem on his hands here. He not only directed the film, but is also a star and wrote the screenplay. The movie comes across as being a project that Osunsanmi was trying to complete where he interviewed the film's main subject, Dr. Abigail Tyler. Being that we are told this is a true story, we learn that Tyler's husband, Will, was brutally murdered one night while sleeping right next to Abigail. He and Abigail were both psychologists who had been studying strange cases in Nome, Alaska. After Will's death, Abigail decided to continue Will's studies. Going back and forth between real life footage of Abigail Tyler and the re-enactment footage where Abigail is played by Milla Jovivich, we get a realistic telling of her horrific story. Her patients all have a particular issue when they fall asleep at night where they are each visited by a weird owl, who just sits there staring at them in the night. We learn later on that this owl is some form of cover up as to what is actually going on. Abigail tells Osunsanmi in their interview that what we are dealing with is alien abductions, which is the fourth kind of contact when it comes to alien invasions. The first being the sighting, the second being the effects of the sighting and the third being contact. It turns out that Abigail is also being terrorized by these "aliens" and her family’s life is now in danger. The interview between Abigail and Osunsanmi serves as a narrative to the story. To me, the film would have been 100% scarier if they only used the "real" footage. I guess for effect, it was important to re-enact certain scenes that "footage" was not provided for. I did feel that Osunsanmi blended the "real" footage in with the "movie" footage rather brilliantly. For example, they would cut to a real audio recording of an interview with Abigail and then transition that shot to Milla Jovivich saying the exact dialogue on the tape. Osunsanmi also would give us split screens of the "real" footage and the re-enacted footage. That aspect was very interesting but the true scares come from the "evidence." Whether or not that is real is up to your imagination. I will say that there is a brilliant murder/suicide scene where the director splits the screen into four different sections and you get an array or "real footage" and re-enacted footage. That was the perfect example of why the film worked so well. The movie does have a lot of problems and one of those is that it is a bit over sensationalized for my taste. It is as if they know they are making a horror film and milk too many easy lines of dialogue or easy scenes out of the audience. I felt like the writers thought I was dumb at times. I could see them in their writer's meetings trying to come up with the scariest possible way to tell this story and sometimes it was a bit over the top. There would be perfect set-ups for scary moments that seemed way to scripted. That only happened about half of the time because there are some rather legitimate scares. Another issue was Will Patton. I generally like this guy as an actor but he completely overacted in this film. He plays the sheriff of Nome, Alaska and every line of dialogue is completely over-the-top and he has a very laughable scene where he throws a chair when he is mad. There was just something funny about how he delivered his dialogue. What really sold the movie for me were the scenes when Dr. Abigail Tyler puts her patients under hypnosis. There are two scenes where two characters go under a hypnosis to try and figure out what happened when they were asleep. I won't say which characters but these two scenes are shown to us in the "real" footage format and they are some of the most terrifying scenes I have seen on screen. I can't get the images out of my head. Regardless of the film being real or fake, it is a rather well put together story and concept for a thriller, hence the 4 BDK rating. Go enjoy the film for what it is! Back to Top |
The Men Who Stare at GoatsGenre: Comedy/War Released: 2009 Rating: NOTE: I wrote this review at 2am this morning and I have to wake up at 5am so please forgive grammatical mistakes. The Men Who Stare at Goats is one big long and terrible Star Wars joke. If the filmmakers made one more Star Wars joke, I was going to get up and leave the theater. This is a film that just way too quirky for its own good. I get that it is trying to be different, weird and edgy but most of the jokes fall flat. The concept of the film seems very funny but the overall execution is not there. I do enjoy a good quirky flick every once in a while but this one took it way too far which is a shame considering the amazing cast of the film. The cast includes George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges. The film is based on a book by Jon Ronson and supposedly tells of the true journalistic journey he encountered in the Middle East. Ewan McGregor plays a character named Bob Wilton, who is a reporter from Ann Arbor that gets dumped by his wife and embarks on this journey to the Middle East to prove that he is worth something. His wife left him for a one armed editor at his current paper. While traveling to the Middle East, his main goal is to travel into Iraq to go on a mission and report a dangerous story. Before entering Iraq he comes across a man named Lyn Cassady (George Clooney) who was a former member of the New Earth Army. The New Earth Army was a group of psychic soldiers started up by a man named Bill Django (Jeff Bridges). Django was in the Vietnam War and realized that we shouldn't have to use guns and weapons to fight a war. It should be more about peace and non-lethal attacks. Django begins this group called th New Earth Army shortly after the Vietnam War. The main story of the film takes place in 2003. Therefore, we are entertained with flash backs to how these psychic soldiers were created. They eventually worked up the nerve to get into people's minds and this was also tried on animals; such as goats and dogs. Cassady was so good that he could stare at a goat and make it's heart stop. The film's villain is Larry Hooper (Kevin Spacey) and he basically tries to ruin the New Earth Army and take it over for himself. He plays a key part in the present day mission that Cassady and McGregor set out on. Again, McGregor is just trying to get a good story but becomes part of something that will change his life. The movie is like eating ice cream with sprinkles on top except that the ice create tastes like crap. Therefore, you end up just licking the sprinkles off the top and throwing the rest of away. There are a few jokes throughout the film that will make you laugh but most of the Star Wars references really became old after a while. They referenced these psychic soldiers as being Jedi masters, which was annoying considering the film's main character was Obi Wan in the latest Star Wars trilogy. There were just so many scenes that did not make any sense whatsoever. The film's best character is a man named General Hopgood (played by Stephen Lang). He always had this huge smile on his face and he opens the film with a rather funny scene. He plays one of the members of the New Earth Army who goes a little crazy. Anytime he was on screen, you were guaranteed some good laughs. Another problem with the film is that it only clocks in at an hour and a half but felt like three hours when I was watching it. It just kept dragging on and as the jokes got worse the film became increasingly more boring. There is nothing worse than a short film feeling long. The film has a couple of gems but not enough for you to spend your money in theaters. I would wait for the rental, hence the 2.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
The BoxGenre: Horror/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: The Box is a fantastically made thriller that brilliantly captures the tone of the 70's and makes you question a lot of your morals and life choices. The main thing that I took away from the film was how greedy the human race truly is. This is a film about whether or not you would take a life away from someone you have never met, just for a quick million dollars. I know that sounds like a lot of money but, to me at least, another person's life is priceless. The sad thing is that I would bet the majority of people would press this button for the million dollars and not think twice. Now, I am just speaking from a stand point of my own opinion. I personally would not press a button to kill some random person to get a million dollars. Now, once you find out the general theme to the movie, you will see where director Richard Kelly is trying to go with this moral dilemma. The film is based on a short story by Richard Matheson called "Button, Button", which was also a Twilight Zone episode. Taking place in 1976, Donnie Darko director Richard Kelly takes us through a journey of a couple who is need of money to keep their child in a private school. Norma (Cameron Diaz) and Arther Lewis (James Marsden) are a married couple living in Richmond, VA with their one and only son. One morning at 5:45am, they receive a knock on the door and once answered, they find a small box waiting at their door step as a black vehicle drives away. There is a note saying that the person who left the box will be back at 5pm that day. So 5 o'clock rolls around and there is a person at the front door. This person, who is missing the complete left side of his face, goes by the name of Arlington Steward. After he is invited in, he explains to Norma that if she presses this button, somewhere in the world, someone will die. This is a person that Norma has never met. Once the button is pressed, Arlington will hand her a briefcase filled with one million dollars, tax free. Norma and her husband talk it over and I will leave the plot line alone from this point as to not spoil anything. Let's just say a decision is made and there are great consequences. The film is much deeper than the choice they have to make. Director Richard Kelly beautifully captures the 1970's with this thriller, which does seem a bit uneven and long at times. Those are my only two criticisms of the film though. Other than that, the film definitely puts you through a moral dilemma and to be honest, I still don't know everything that happened in this movie. I feel like I need to see it again. One of the strong points of the film is the film's score, which was done by the band members of Arcade Fire. You may recognize their song "Wake Up" from the Where The Wild Things Are trailer. In an interview with Richard Kelly, he said they were going for a Hitchcock type score and they definitely nailed it. It is a creepy, yet completely over-the-top score, which fits the movie perfectly. The film's tone is very interesting because you will find yourself laughing at things that are completely bizarre and creepy. The laughs are more of the uncomfortable nature though. There are images that may come across as comical to some people and just weird to others. Lots of the characters that walk around the film may have their mouths opened or weirdly follow other characters. All of these actions have reasons which will be explained in the film. The film's score does add to this quirkiness. I do want to point out the amazing acting in the film. Cameron Diaz, James Marsden and especially Frank Langella (who recently played Nixon in Frost/Nixon) all pull of great performances. Langella was one of the creepiest villains I have seen in a while. A lot of that had to do with the fact that half of his face was missing. You will find out why once you see the film. The main reason I enjoyed the film is that really gave a good look into testing the morals of human beings. Once you get deeper into the film and see what is really going on, it makes you step back and think about the human race as a whole. The film receives a 4 BDK rating out of 5. Back to Top |
This Is ItGenre: Documentary/Music Released: 2009 Rating: I feel like I now know who Michael Jackson really was. He was truly a perfectionist, a genuine genius and just an all around caring person. Has the guy done crazy stuff in his life? Of course he has and so has everyone else in the world. The difference is that when a normal person like you or I mess up, it is not blown up by the tabloids and examined inch by inch. The news media and tabloids just loved to focus on anything negative this man had one. Each and every mistake he made was sensationalized by the media and once the poor man lost his life, the last image we had was that he was a crazy person. Well, thankfully we have This is It. This is a true portrait of who Michael Jackson was behind the scenes. What you see in this film was never meant to be seen by the public eye. Jackson had 3 HD cameras on him at all times during the rehearsals for his upcoming tour because he wanted archive footage of everything he had done. The filmmakers probably wanted footage for the concert DVD as well. He was just going to take these tapes and put them away to look at later in his life. Therefore, he did not have to put on a show for anyone at home. He was not buttering himself up and in fact, at times, his singing is off key and he is being a completely goofball. Those are the best parts of the film though. The film chronicles the rehearsals for his This Is It tour, which was his first tour in over a decade. The rehearsals took place between April and June 2009, right up until his death. He was rehearsing for a 50 concert tour in London, which would have been seen by over a million people and as you see in the film, each and every person was going to get their money's worth. The show was going to play like a live concert and a movie, where they filmed new videos for "Thriller" and his other classics. The "Thriller" video was actually shot in 3D and they were going to have ghosts flying through the audience for that 4D effect. As Michael stated in his press conference when this tour was announced, the songs were going to be chosen by the fans. I was reading through the press notes for the film and he actually posted up a poll on his website where millions of people voted for which songs he should perform live. The movie takes us through the majority of his set and we get to watch him rehearse all of his classics like "Billy Jean," "Thriller," "Black or White" and of course, "The Man in the Mirror." These are completely raw rehearsals where he will be practicing his dance moves or working on his vocals. Again, this was not meant to be seen and we are getting such a unique perspective of him. I almost felt like I shouldn't be allowed to see this type of footage and it felt like such a treat to be able to watch it. I feel like everyone should see this movie, whether you like or dislike Michael Jackson. For the people who love him, you will get to see a side of Michael Jackson that you already knew. You will see the artist, the dancer, the performer, the musician that was Michael Jackson. This will be a film that you can watch and see just how much work goes into a tour and how much of a perfectionist he really was about getting every little detail correct. If you dislike Michael Jackson, based on how he is portrayed in the media, I recommend you check the film out to get an honest look at this man. I will say the film does start to drag a little bit at the end and could have been cut down by maybe ten minutes, but besides that little issue, this is a brilliant documentary that you will easily connect to. All of the songs are ones that play a big part in our music culture and I feel that anyone can relate to. Plus, you get to see this fifty-year old man dance around stage like he's fifteen years old. I will still never understand how he was able to move his feet the way he did. Michael Jackson's This is It receives a 4.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
An EducationGenre: Drama Released: 2009 Rating: Normally, when you read a good review of a film, the critic may say that it left them "speechless." Well, as I sat in this crowded auditorium at the London Film Festival, I could not wait until the film reached its credit sequence so that I could look over at the guy next to me and blurt out my feelings. Never before had I been speechless and at the same time, had so much to say. Much of what I was saying did not make any sense because I was so overcome by emotions and happiness. This may sound a bit contradictory, but the film has the most cliché, yet anti-cliche, ending I have seen. Without explaining exactly what that is, they end the film in such a way that yes, it may be typical, but the way it is done is very original. After talking with star Carey Mulligan and Nick Hornby, they stated that the ending was not originally like that in the script and that they came up with how to shoot it while on set. They wanted the ending to not be a typical Hollywood ending. I'll be the first to admit, much to people's dislike, that I am a young lad in this business. I have only been doing movie reviews since 2005 here in Washington D.C. This next statement could not be more true in my eyes, as I have thought about it for the past couple of weeks. The performance given in this film by Carey Mulligan is, hands down, the best performance by an actress I have seen in my career. Not for one second in the entire ninety-five minute film, did I ever feel that she broke character. She became the character of Jenny and lived her life as a 16-year old school girl getting three different educations. This is a performance of a life time and she will win the best actress award at the Oscars in 2009. To be a bit of a hack, the film truly is an education; well actually three educations. The film has so many layers and so many messages that it can teach any person, no matter what stage of their lives they may be in, a decent life lesson. Jenny (Mulligan) is your normal sixteen year old high school student in London, where her grades are remarkable and she is on her way to an education at Oxford University. Her mother and father (played by Aflred Molina) are very strict on her and are constantly on her back on her Latin homework. They want to keep her away from her love of Paris, as her father is always complaining when Jenny listens to French music. One day after band practice at school, Jenny is waiting at the bus stop in the pouring rain, when a rich gentlemen in his 40's rolls up in a nice looking car, offering her a ride. At first she is very reluctant but he works his magical charm and eventually she gets in the car and they have the most wonderful conversation. You have to keep in mind that Jenny thinks she is completely mature for her age. This is the beginning of a two year relationship between the two, where David essentially convinces Jenny's parents that he should take her places like Paris for the weekend. This would be for strictly educational purposes, of course. David and Jenny are always hanging around another couple; Danny (Dominic West) and Helen (Rosamund Pike). Danny is David's business partner and they deal in a very shady way. Jenny begins to care less and less about school and more about living her life. She feels that this life she lives with David is fun and how it should be. That is where she becomes really immature. When problems arise though, she will get her most useful education. I want to point out two other brilliant performances in the film; Olivia Williams (who plays Miss Stepps) and Emma Thompson (who plays Jenny's principal). Why is Carey Mulligan's performance so good? Naturalism. It is the most realistic performance I have seen in long time. Every mannerism, smile, laugh and line of dialogue was said as if she was really Jenny. This made her the easiest character in the world to fall in love with. Most critics will not be able to experience this next part, so please take my word on this as it pertains to how amazing Mulligan's performance really was. I attended a press conference after the film with Carey Mulligan, Nick Hornby, Scott Hicks and Dominic Cooper. As I arrived at the conference, in my mind, I was hoping I would see Jenny and not Carey Mulligan. The actress could not be more different from the character she played and it is pretty much a 180, which kind of saddened me because I loved her character so much. This goes to show you how good Mulligan is at getting into character. The film is brilliantly shot by director Lone Sherfig who perfectly captures the 60's. This is a film that everyone should see and is one of the best of 2009. Every performance and every line of dialogue were amazing. One of my favorite dynamics was Mulligan and Molina. There is a wonderful scene towards the end of the film where Molina is trying to console his daughter and the entire scene happens while Mulligan is in her bedroom and he is at the door. It was truly one of the more heartfelt scenes I have seen in a film in a long. The kicker was that the two characters were not even in the same room. Please go see this film immediately, hence the 4.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
AntichristGenre: Drama/Horror Released: 2009 Rating: I will never think of scissors, shoes, acorns or slow motion the same ever again, thanks to director Lars Von Trier. With one of the most brilliant opening sequences I have seen on film, Von Trier takes us down a path of grief, pain and despair, which also happen to be three of the four main chapters of this horrific story. Told in a chapter format, he is even so kind as to give us a prologue and epilogue to wrap everything up in a nice little bow for us. Let's just say that the film is very interesting. Antichrist tells the story of a couple with no names, played by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg. As we see in the amazingly cinematic opening sequence, they lose their child to a terrible accident while making love right next to the tragic occurrence. Dafoe's character is some type of therapist and as the film progresses through its four main chapters of "Grief," "Pain," "Despair," and "The Three Beggars," he tries to walk her through the steps to move on with her life. He, being the "man" in the relationship, seems emotionless about the death of their son and more focused on the recovery of his wife. The only problem is that his wife seems to think that acts of violence and rough sex are the answers to her grief. During her treatment, he learns that her most feared place is the woods; specifically a cabin where she was previously writing her thesis. They travel, to what they call "Eden," to attempt to cure her sadness. In this wood cabin, located in the middle of the woods, both characters experience a form of treatment neither could have ever imagined. Von Trier's film is filled with jump cuts, awkward slow motion shots and horrific spurts (no pun intended) of unbelievably disgusting violence. This is not a film that I would recommend to most people considering the fact that is more disturbing than all of the Saw and Hostel films combined. The crazy thing is that most of the scenes are very quick, unlike the Saw movies where everything is drawn out. Yet, the disgusting scenes from Antichrist will be etched into my memory until the day I die. It was as if Von Trier tried to think of the most disgusting thing possible, just to shock the audience. I would consider it to be a negative aspect of the film, that now when I think back on it, I think of how disgusting it was. That overpowers any type of message Von Trier was trying to tell the audience. People will get different reads on this movie considering the subject matter but I took away a very simple read. Charlotte Gainsbourg was some form of the devil, considering her actions with her child and her husband. Something was not right in her brain and there are many clues to her being some form of evil being. Something happened to her on her original trip to Eden and her actions forced the couple back to the cabin in some sort of devious plan. As I sit here and write this review, the images of the film keep popping back into my head. I try to go to a nice place in my mind but some of the images were just so horrific that I can't think of anything else. Speaking of good imagery though, the opening sequence is done in this blue tint with beautiful slow motion. My mouth was literally open for the entire five to seven minute sequence while this beautiful opera music played on in the background. It is this scene alone that really kept me on the positive side when rating this film. To give the film credit, its best achievement is the level of intrigue it gains from its audience. I don't know about you, but I was just so locked in to see what would happen next. Where else could this film possibly go? I wouldn't say the finish product lives up to the much anticipated intrigue, except for the fact that it did gross me out way more than I had expected. Is the film worth seeing? Well, I would say yes because of the filmmaking involved. The acting and direction are wonderful but this is not a movie for everyone. It does contain some slow moments but the overall intrigue never leaves you until the final frame. I would say the slow moments could be taken as a positive because you sit there wondering when the characters are going to go crazy. I give the film a 3.5 BDK rating out of 5. Keep in mind that this is an UNRATED film, containing extreme sexuality and horrific violence, so don't let that fool you. Back to Top |
Saw VIGenre: Crime/Horror/Mystery/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: The Saw writers have an answer to Michael Moore's Sicko. They take a stab at the current health care system, basically saying it's not right that certain dying people do not get the coverage they deserve. Except in Saw VI, they let Tobin Bell take out the garbage. All Moore should do now is combine his film with Saw VI and then shop it around to all of the health care companies in the United States. I would love to see how fast our health care system would change. Saw VI conveniently takes a political angle this time and is easily the best one in the series since Saw III, but that's not really saying much, considering it's the same old "torture porn" again. Saw VI picks up right where Saw V left off. Does anyone remember exactly where the fifth installment left off? Well, unless your memory is flawless or you have watched the fifth one a million times, you may want a refresher. I feel like these Saw films should have a "previously on Saw" feature before the movie starts. Not everyone remembers all of these movies and it would make the audience happier if they knew everything that was going on. I will say though, that this one does a good job about giving flash backs to key plot points throughout the movie. The main story revolves around a health insurance company called Umbrella Health. The head of the company, William (played by Peter Outerbridge), believes in a formula that basically tells him if a person is coverable under his insurance company. Essentially, if it will make the company money, the person is insurable. If the person is going to die, it is a waste for the company to cover their medical bills for treatment. Well, Jigsaw (Tobin Bell), doesn't feel this is right and I feel that most people would agree with him. Now, Jigsaw, has been dead for a couple of years now, but his games and torture still live on through a man named Hoffman (played by Costas Mandylor). Without giving anything away, Jigsaw was somehow affected by this insurance company and William will now be dealt with. The majority of the movie takes place during an hour span where we follow William through a bunch of games that put him in the face of death to teach him a lesson about leaving other people's lives in the hands of a simple formula. While I enjoyed adding another piece to the Saw puzzle, this film reminded me more and more why the series is not scary in the least bit. In today's horror climate, it is all about how much you can gross out the audience with blood and guts. At one point, these "torture porn" films were all the rave because it was intriguing to see how far they would go. Could one film top the other? That wave has long passed though, mainly because everyone is now desensitized to the material. There has to be another way to scare people now and it is slowly heading back to the classic scares. We need more Hitchcock-type movies! Make more movies like Rope or Pyscho. Even earlier this year, Drag Me To Hell came out with a PG-13 rating and was scarier than every Saw film combined. It was all about Sam Raimi's want to "build sequences of suspense," as he said in an interview on my radio show. It was scarier to not know what was happening, than to have it all shoved in your face. That is why Paranormal Activity is shocking the hell out of people across the country. No one is going to go home at night, get in their bed and worry that someone is going to throw them in a torture device where they will have to make a decision regarding life or death. That all being said, the Saw films do follow an interesting story line and the concept was always great. The films have always brought up the fundamental question between right and wrong, as does this one. Not that I would ever condone anything that happens in these movies, it does make you think about life in general. You always feel yourself rooting against some of these people that Jigsaw tortures. Especially in this film, where our main character, William, has denied so many people health insurance and that has eventually lead to their death. It has always has been a strong angle to the films and each one of them contains this message. Is the film scary? No. Is it unbelievably disgusting and hard to watch at times? Yes. Is it entertaining? A little. Is it a bad film? No. Is it anything new? No. I would stick with a rental on this one. Back to Top |
Where the Wild Things AreGenre: Adventure/Drama/Family/Fantasy Released: 2009 Rating: Where The Wild Things Are is a movie that I wanted to love, cuddle with and come out of the theater screaming like a little kid. It was a movie that I wanted to bring back memories of my childhood when my mom used to read the book to me each and every night. I wanted to reminisce on old times with my brother when we used to build forts and do sleepovers in the guest bedrooms, where we would stay up past our bed time trying to unscramble the bad channels on our 19inch television. I wanted all that and I was let down, which is not to say the film is bad. I heard a great quote once that compared parents being disappointed in their kids as opposed to being angry. It is always worse if they are disappointed in you. That is how I felt about the film. It pains me to be disappointed in the overall product but let me say that the direction and cinematography are brilliant. Those two aspects actually saved the film for me. You will be stunned by the superb cinematography and Jonze's realistic way of incorporating these "wild things" into the film. According to an article in the L.A. Times, all of the actors who played the "wild things" were actually behind the suits, but there faces were CGI. Apparently, they were in the suits for twelve hours a day. In post-production, the faces were digitally enhanced so that the lips and eyes could move naturally. Watching these "wild things" interact with our lead characters, Max, is just flawless. In that department and cinematography the film receives and A+ in my book. Jonze would definitely go home with an A if this was for a directing class. The film's biggest issue lies within its pacing. To me, a lot of the film was a bunch of music video and montage sequences where we heard songs from "Karen O and the Kids" while Max and the "wild things" would roam around the forest destroying things. I understand that it is supposed to feel like we are tapped into a child's imagination but I didn't need to see three or four sequences of the same thing. It became monotonous and grueling after a while. To get away from the similarities, I found myself studying the "wild things" effects and how Spike Jonze could have possibly done them so flawlessly. If you are not familiar with Karen O, she is the lead singer of a popular Indie band called the "Yeah Yeah Yeahs." This movie was obviously made for the people who read the book when they were younger, like myself. Kids will have a tough time watching it mainly for the same reason I was not highly impressed with the overall picture; the slow middle portion where Max is interacting with the "wild things." The film taps into the imagination of a young kid named Max (played by Max Records). Max feels lonely and as we see in the beginning, he barely has any friends. His sister and her friends are mean to him and his mother (played by Catherine Keener) is trying out new boyfriends. It would appear that Max's father either passed away or his father left the family. His mother's new boyfriend is over the house the night the story takes place and he is played by Mark Ruffalo. To make a short story short, Max runs off after arguing with his mom and embarks on a magical journey in his imagination. He gets in a boat and ends up on an imaginary island where imaginary creatures live. These creatures include Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini), Douglas (Chris Cooper), Ira (Forrest Whitaker), Judith (Catherine O' Hara), KW (Lauren Ambrose). Obviously, you will see many themes throughout the film. There are many on the surface, i.e. loneliness, depression, absence of a father figure. There are also many parallels between the "wild things" and Max. Some people will say the "wild things" are all a different part of Max and some will say that he each one of them represents and aspect of his life. For example, the character of Carol highly represents Max's need to feel loved. On the drive home from the film, I was talking with a fellow critic (Josh Hylton) regarding other themes to the film and we came up with possible parallels between real life characters and these "wild things." I won't go into them, as to not ruin the film for anyone but the point would be that anyone can take anything away from the film. Jonze leaves a lot up to you to figure out, which is another reason why it is not a movie for kids. I truly enjoyed the book more than the film. I know that is not saying much considering how short the book (mainly pictures with less than a dozen sentences) is but to me, reading the book is more entertaining. Besides the last twenty-minutes of the film, I felt like the pace could have been more sped up. We spent too much time running around with Max in the forest, destroying things. It would have worked better in a shorter film because it starts to wear thin after a while. This is far from a bad film and actually very close to being a good one. The pacing issues are what killed it for me and I had a hard time connecting to the characters based on these issues. Visually, the film will blow your mind. The scenes where Max and Carol are walking the island are just breathtaking. There is one particular shot where Carol is standing on top of the desert and the sun is either coming up or setting. It literally took my breath away. I am going to going to give the film 3.5 BDKs for now. Again, I didn't hate it or love it. I am very in the middle on this one for now. I would like to see it again after having that parallels discussion and see where it takes me. Back to Top |
Law Abiding CitizenGenre: Drama/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: Note from Kevin: This review may come off as a bit a contradictory because I did not feel the film worked as a whole but the parts that I did like were extremely entertaining. Gray shoots the film with a beautiful "neo-noir" style but it eventually loses its moral track and becomes an all-out action flick taking it away from its original purpose. That is not necessarily a bad thing but at the end of the movie I personally did not feel that I was taught a lesson. If this was just a normal action flick, it would have worked but if you set the film up to have some type of moral question answered, you need to leave the audience satisfied. Much like From Dusk Till Dawn, the film's opening half is quite different from its ending half. Unlike From Dusk Till Dawn, the two halves do not work well together. Gray and his writers bring up many controversial subjects about our judiciary system within this film, which are subjects that need to be tackled immediately. The answers that are given in this film are completely far-fetched and completely impossible but allow for entertainment. During a Q&A with the director, F. Gary Gray mentioned that he was trying to keep a serious vibe but also entertain the crowd. He definitely gets that but it becomes a bit too much. The film opens up with a happy family sitting around the house doing normal family-type stuff. Clyde Shelton (Butler) is playing with his daughter, when he goes to answer the door and is immediately beaten to the ground by two robbers. They proceed to tie him and his wife up, leaving them helpless. Butler watches as his wife is brutally stabbed to death. One of the robbers, Darby (Christian Stolte), notices Clyde's kid and murders her off screen. The other robber, Ames (Josh Stewart), seemed like he didn't want to be there and as if he was peer pressured from the start. This leads us to court where Clyde is being represented by Philadelphia's hottest district Attorney, Nick Rice (Foxx). He claims to have a conviction rating of 96% and you will be damned if you tell him it is 95%. Nick tells Clyde that the only way to get justice is for Darby to confess to murder and serve as an eye-witness to Ames' brutal murder. Backwards right? Well, to keep that conviction rating up, he had to cut a deal. Butler feels this is wrong and decides to take matters into his hands. Ten years pass, Darby is out of jail and Ames is about to be put to death by the state. Butler is then sent to prison where he continues his wiping out of this corrupt judiciary system. The twist is that he is killing everyone while he is in jail! How is he doing it? As his character says, it is going to be "Biblical." I read a quote from the producer of this film saying that you never know who to root for in this movie. Producer Lucas Foster stated "Our main characters are locked together by tragedy. They're both right and they are both wrong." One minute, you are with Gerard Butler because his family was brutally murdered. The next minute, you think Butler is a maniac, killing off all of these judges and important figures in the judiciary system. At this point, Foxx becomes the hero, but in the end you really do not know who to root for. If this had be managed a little better, the film could have made a statement, but you are left with a brutally violent, mindless action flick in the end. Now, once the film shifts and you start to take Jamie Foxx's side, it gets fun. As an audience member, I was curious as to how Butler was pulling off all of these murders. What makes the movie entertaining are the comedic moments throughout the film. Personally, it was these comedic moments that took me away from the film's seriousness. That being said, the comedic moments are intriguing and very entertaining. I guess my point is that the overall film did not work but it was still fun to watch. Trust me, I know that is contradictory but it is how I felt. The strongest point of the film is F. Gary Gray's direction. In an interview that I did with him, he stated that he created a format called "neo-noir", where he wanted to shoot the film in a modern day setting with a film noir style. There is a genius montage sequence that he cut together between the execution of Ames' character and Nick's daughter participating in a recital. Both are cut together with the curtains being released on each and close-up shots of each. It is something you need to see visually but it was truly stunning. This was a tough review to write but I am going to stick with my 3.5 BDK rating. I did the see the film a second time and felt the exact same way. Back to Top |
More Than A GameGenre: Documentary Released: 2009 Rating: Kristopher Belman directed this film as a college documentary class assignment and received a B+. I wonder if his teacher is kicking his or herself now. I doubt Kris had any clue where this little high school basketball team out of Akron, Ohio was going. As of today's date, I have now seen one of the most inspiring documentaries to come out in years. While the trailers lead you to believe that the film is a LeBron James documentary, the film focuses more on the amazing story of his high school basketball team. Personally, I walked away thinking about Little Dru Joyce, who was the smallest, most explosive player on the team. Besides LeBron, Joyce was the most entertaining and the most "real" of the players. The five main starters at St. Vincent-St. Mary called themselves the "Fab Five." LeBron James, Dru Joyce, Sian Cotton and Willie McGee were together all four years, adding Romeo Travis a couple of years down the line. With recent interviews, home video footage and the brilliant direction and editing of Kris Belman, we follow this team to a national championship. The film focuses on all five of these players' lives, including their amazing coach, Dru Joyce. When you see the trailers, it does appear as if the movie is completely centered around LeBron James. While we do see how he rose to fame, it is more about the team’s friendship. The interesting thing is that out of the five, LeBron obviously became the most famous. At the end of the film, you do get to see where each player ends up. My favorite part of the film was the editing. I just loved how retro and original it appeared. Even though it was a documentary, it came off like a perfect narrative. All of the effects used in the editing bay are beautifully show with slow-motion and still photography turning into action shots. You kind of have to see it to know what I am talking about. This can primarily be seen when each player is introduced and while we are learning about each. You always see cliché and formulaic movies about "nobodys" rising to the top and defeating the "somebodys." Well, this is no fictional story. This is real life and it is just so sweet to see this team, that nobody even whispered about, make a mark in high school basketball history. As of right now, this is my favorite documentary of the year, above Michael Moore's Capitalism and Chris Rock's Good Hair. Back to Top |
Couples RetreatGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: Vaughn and Favreau sprinkle in a couple of hilarious jokes throughout but that does not save this formulaic, cliché and horribly paced comedy. You would think a film written by Vince Vaughn/Jon Favraeu and directed by Ralphie (Peter Billingsley) from A Christmas Story, would be half-way decent. Well, they just decided to follow the Hollywood route and it shows negatively here on screen. Besides feeling three hours long, the movie was like a perfect math equation. We have our problem and the solution is inevitable. Everything in the film is timed perfectly and served up to you in a nice little bow. It was as if Macy's gift wrapped the script and handed it right to the director. I understand people want to walk out a movie and feel good but this film became so far-fetched it was actually offensive. You are supposed to suspend your disbelief when watching a movie, not look at the screen and say "life is not like that." The ending of this film could not have been more scripted and formulaic. Couples Retreat stars Vince Vaughn, Jon Favreau (director of Iron Man), Kristen Bell (Forgetting Sarah Marshall), Kristen Davis (Sex and the City), Malin Ackerman (Watchmen), Jason Bateman (Juno), Jean Reno (The Professional), Faizon Love and Peter Serafinowicz (voiced Darth Mahl" in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace). The film revolves around four couples and their trip to a paradise Island called Eden. Jason (Bateman) and Cynthia (Bell) have been married for eight years and realize that their marriage is no longer working. They hear of a vacation paradise that also works as counseling for marriages. They cannot afford to go on their own, so they ask their other couple friends to join for a group discount. Before leaving, we learn that Joey (Favreau) and Lucy (Davis) are having trouble with their marriage as well. They are only staying together until their daughter leaves for college, as to set a good example. Dave (Vaughn) and Ronnie (Ackerman) have an "ok" marriage, meaning that they are generally happy but they never have "us" time. It is almost as if their marriage is a job. Dave's friend Shane (Love) just got out of a marriage and is now dating a young twenty-year old girl named Trudy. They embark on this trip to Eden, not knowing that it is a couples counseling retreat. Minus, Jason and Cynthia, they all think they are going away on a nice vacation. It turns out that this place is a bit militant and they realize this right when they get as they are introduced to Stanley, which is spelled with a C. Stanley works under Marcel (played by Jean Reno). Marcel has created this program which is supposed to bring couples close together again. The first thirty to forty minutes of the film are actually very funny. The dialogue between the couples and the back and forth banter between Vaughn and Favreau is great. You start to think that you might actually have a decent romantic comedy on your hands here. All of the couples have their issues and they are now stuck on this Island. Well, all is well until the film starts fitting into place with every formula possible. It became tiring when these characters would be in separate places, yet having the same dialogue with their husbands/wives that the other characters were having. Meaning, if one of the couples was finally working their marriage out, the other three were as well. If one of the couples was having problems, they were all three having problems. It was just so unrealistic and annoying. Everything felt forced like when my dad used to force me to eat food I did not like when I was a kid. It was all shoved down our throats. The biggest issue with the movie is that you have four couples and only two of them are interesting. Shocker, the two that are actually good are Vince Vaughn and Jon Favreau's couples. Both Vince and Jon have the best scenes in the film and that is obvious considering they wrote the film. Both of these characters will definitely bring you laughs but the other two couples are down right annoying and bland, which leads you to only liking about 50% of the film. That in my book is a movie not worth spending your hard earned money on to see in theaters. Can someone explain to me who thought that a five minute Guitar Hero battle would be funny on screen. There is a scene where Vaughn and Serafinowicz have a Guitar Hero battle and it is so out of place and completely unfunny. They edit all cheesy with split screens and I could tell they were going to a nostalgic moment with the audience. You know how if someone brings up something form the past you like, your interest in kind of peaked? Well, they probably thought that most people have Guitar Hero, so this bit should make people laugh. This bit failed miserably and was more embarrassing than anything else. Also, could this film have followed the trailer anymore? It was as if I was watching the trailer but a little bit extended. All of the funny bits that you are waiting to see, are in the trailer, which is why you need to wait for this movie to hit cable, hence the 1.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
A Serious ManGenre: Comedy/Drama Released: 2009 Rating: A Serious Man is a film that took me out of work mode as a critic and shifted me back into a fan boy. While the film has unexplainable themes, it is a well executed dark comedy that will leave you talking as you walk out of the theater. I couldn't stop admiring the fantastic direction, the well placed dark comedy and the beautifully depressing vibe of the film. The fascinating thing about watching a Coen Brothers movie is that you never have any idea where the film will end up. Sometimes in movie, you can figure out the mystery by the direction of the score but with this film, the score will pop in completely out of nowhere creating a sense of mystery. Yet, nothing will happen in the scene. It is as if they are tapped into the audiences' brain and know exactly what to do to keep the audience engaged. The suspension of disbelief in their films is unbelievable. For what seems to be a movie coming out every year for them, they always deliver and this is sure to be one of their most remembered films. Going back and looking over their filmography though, it does not stand up beside something like Fargo or Raising Arizona but I would say it is on par with something like No Country for Old Men or Burn After Reading. Above when I talked about going from work mode into fan boy mode, I was mainly referring to the direction of the film. Growing up, I really enjoyed unique camera work from directors and I feel like the Coen Brothers brought that back for me. The canted angles, extreme close-ups, the awkwardly high hovering shots all added stress to the story line and they actually fit the film. It was great direction but that also fit the mood of the film and not a cool shot for cool shots sake. There was one particular shot where the lead star, Michal Stuhlbarg, and one his neighbors smoke a joint together. When Stuhlbarg is about to take a hit from the joint, the music stops and the Coen Brothers cut to a record player, which mimics the sound of the joint being smoked. This is preceded by an amazing canted angle of both Stuhlbarg and his neighbor while they are stoned and talking. For some reason, it just really worked on screen and it was scene of relief for this character that had been struggling the entire film. Let's just say that when you see this film, you will feel better about your own life. The lead character of the film takes an onslaught of negative events in just a short period of time. The amount of problems that he faces throughout this film can be equated to a lifetime of problems for another individual. Larry Gopnik (Stuhlbarg) is a married man whose wife, Judith (Sari Lennich) comes to him out of nowhere one day saying she wants to have a "Get", which is a ritual divorce in the Jewish religion that essentially makes it acceptable to marry another man afterwards. His wife is upfront about her future with her new husband, Sy (Fred Melamed), who happens to be a friend of the family. Did I mention that they get Larry to move out of the house even though he was not the one in the wrong. On top of all that, Larry is professor at a local college and one of his students is trying to bribe him for a passing grade. The student tries to leave money on his desk and act like he didn't put it there, causing the kid's father to threaten to sue for defamation. Larry's brother is also staying at his house because he has nowhere to go and he keeps getting in trouble with the law. Larry's son is getting into a ton of trouble at school, including doing drugs and stealing from his parents. The movie essentially follows Larry through this period in his life where everything is going to crap. While it is never stated, the film appears to take place in the 1960's, after a very interesting beginning sequence which looks to take place hundreds of years prior. This opening sequence definitely has meaning to the overall movie, but until I see the film again, that will be a tough one to figure out. The film's leading man is a very disturbed character but most of these feelings are kept locked away, which is shown beautifully in his performance. Everything from his facial expressions to his delivery were spot on. Throughout the whole movie, as everything is falling apart in his life, you are just waiting for him to explode on somebody. When will enough be enough for this guy? All of his friends and family keep telling him to see the Rabbi and through a sequence of three different occasions, he visits three different Rabbis. These scenes are much like confessionals and are very well written and often humorous. The best Rabbi he visits is played by George Wyner and he tells a great story about a dentist which was a typical Coen Brothers angle on life. If you have been lucky enough to see the genius trailer for this film, you probably have absolutely no idea what is happening or what the film is about. Well, that is part of the mystery and what makes the movie so good. From the first frame to the last, there was never any indication in the trailer as to where this movie was going to go. A Serious Man is a film that will make you think and contemplate on this character's life. When will he go to the dark side? He considers himself to be a nice Jewish man who has not done anything evil in his life. There is really no explanation as to the exact meaning of the film and it does have a very similar abrupt ending as we saw in No Country for Old Men. The Coen Brothers are masters at dark comedy and you will definitely laugh but this one is a bit on the stressful side of things. You are with this character the whole time and everything bad is happening to him. Based on the direction and film's score alone, this comes highly recommended. Right up until the last frame, you will be locked to the screen to see how much worse this guy's life could possibly get. I will admit this was a tough film to review because I still do not quite understand everything that happen. I am going to go back for a second viewing and I will have an updated paragraph once I capture it again. I am going to follow my own review and catch it during a matinee, hence the 4 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Paranormal ActivityGenre: Horror/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: I mean this with complete sincerity when I say that you should bring a change of pants when you watch this film. I am aware that this next statement is very bold like buffalo wing sauce but I truly believe that Paranormal Activity is the scariest movie I have seen since The Exorcist. Director Oren Peli has created an instant horror masterpiece that will live on forever as one of the greatest horror films ever made. The crazy part is there is absolutely no violence except for one small scene at the end. Wait, a horror film without violence, how could that work in today's standards? I was talking with Trick 'R Treat director Mike Dougherty the other day about the current state of horror and the fact that all of these movies today rely on hardcore violence for scares. Look back at the older films from the 70's and 80's where the scares revolved around the set-up of the scene and what was off camera. Recently, Sam Raimi brought that style of horror back with Drag Me To Helland now Peli has taken it to another level. Paranormal Activity relies heavily on setting up the scene and with their use of innovative camera work, he has created something that I have never seen before. There have been a couple of different numbers floating around the Internet pertaining this film's budget. I have heard anywhere from $11,000-$15,000. Regardless, if the movie was made for any amount in between those numbers, the point I am about to make is still valid. Peli has created an environment that is scarier and more realistic than most multi-million horror films we see today. It was all the aesthetics of the shot. The camera would just sit there during a 6-7 hours night sleep and then we would go back the next day and see that footage in fast-forward. The cool part is that he would keep the time code on the bottom right part of the screen when the characters would go to sleep. Therefore, if they fell asleep at 1:00AM and the activity did not happen until 3:00AM, he would just fast-forward for us. The fast-forwarding actually plays a very important part in the scares for this film. Who ever knew something so simple could be so scary. The film revolves around a couple and their experiences with paranormal forces in their home. Micah (played by Micah Sloat) and Katie (played by Katie Featherston) have been dating for three years and now live together in a comfortable home in San Diego, California. Ever since Katie was eight years old, she has felt a ghost-like presence at night when she went to sleep. It would make banging noises and she sometimes saw things while asleep in her bed. Her boyfriend Micah wants to start filming and documenting these events by placing a camera on them when they sleep at night. He figures that if anything is occurring that it would be great to have evidence. The film is only told through Micah's camera and we are taken on this roughly two-week adventure, solely in their home. Among the scariest of scenes are when Katie wakes up in the middle of the night and just stands over her boyfriend for hours at a time. Considering the movie is only an hour and thirty-nine minutes, the director cleverly places a time code at the bottom right of the screen and fast-forwards the hour or two that she stands there. We get a quick jerking motion from her during this time period and that just ramps up the creepy level. Throughout the movie, Peli cuts back and forth between the night-time shots and Micah and Katie dealing with what happened during the day. They hire a psychic to come by the house, who was honestly a terrible actor. Peli makes you beg for the night time scenes with these pro-longed daytime scenes of dialogue. As an audience member, you are just waiting for them to go to sleep at night and see what could possibly happen in their bed. Hopefully, you know that this film is not real. In fact, I added Micah and Katie on Facebook the other day and they are doing just fine. I do want to give credit to them for displaying some of the more realistic acting in a horror film that I have ever seen. There were points where I actually contemplated that this could be real footage. They acted like a couple who had been living together for three years and it did not feel like they were reading a script. To add to the realism, Paramount Pictures puts a note before movie starts on the screen saying they want to thank Katie, Micah and the San Diego police department for their corporation in using this footage. The fact that this movie is only playing at 12am in select cities right now means you will be guaranteed a sold out crowd. That is the ultimate way to see this film. The trailers were not lying when they showed people screaming their lungs out. This is a great movie to see in theaters, hence the 4.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Good HairGenre: Documentary/Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: I saw this film and will post my full review this weekend. Let's just say for now that this film is eye opening and will show you things you have never seen before. Personally, it blew my mind. Back to Top |
ZombielandGenre: Action/Comedy/Horror Released: 2009 Rating: Read this statement and tell me this does not get you excited and make you want to do back flips. Metallica's "For Whom The Bell Tolls" set to slow-motion blood filled zombie deaths. Let it sit for just one more second. Ok, now leave your computer and go watch this movie immediately. As of today's date, Zombieland is the most fun I have had in theaters in 2009. Let me just go ahead and get all of the adjectives out of the way. This is one of the most bad-ass, scream at the top your lungs, over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek, ultra-violent and exhilarating movies I have seen in a long time. The fact that this movie is coming out via writers and directors who are basically no-names in the business, is just beyond me. This is Ruben Fleischer's major directorial debut and the writers, Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, have worked on other films but this is their first major release. If I didn't look that up, I would have guessed this was written by a very big name writer and directed by Edgar Wright. Speaking of Wright, we all know him for his classic zombie-spoof flick Shaun of the Dead. Wright was able to combine a spoof movie with an original and catchy screenplay. It was obvious that he was spoofing old classic zombie flicks but he was able to still tell a great story around it. Now, if I were to compare Zombieland to Shaun of the Dead, I would honestly go with Zombieland. Being a huge fan of Shaun, that pains me to say, considering how similar the films are and the fact that Shaun came first. Well, Reese and Wernick must have learned a lot from that movie because they just came out with a completely new flick which took zombie films to the extreme. The story is completely unoriginal, telling the tale of the earth being infected by a virus which turns everyone into zombies. As our main character, Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), tells us, we are now in the United States of Zombieland. There are roughly six human beings in the entire film, which leaves plenty of time for awesome slow motion zombie kills! Columbus opens the film with his voice over explaining his rules of survival. These 32 rules consist of staying in shape, always checking the back seats of cars and always make sure you "double-tap" the zombies. If you aren't familiar with the lingo, that means you shoot the zombie once and then again in the head to ensure their second death. These rules pop up all throughout the film, superimposed onto items, which creates a more light hearted and hilarious vibe. Columbus has been a loaner for a while, but once he comes across Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson) things begin to look up for him. Tallahassee is a complete bad-ass and loves killing zombies. He states his business is killing zombies and business is good. Brad Pitt's character from Inglourious Basterds immediately came to my mind but I will let that slide since both films opened within a month of each other. Both Tallahassee and Columbus come across two other survivors, Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Breslin), who happened to be loaners and sisters as well. After some back and forth between the two characters, they start making their way to California to a theme park called Pacific Funland, where apparently there are no zombies. Throughout their trip, they come across many surprises and the end game is not what they had expected. Zombieland is short, sweet and completely to the point. It knows exactly what it wants to be. Therefore, the film is able to have fun with itself. The over-the-top slow motion effects and the excessive amounts of blood will just bring laughter to you. Even Eisenberg's hilarious voice over will keep you laughing for the entire eighty-three minutes. This movie was made for ADD people because once you sit down for the movie, you feel like you are just getting right back up. When I say this movie is the most fun you will have at the theaters this summer, I mean just that. Is it better than Inglourious Basterds, District 9 or 500 Days of Summer? No, but that is a quality vs. entertainment question. While those are all better films, Zombieland is a movie you see and it feels like a ride, but for adults. One of the best parts of the movie is a part that I cannot discuss without giving away a massive spoiler. There is a huge cameo appearance that everyone in the world will laugh at. I will just say that next to Neil Patrick Harris showing up in Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle, this is easily my favorite cameo. The events that take place during this cameo are so priceless and classic that your mind will just be completely blown. Regardless of your taste in films, you are bound to have a great time, hence the 4.5 BDK rating. The film is funny, smart and even frightening at times. Harrelson was born to play this part and he plays it perfectly. Back to Top |
Capitalism: A Love StoryGenre: Documentary Released: 2009 Rating: Even Michael Moore's weakest and most convoluted film is an excellent documentary which will enlighten and scare you. To be honest, I had to see the film twice in order to come to my final analysis and I will say the second viewing was much more pleasant. To speak metaphorically, taking in this movie is like shoving an entire steak in your mouth in one bite. It will be impossible for you to understand and digest every little bit of this film during your first sitting. After seeing it the second time, I have now digested 75% of the steak but the juicy part’s are still on the plate. In simplistic terms at the end of the film, Moore states that Capitalism enriches the wealthy at the expense of the poor. Now, that statement contains a lot of baggage with everything from banks, foreclosures, the bail out and the big wigs on Wall Street. To be honest, I feel that the majority of America is still a little in the dark as to what happened to our economy. Much like these Wall Street derivatives, which are essentially gambling stocks, the entire downfall of the economy is a complicated formula. During one of Moore's interviews with a former bank regulator, the man states that this was not a two minute failure. This happened over the years with these banks giving out mortgages to low income families or having "older" people refinance their homes. To be literal, it was stealing! I walked out of the film screaming about why the hell we gave the banks a bail out when they are ones that screwed us. I know I am preaching to the choir here, but how could we let that happen. That is why Moore is such a genius. While he may be one sided, he knows how to get a reaction from his audience. Moore's film is yet again full of shtick. While his shtick is funny at times, it does get a little old. The classic shtick was the scene in Bowling for Columbine, where he walked one of the students who had been shot into a K-Mart to ask for a refund on the bullets inside the kid's chest. Obviously, that is completely over the top, but it helped get Moore's point across. Though in this film, it does work as a good visual aid to understanding what happen to the economy. He loses me though when he sits down with Professor William Black, who is a former bank regulator. This guy is too smart for the room and serves as an expert to what happens on Wall Street. I have seen him explain this twice and I am still confused. He uses a metaphor comparing the entire event to a little crack in a dam. His metaphor makes sense over all but the information inside of it goes a little over your head. Parts of this film play like a horror film, especially the last five minutes. The one portion of the film that blew my mind was the description of "dead peasants." This essentially means that a company takes out a life insurance policy on an employee hoping that they will die. Therefore, the employee is worth more to the company dead than alive. How sick is that? The film does drag a little and will go over some people's heads but is still a very strong documentary. He has a genius way of convincing people that he is right, because in fact, everything he is saying is factual true. He just focuses on minor details. Moore was recently on the Howard Stern show stating that he has lawyers that fact check everything in his films. We know what he is saying is true but he is obviously very one sided. He is a great filmmaker because he is able make you believe what he is saying. Another strong aspect of the film is his transitions. When he goes from point A to B, he perfectly changes scenes. This is yet again an important film to see. He even states at the end that he can't do this alone anymore and needs the people to help him out. I am giving this a 4 BDK rating because it is worth a matinée. Back to Top |
Whip ItGenre: Comedy/Drama Released: 2009 Rating: Whip It is an unbelievably fresh and original film with great performances, music, dialogue and a superb directorial debut by Drew Barrymore. Ever hear of the sport of Roller Derby? Well, I am sure you have heard of it but do you have any clue what the rules are? For a Hollywood film, it contains beautiful women roller skating across a circular track trying to rack up points. This is a full contact sport where two teams compete by sending one of the players to pass the other teams players for points. It is more understandable if you see it visually. While the movie does focus a lot on the sport, it is more focused on a teenage girl growing up. I almost wanted to call my mom right when I walked out of theater and apologize for ever being rude or questioning her. Teenagers really do not grasp how much they mean to their parents and they want to rebel. This is typical for all teenagers but looking back on the way I acted as a teenager, I wish I would have changed by ways. Though, mistakes can be good because we can learn from them and better ourselves. You will see this development in Ellen Page's character. The film stars Ellen Page (Hard Candy, Juno), Kristen Wiig ("SNL", Extract), Drew Barrymore (no need to list filmography), Daniel Stern (Home Alone), Marcia Gay Harden (The Mist), Jimmy Fallon (he hosts a late night talk show), Alia Shawcat, Landon Pigg, Eve and Juliette Lewis (Natural Born Killers, From Dusk Till Dawn). Meet Bliss (Page), or should I call her Babe Ruthless, a seventeen year old high school student who would be deemed a "nerd" by her fellow students. Her mother (Harden) has been trying to breed her to be a beauty queen for years, forcing her to attend pageants in her little town in Texas. Bliss goes to school and works part time at a local BBQ joint called Oink Joint. One day while out shopping with her mom and sister, she notices a flier that contains information on a roller derby tournament that happens in Austin, Texas. Curious, she and her best friend Pash (Shawcat) head down to check out the sport and Bliss becomes addicted. The cool part is that all of the girls have these bad-ass names that they use on the track. She meets a member of the team, "The Hurl Scouts," named Maggie Mayhem (Kristin Wiig). After meeting Mayhem and making a great impression, she is invited to tryouts and eventually makes the team. Once she makes the team, she lies to her parents that she will be taking SAT prep classes. It turns out that Bliss is an excellent player and she slowly starts to become a star, while also falling for a boy named Oliver (Pigg) and disowning her family and best friends. She is in for a rude awakening. There is nothing better than seeing a refreshingly original film that makes you happy and giddy when you walk out. It has been a while since I have seen more realistic dialogue taking place between a mother and a daughter on screen. Personally, I know this is Ellen Page's film, but Marcia Gay Harden completely stole this movie. Her performance as Bliss' mother just blew everyone out of the water. There is one particular scene where Harden and Page are sitting down against their refrigerator having a heart to heart discussion. When you see this scene, look at the magnet that is between both of their heads. Everything about the film was fresh, including the great soundtrack and fantastic script, written by Shauna Cross, who also wrote the novel the film was based on. I did some research and found out that Cross actually participated in these roller derbies. According to IDMB.COM, she played for the Los Angeles Derby Dolls and her skater named was Maggie Mayhem, which is the same name that Kristen Wiig used in the film. One of the best parts of the film were the hilarious names the skaters would have, i.e. Jaba The Slut, Iron Maiven (Juliet Lewis), Smashley Simpson (Barrymore), etc. I wonder what my name would be if I were to play; maybe Big Derby Kevin. I think I will stick to my day job. The script was hilarious and all of the dialogue felt natural. It was if I was watching a real life home video of these people's lives. Yes, the characters have their developments and it is set up in a movie structure, but the conversations just felt pure and original. People will have fun watching the roller derby scenes but keep an ear out for how well the dialogue was written. In case you are wondering what the title means, a "whip" is when a player in roller derby grabs another players arms and whips her out to give the player more speed. To be honest, it is a great concept. Growing up playing roller hockey with friends, I can appreciate a good sport on roller skates. Everyone on the film had to do all of their own skating because I doubt they used computer effects for the derby scenes. I would be curious to know which one's knew how to skate before hand and which one's did not. The sport itself is very brutal and to honest, I would be a little afraid to play it. This is a solid matinee viewing-type film and I highly recommend it if you are in for some good clean fun, hence the 4 BDK rating. Back to Top |
The Invention of LyingGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: The film has such a promising and hilarious start but there is nothing worse than feeling the comedy get sucked right out of a film. That is not to say the film turned out to be bad or anything but the joke eventually gets old and the film then falls back on the cliché romantic comedy structure. The first twenty minutes of the film are laugh-out-loud funny but I kept wondering how they were going to keep this up for an hour and a half. The film is written and co-directed by Ricky Gervais, who created the British version of "The Office." Gervais had a writer and directing partner on the project, Matthew Robinson, and this marks Robinson's directorial debut. The trailers for the film stated that "This is the best film ever made," which is obviously a lie. The funny thing is that Gervais is lying in that scene. Therefore, he realizes he is not making the best comedy ever made but he wanted to have fun with it. Imagine a world where a lie has never been told. Everybody speaks what is on their mind 24/7. For example, a waiter brings you your drink and you can tell it is low. Instead of you asking, he just looks at you and says that he had a quick sip of your drink. Or imagine if you are on a date with a woman and she calls her mom and tells her that she thinks you are fat and unattractive. In this imaginary world, nobody has stumbled upon this lying phenomena, until one day Mark Bellison (played by Ricky Gervais), walks into bank knowing he only has $300. He has just been fired from his job and he needs $800 for his rent. Something clicks in his head and he tells the bank teller that he has that amount and she just gives to him. It is at this moment he turns his life around and starts telling lies all over the place and that includes inventing religion. The woman of his dreams, Anna McDoogles (Jennifer Garner), thinks he is short, fat and has a snub nose. This will all change though when he becomes all rich and powerful. The Invention of Lying also stars Louis C.K. as Gervais' best friend in the film, Rob Lowe, Tina Fey, Jonah Hill and a hilarious cameo part from Edward Norton. You can literally feel the comedy dying out in this film after the first twenty minutes or so. Though, that first twenty minutes are so good that you will forgive the rest of the film, which is not that bad. The concept alone where people always say what they are feeling leaves doors wide open for comedic genius. Wait until you hear the things people say. Think about what you think when you see a good looking person or you see something that that you want to make fun of. Everything that anyone thinks internally comes out of their mouths in this fantasy world. That alone is hilarious but once Gervais stumbles upon the lying gig, the comedy then shifts. It is as if he found a magic genie. Once the film crosses the one hour marker, it does start to hit all of the cliches for a romantic comedy. All of the things start to fall in place, and then we get the drama and then the solution. It really is surprising how slowly the comedy fades out but when it is gone, you really do notice it. Gervais and Robinson's script is definitely worth noticing in the writing department. There are so many clever lines and jokes. A lot of it works though because of the delivery. Gervais has this perfect dead pan delivery that is just so obnoxious and sarcastic. He works really well in the part and even has a very convincing crying scene with his mother in the film. Personally, I feel that the joke of this movie would work better as a short film but it is not a bad flick. It just took a weird direction towards the end but the beginning makes up for everything. I give this film a 3 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Toy Story/Toy Story 2 3DGenre: Animation/Adventure/Comedy/Family/Fantasy Released: 2009 Rating: No Rating Personally, I don't feel the need to rate these movie considering they have been out for years. The big question is whether or not it is worth paying to see in 3D. Well, to be honest, I enjoyed watching them on the big screen again but the 3D is not massively impressive. Don't get me wrong, it looks great and the 3D is definitely there but I would not say it's enough to keep you seated for close to three hours in a theater. If anything, seeing these films again was a great refresher for the third film coming out in June 2010. I personally enjoyed Toy Story 2 more than the first but the first still holds that original feeling. That film was like the Citizen Kane of animated films; it was innovative and new but there have been better films since that was released. Toy Story 2 was more entertaining and more action packed, while the first one had more themes about childhood. The set-up of the double feature is pretty cool. They have the brand new trailer for the 3rd film coming out and they set you up with a goofy hand drawn animated sequence telling you to put your glasses on. You get a ten minute intermission between the films, which is filled with facts about the Pixar films. To be honest, I didn't feel like I wasted my time but the films are not anything different from what you have already seen. Back to Top |
SurrogatesGenre: Action/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: To be punny, Surrogates has a pretty cool idea but the product is lifeless. The film starts off and I am thinking to myself that this is a pretty cool idea with a lot of interesting social undertones. The fact that technology will eventually overtake our lives and essentially turn us into the most non-social species on the planet is a pretty scary thought. Earlier in the week, I had the pleasure of seeing a film called Bright Star, which told the story of the late poet John Keats and took place in the early 1800s. There is a paragraph in my review about how love will never be the same because of all the technology we have now, i.e. Facebook, Twitter, texting. It essentially keeps people from having any human interactions. This movie takes it to the extreme and shows us that eventually we will become so lazy that we will have computers do the work for us. Sounds comforting and easy right? Well, it may be cool for the first year or so but after a while, people will get lonely. The film will definitely intrigue you and then after the first twenty minutes or, completely lose you with its lifeless script and mediocre performances. The cast involves Bruce Willis, Rhada Mitchell (Man on Fire), James Cromwell and Ving Rhames in a laughably bad performance. Director Jonathon Mastow is no rookie when it comes to directing films about machines taking over the world. He directed a very impressive sequel to Terminator 2: Judgement Day, which was an extremely tough act to follow. With Surrogates, he goes in a different direction, telling the story of a society that has now created machines that look exactly like people but can be operated by a human while sitting at home. For example, if I had a surrogate, I would stay home all day and send my surrogate to work. I would personally be controlling this machine all day long but he would look and act human. He would speak with my voice. I would still be doing the work but I could do it all from the comfort of my own home. The only difference is the person at work would have wires and hardware inside his body and I would still have my beating heart. According to the films story line, surrogates have lowered the crime rate by 99% because humans are rarely out and about anymore. If the surrogate falls down or gets shot, the human will be fine. Somehow though, a weapon has been created that can kill the surrogate and the human at the same time. Bruce Willis plays Tom Greer, an F.B.I. Agent who has to help solve a murder mystery where a human was killed after his surrogate was shot to death. His mission is to uncover how a human could have possibly died. Ironically enough, the human who was killed is the son of Lionel Canter (Cromwell), who is the creator of the surrogates. He heads up a company called VSI and they are credited as the pioneers of these human machines. Greer and his partner, Peters (Mitchell) have to unlock the case before more humans die. You might be thinking to yourself, wow that actually sounds like a cool idea. Well, it is a great idea and could have been a great film. It was just poorly executed. Not for one minute did I care for any of the characters within this film. They all seemed lifeless, which makes sense with the story, but there are humans under those surrogates. Willis plays one of those humans and we are with him the majority of the film. They throw the typical character struggle where he lost his son and he and his wife are currently not getting along due to the death. Willis' character feels they should unplug more and be more human, while his wife hides behind the surrogate. There are some really interesting concepts and scenes in the film. One of the more interesting aspects is how the filmmakers created the surrogates. When Bruce Willis is walking around as a surrogate, his make-up looks so phenomenal, yet odd at the same time. It almost looks animated but not. I was talking to some critics afterwards and they said it was the same effect used in the X-Men films that made Professor X and Magneto look young when they went to visit Jean Grey as a child. I was reading an interview online where Mastow explained that it was a lot of make-up mixed in with a ton of CGI. The pacing, acting and writing just were not there. Besides a couple of interesting action scenes including a great ending, people are going to walk out of this film feeling disappointed. Movies follow a certain pattern and set you up to feel emotion but with this film the timing was all off. It just all happened so quickly that you do not have time to connect to the characters. Also, since you have seen these types of struggles in films before, you are kind of used to the outcome. Obviously, it is sad that Bruce Willis' character lost his son but since that has been used to show humanistic sides of characters before, it didn't work on me. All of the characters were very one dimensional. I will give credit to Mastow for the direction of the film, which contains really cool digital shots here and there of the city of Boston. My problem is that sometimes it looked really good and then other times it looked like it was from 80's. He also needed to spend a bit more time on the blue screen effects. There were scenes where characters would be jumping on cars and it looked fake. I give the film a 2.5 BDK rating because it is worth seeing on cable/rental. If anything, the film will stimulate your mind and make you think about how technology is ruining our lives. It is such an oxy-moron because it does make things more efficient while limiting human contact. Back to Top |
FameGenre: Comedy/Drama/Family/Musical/Romance Released: 2009 Rating: One of the main characters in the film says to his teacher, "It's the oldest story in the book," when referring to how his father walked out on his family when he was just a little boy. The same can be said for this movie but if it's a good story, I don't mind hearing it again. This movie will get panned by most critics but to tell you the truth, I was tapping my feet the entire film. I will never forget seeing the play with my family when I was younger and being completely inspired by the talent and the want to live out your dream. Yes, I am aware that is a cliché. Sue me for having any emotions towards this film; I don't care. Stories about people overcoming obstacles, especially in the entertainment world, are always fun to watch. The film is a remake of the 1980 classic, which was eventually turned into the Broadway play and now this 2009 remake. They added a new fresh look, feel and sound to the film but kept the basic story and storytelling. There are some amazing performances, especially from Naturi Naughton who has such an amazing voice and talent as an actress. You saw her earlier this year as Lil Kim in the biopic about Notorious B.I.G. Fame stars Kelsey Grammer, Kay Panabaker (T.V. star who has appeared on "CSI" and "Grey's Anatomy"), Kherington Payne (this is her first film), Walter Perez ("Friday Night Lights"), Paul McGill (Man on Wire), Asher Book and Collins Pennie (Fired Up, Half Nelson). The story follows the same structure as the original where the film opens with the auditions and then we live with the main characters through their entire high school career. Of the thousands of kids accepted to the New York City school of Performing Arts, only two hundred are accepted. The movie focuses on nine of these students who all have similar mindsets about the arts but are very different in their own ways. You have Denise (Naughton) who has been training with classical music all her life. Her character struggles because she has an amazing talent as an R&B singer but her parents will only allow her to stick with the classical piano music. You have Jenny (Panabaker) and Marco (Asher Book) who are a couple but Jenny struggles with the ability to let her self go. Marco is the talented singer and piano player that she wants to be. You also have Malik (Pennie) and Victor (Perez) who are both talented in their own right but want to make music together on the production side of the business. Victor falls for a girl named Alice (Payne) who is a ballet dancer that is all about making it to the top of the world. As you can see, there are many different talents involved but they are all after the same goal; fame. Considering this takes place in a high school setting, you will get all of the normal high school drama. This is easily one of the more unoriginal films of the year but that does not stop it being fun and entertaining. All of these characters have showed up in numerous films throughout film history, i.e. the father who won't let her daughter expand her talents, the mother who doesn't understand that her son has talent, the struggling dancer who just can't make the cut and struggles with suicide, etc. If you are walking into this movie expecting originality, you will not find it. You will leave tapping your feet with a big smile on your face. My favorite parts of the film were the singing and dancing because they resembled a Broadway play but on a much larger scale. It almost felt like raw talent. There is a great scene where all of the students are at lunch and everyone in the cafeteria starts busting out instruments and dance moves. Obviously, that would never happen in real life, where people would be so in sync with each other in a lunch room but it was still a great scene. The singing and dancing actually served a purpose rather than just being thrown in at a random time. Anytime a character sings, it benefited the story line instead of some musicals where characters are just randomly singing on their way to work or people break out in song and dance in the middle of the street. All of the acting performances were very well structured and I feel all of them will have a very successful career. I would recommend seeing this film as a matinee/rental; hence the 3.5 BDK rating. Personally, I am a huge fan of musicals, so this was right up my alley. To give you a perspective of what musicals I have liked and disliked; loved Sweeny Todd, The Producers, Moulin Rouge, Chicago, Greaseand hated Mamma Mia! Back to Top |
Pandorum Genre: Horror/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: Pandorum is a poor man's Event Horizon meets The Descent. I am convinced they borrowed the same monster effects and costumes from The Descent. It is not surprising that the film has similar elements of Event Horizon considering it was produced by the same director, Paul W.S. Anderson, who also directed Resident Evil. The film stars Ben Foster, Dennis Quaid, Cam Gigondet and Norman Reedus for a quick scene. When I say poor man's, I do not mean that the film is bad but that it is a bit unoriginal. Pandorum still delivers decent scares and much like The Descent, some insane claustrophobic scenes. The film takes place in the future and at this point earth has pretty much lost all of its natural resources. This means humans can no longer survive and we need to start new life on a different planet. As the film goes on, we learn of a mission to a planet called Tarnis where plant life has been discovered. Thousands of people were put onto space ships and sent up to this new planet. Something tragic happens and a captain (who will remain nameless due to spoilers) experiences the effects of pandorum, which take him into psychological hell. As the movie unfolds we discover what happened on that ship. The film’s curiosity and intensity come from the fact that we are learning what is happening at the same time the characters are learning. Ben Foster plays a member of the flight crew who wakes up to discover he has lost his memory and the ship is full of these Descent type monsters. He and his lieutenant (Dennis Quaid) awaken at the exact same time with the exact same conditions. Quaid's character stays behind, while Foster's character takes a journey through the ship to restart the reactor to restore power. What he finds during this journey is definitely not human. The bottom line is that while the film contains great intensity at times, it is not the most original film in the world and makes you wish for better films of the genre. I kept thinking, "this is no Alien or Event Horizon." I would recommend a solid rental for this flick, hence the 2.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Bright StarGenre: Drama/Romance Released: 2009 Rating: It was so refreshing to see a story told about true love that contained honest chemistry and withheld special effects and CGI. According to the film, John Keats is among the most famous and respected romantic poets of all time. Keats died at a very early age of twenty-five years old while living in Italy due to an illness. Personally, I have never read any of Keats' material until now and I know I am late to the party, but he was brilliant. The refreshing aspect of this film came from the fact that it was telling a story which started in 1818. This is an obvious observation but please stick with me until I reach my point. Back then, they did not have computers, Twitter, Facebook, cell phones or any other type of technology that people hide their true feelings behind. As I was walking out of the theater, I stopped a fellow critic and said, "Do you think love THAT intense exists today?" Until I see it myself, I would have to say no. Until I see a man, who is almost at his death, fall asleep in pain outside the window of the woman he loves, solely because he cannot bear to be apart from her, I will not feel that exists. I am not saying true love does not exist but I feel that we have hurt ourselves with technology and it will be very tough to find. In today's times, we hide behind text messages and e-mails. The face to face interactions are slowly dying. My boss always tells me that he wishes e-mails never existed. People should pick up the phone more often or see each other face to face. This is a story that gives praise to a better time. A fellow critic of mine, Brandon Fibbs, noted that when he left a film called The New World, he walked outside and saw the cars, cell phones, etc and he could not breathe. Personally, I could not imagine living in a world without those things but imagine if they never existed and how much more personable we would all be. It is truly amazing and for some reason, Bright Star, really opened my eyes to the fact that love and interaction in those times was just that much more personable. The film tells the story of the love between John Keats (Ben Wishaw) and Fanny Brawne (Abbie Cornish). Keats is a struggling poet at the time in England and he can't seem to make any money off of his published poems. Brawne is drawn to him one day when she visits his home, where she finds out that Keats' brother Tom is very ill. At this point, she is totally against poetry, i.e. she doesn't understand it and she feels that it is too complicated. Brawne purchases one of Keats' published books and immediately goes back to him stating that she does not like it. As she reads deeper and she begins to meet with him more often to understand poetry, they begin to fall in love with each other. This is a love so strong and so poetic, if I may use that pun that it just vibrates through the screen. When these characters are reading their letters back and forth I almost started to cry. Now, since the story takes place in the 1800s, these were completely different times and they could not marry as easy. He had no source of income and therefore could not take care of Fanny if they were too live on their own. Their love had many obstacles, including Keats' assistant/best friend Charles Brown (played by Paul Schneider). Mr. Brown and Fanny absolutely do not get along and this is where a lot of the films drama comes from. It was almost as if Mr. Brown was jealous of their relationship because he was in love with Keats in a totally heterosexual way. Wishaw and Cornish's performances were just amazing to watch on screen. There were scenes where as Keats' character became more and more sick, he would have to cough in between his dialogue. These scenes felt so realistic and were acted out so beautifully. Besides the acting, the film is also beautifully shot with vibrant colors and unique close-ups. I particularly enjoyed the close-up during the opening sequence where Brawne's character was sewing a piece of clothing. Along with great scenes like that, you had beautiful shots of flowers and snow that were just great to see on a big screen. I did have some issues with the film, where I felt the opening and the closing of the film were a bit drawn out and slow at times. Once the characters started to fall in love, I was immediately hooked. It took me a while to get used to the structure of Jane Campion's film. The editing of the film is definitely not something you see every day and does not follow the rules of continuity. You will have one shot where Cornish will be sitting down in a room and then next cut she is standing up in another room. It takes a little while to get used to but you do eventually catch on. Campion also directed the academy award winning film in 1993, called The Piano in which Anna Paquin won an Academy Award for her performance. I give the film 3.5 BDKs because I feel that it is worth seeing as either a matinee/rental. The film does have flaws, especially where it drags a bit, but overall, it was a refreshing love story minus all the technology from today. Back to Top |
No Impact Man: The DocumentaryGenre: Documentary Released: 2009 Rating: Check out my exclusive interview with Colin and Michelle Beavans by clicking here. No Impact Man is an interesting, fact-filled documentary that will make you think about how much you use and waste in your daily life. To be honest, it feels like the perfect movie to see in your own home without spending the ten to twelve dollars to see in theaters. It is more of a lesson on how to live better in today's society. I brought two things away from this film that I will never forget; 1) the fact that I take the invention of toilet paper for granted 2) I throw away so much unnecessary trash. If you stopped for a second to think about everything you have ever thrown away, how much land could you fill with just your trash? That's such a great question. Colin and Michelle should start documenting that with their child. Colin Beavans, star of the documentary, came up with an idea where he wanted to live for one year without having any negative impact on the environment. His wife Michelle was interested in the idea as well, but scared because they have a very young child and she was worried this could affect how she grows up. Now, when I say no impact on the environment, I mean just that. The documentary documents the entire year and the struggles/successes that the Beavans' encountered. Colin and his family gave up everything from laundry detergent, toilet paper, washers and dryers, cars, air conditioning, heat, coffee to even diapers for their young child. In Colin's mind, these are all products that harm the environment. According the film, 49 million diapers are thrown away per day. With that assumption, we will be living in our own trash before we know it. Immediately, after watching the film, I went down stairs to my kitchen and noticed that we had 7 bags of trash that were ready to be taken out. That was maybe five days worth of trash for 4 people, which is completely unacceptable. Then I started to think about what was in those bags. There was everything from Taco Bell wrappers, soda cans, and McDonald's cups to even other trash bags! It is amazing how much we throw away and how much of that trash is completely unnecessary. Colin makes a great point in the movie about Chinese food bins. Those bins are unnecessary and just build up trash. If people really stopped to think about what they throw away, they would be astonished. Throughout this year of being a no impact family, Colin and Michelle experience some differences. She is "addicted" to Starbucks coffee but Colin feels that it needs to be cut out. Colin only wants the family to have local foods, meaning foods that were made right within the city of New York. According to the film, the average piece of food travels 1500 miles before it reaches the persons mouth. Think about all the gas and travel used for that. He even goes to the extreme to get his milk from local farmers. As you can see, this is a relatively interesting topic and something that a lot of people should watch to see the impact they are having on the environment. Personally, I don't see the need to see this movie in theaters but it is a great rental and it will open your eyes to a very important subject, hence the 3 BDK rating. If I were to compare this to a better documentary, I would go with An Inconvenient Truth. Davis Guggenheim created a masterful documentary that played out like a horror film while still giving you the straight facts. Not that No Impact Man is a bad documentary; it just feels a little bland, slow and repetitious at times. Back to Top |
I Hope They Serve Beer in HellGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: I attended the DC premier of the film and was able to sit down with Tucker Max afterwards to do a 2 part interview. Check out the interview right here: PART 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ryR06UW36s PART 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhbZXwjUspU When I attended George Mason University for my undergraduate degree, I worked at the college bookstore so I could have beer money to go out with my friends on the weekends. One day, I was stocking the best-seller section and I noticed a book called I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell. Now, I was twenty-two years old at the time, so the title caught my attention instantly. Well, I immediately picked it up and started to thumb through it and was immediately hooked. This became a problem because I couldn't put the book down. Therefore, I was not getting any of my work done. The sex stories were so outrageous, disgusting and just downright dirty that I could not look away. For those of you who don't know, the book has gone on to sell a million copies, has been on the New York Times best seller list for 3 years and now is being made in a full length motion picture. This book or movie is not for the faint of heart, as it contains some of the most crude, sexual and dirty stories you will ever hear. To be honest, that style of humor is right up my alley and I fit the demographic for his book. Therefore, this review comes from the perspective of someone who is extremely immature when it comes to toilet humor. I really do feel that type of humor will never get old, as my 52 year-old father still thinks flatulents are funny. Over the years, we have seen many classic comedies from Caddyshack to Animal House to American Pie and now to The Hangover. One thing that has always stuck out to me in a comedy is the bathroom scenes. Call me immature, but I would sit in my house with my dad as a kid and watch films with bathroom scenes and just cry my eyes out because I was laughing so hard. Over the past decade, many of the comedies have started to battle each other out to see who could have the best one. i.e. American Pie, Van Wilder, Harold & Kumar Go to the White Castle, etc. I will go on record as saying that all of those movies have absolutely nothing on the scene in I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell. While the film may be mediocre at best, this one particular ten minute sequence had me laughing so hard that if you looked at me you would have thought I had just lost my family. I lost so many tears in that ten minutes that I easily lost a pound or two of water weight. I don't want to give anything away, but if you have read Tucker's book, it is the scene in the hotel lobby where he can't hold his bowels any longer. The book is a bunch of short stories put together as chapters. Therefore, he had to focus one of the stories into the movie and that story deals with a bachelor party and a strip club. Tucker (played by Matt Czuchry) in the film is attending Duke Law School with his best friends Dan (Geoff Stults) and Drew (Jesse Bradford). Dan is about to tie the knot with his long term girlfriend, Kristy (Keri Lynn Pratt), but Tucker wants to give him one last fun night out with the boys. He wants to take Dan and Drew on a road trip to a strip club where you can actually touch the girls and depending on how much money you spend, you can go home with the girl. Obviously, Kristy is not too happy about this but Tucker lies to her and says they are going elsewhere. If you have not read the books, you have to understand that Tucker Max is a manipulator and always has to get his way. He will sweet talk his way into any situation. Let's just say that he has his own mission that night, which is completely separate of taking Dan to a strip club. To be blunt and use his terms, Tucker wants to act out a fantasy of sleeping with a "midget." As with any bachelor party, things get crazy and lives get ruined. The ironic thing is that the story is true but it is also another cliché bachelor party film. Either way, the jokes do work and the script was very well written by Tucker Max and his writing partner Nils Parker. I would say there are about 25% of the jokes that do not work but the rest are pretty solid. Their goal was to be as filthy as possible and they definitely succeed. During the Q & A portion of the DC premiere, Tucker and Nils talked about how releasing this film through an independent film company allowed them to get more raunchy comedy into the script. As they said, there is no possible way that some of these jokes would have gone through the studio system. They went on to talk about how comedies these days are limited and that a movie like The Hangover is probably the best comedy you will see through a major studio, implying that they were limited on as well. Well, once you see I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell, you will know exactly what they mean. To be honest, this is just an all around fun film. It was made for really cheap and completely by-passed normal Hollywood routes to get it out to the public. The marketing Tucker is doing for this film is definitely something to be looked at, especially if you are an aspiring filmmaker. Though, it probably does help that he has a NY TIMES Best-Seller with the same title as the film. Tucker and his huge bus traveled the country doing screenings and Q&A's to promote the film. I feel that you should support the movie and check it out in theaters, hence the 3.5 BDK rating. It is not the best comedy you will see this summer but it is worth the money for the one particular scene at the end. Back to Top |
Cloudy with a Chance of MeatballsGenre: Animation/Family Released: 2009 Rating: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is one of the cleverest, most well-written and visually pleasing animated films in years. Besides Wall-E, there has not been a better and more human animated film in a long time. Yes, Up had many human aspects but I felt it was a bit overrated. The film had trouble figuring out exactly what it wanted to be. One minute is was a goofy kid's movie and the next minute it was a sad love story. I sound bitter but I actually did enjoy Up, just not as much as everyone else in the world did. Like Up, Meatballs is yet another movie to come out in 3D, which gained absolutely nothing from the aesthetic. During part of the film, I removed my glasses to see what it looked like and there was hardly any distortion. 3D has become more of a business venture nowadays. The studios know they can charge more money for the tickets if the film is in 3D. With this film, it just seemed more like an afterthought. I understand the new 3D is more about depth of field but I am here to tell you it is not worth the extra money unless they are using it as a gimmick, i.e. My Bloody Valentine 3D and The Final Destination. Going along with Hollywood's stride to be unoriginal, the film is based on a children's book by Judi and Ron Barrett. The book was written back in 1978 and from what I have heard, is only around 32 pages long. Generally, when it comes to animated films, I am against the use of a huge star-studded cast because it is sometimes hard to separate yourself from the character and the famous actor who is doing the voice over. To be honest, this particular movie has one of the bigger casts out there, yet during the entire film, I was more involved in who the characters were as opposed to who was on the other side of the microphone. The film stars the voice over work of Bill Hader ("SNL", Superbad), Anna Farris (The House Bunny, Scary Movie), Bruce Campbell (Evil Dead, Spider-Man), Mr. T., Andy Samberg, Al Roker, Benjamin Bratt and Will Forte. Flint Lockwood (Hader) has always been crazy about science and inventions. Growing up, all he ever wanted to do was become a famous inventor and change the world. His mother always believed in him, as we see in the scene where she gives him his first and only lab coat which he will eventually grow into. The story takes place in a town located in the middle of the ocean called Swallow Falls, where Flint's dad owns a bait and tackle store. Tourism has fallen to all time low and the mayor (Bruce Campbell) has no clue what to do. One day in the not to distant future, Flint is working on an invention that can turn water into food. Let's just say things go very right and the machine ends up in the sky due to an unforeseen event. From this point forward, Flint can make it rain any type of food he wants. Therefore, people began requesting food and the news is all over it, including a young weather girl (voiced by Anna Farris) who was sent over to witness the opening of their new Sardine-based theme park. Immediately, Swallow Falls is back on the map, but as the movie teaches you about greed, all amazing gifts come with a price. The more Flint and the town use this machine, the more dangerous it will become. Let's just say the food starts to get bigger, i.e. hotdogs the size of cars. It is amazing how many hilarious jokes you can do with food and corny one-liners. You can do anything from having giant Haribo Gummi Bears fighting each other to the death to building a giant Jell-O kingdom to bounce around in. Anybody can relate to this movie because food is universal. Along with genius food ideas, the writers mastered the art form of telling a completely cheesy joke. Whether the joke is completely raunchy or just downright corny, it is all in the delivery. This movie has a vibe where it does not take itself seriously; therefore any joke being delivered comes off funnier due to the atmosphere. Keep your ear out for some hilarious one-liners. While the movie is visually pleasing, it also has a ton of heart. The characters are very likable, even though they are same cliché characters you see in all movies. You want Flint to succeed to impress the girl. You want him and his father to have a better relationship. The movie contains your basic moral messages about family, love and feeding your appetite. Whatever you choose to get out of the film, you will definitely be entertained. Both adults and children will find something to relate to. The film receives a 4.5 BDK rating and will appear on my top films of 2009 list, as of right now. Back to Top |
The Informant!Genre: Comedy/Crime/Drama/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: This is easily Soderbergh's best film in years with a fantastically convoluted plot, hilarious script, a great performance from Matt Damon and fascinating directorial decisions. The film was so convoluted, but in a good way. Does that make sense? Normally, if a movie is overly confusing, you find yourself lost and frustrated. I felt the opposite during this film because I was so interested in its protagonist. The entire time, you are focusing on Matt Damon's character and you have no idea what his intentions are. As the film progresses, you are just so locked in and wondering what the hell his problem is? Is he telling the truth? Is he lying? I would put it on the level of an Ocean's 11 type film but with a better script. The film is based upon a true story and centered on the book written by Kurt Eichenwald. The film also stars Scott Bakula, Joel Mchale ("Talk Soup") and Patton Oswalt. Mark Whitacre, played by Matt Damon in the film, was the Vice President of Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), where he worked in the corn processing area in the early to mid 90's. Whitacre becomes aware that his company is involved in price fixing with other companies. ADM and other companies around the world that also dealt with corn processing were meeting and discussing ways to lower and higher their prices so that they would all make money in the long run. Whitacre catches wind of this and makes up a story that there is a mole inside their company. Essentially, the F.B.I. is brought in to investigate the mole in the company and Whitacre downright tells Agent Brian Shepard (Bakula) about the price fixing. Whitacre then becomes an informant, wearing wires and taking videos of all of the conversations between the companies. Meanwhile, he is stealing from the ADM on the side. For the record, it is now publicly known that he was bi-polar so pretty much everything you are seeing will be completely out there. Matt Damon's inner monologues are the oil to this film's engine. Amidst all of the chaos surrounding the film, you will get these hilarious, yet insightful, monologues directly from Whitacre's mind. To give you an example, he did an entire monologue on why polar bears have black noses and the fact that they could be completely incognito if they were to have white noses. It was just so interesting and once you find out what is really going on during the film, you start to understand why he was having these thoughts. Throughout all the film's confusion, it was these monologues that help keep you grounded and understanding of who this character really is. They will make you laugh and scratch your head at the same time. Damon put on a hell of a performance and almost gained 30 pounds for the role. Personally, I don't find that to be an interesting fact anymore. Actors and actresses are always losing and gaining weight for roles. One of the more pivotal weight losses I have seen from an actor was Christian Bale in The Machinist. He actually put his life in danger. Now, I will still give Damon props for gaining the weight because it was a pretty wicked transition and it easily helped the role. I wonder if the weight gain changes the mindset of the actor and helps them take the role more seriously. Either way, the performance is very chaotic and all over the place. You will feel his bi-polar aspects throughout the film. As unoriginal as this may be, the yellow tint of the film was a nice touch. Considering the film is centered on the corn industry, Soderbergh put a lot of the film in a "corn"-ish tint. It was little aspects like that and the music that kept the film upbeat. Much like Quentin Tarantino, Soderbergh has a great ear for music. The music was very corny and upbeat throughout and made the scenes go down easier, i.e. like a can of soda which has corn syrup! I crack myself up. This is easily one of the better films of 2009 and I highly recommend checking it out in theaters, hence the 4 BDK rating. It is a movie that will make you think and not let you just sit there and watch. You almost feel like a detective trying to figure out who’s wrong and who’s right. You will be drawn in and involved with the characters and their lives and then think about them on the way home. Back to Top |
Jennifer's BodyGenre: Comedy/Horror/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: Jennifer's Body is delightfully disturbing and beautifully tongue-in-cheek. Recently, Megan Fox has been in the news saying that when she acted in a little movie called Transformers and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, that she was not acting to her full capability. She attributed this to the direction of Michael Bay, who she apparently says was like working with Hitler. Now, I have heard Michael Bay is very dedicated on set but that seems rather excessive. Well, Jennifer's Body is the perfect vessel for Megan to show her acting ability considering she is the lead star and the film is written by the Academy Award Winning writer of Juno. Everything is perfectly aligned and Megan is now one of the biggest stars in Hollywood. This is her best time to perform and to tell you the truth, she pulls off a great performance. This is mainly due to the fact that the part is perfectly fitting for her and she is spitting up Diablo Cody dialogue, which is pure gold. She has to walk around, look good and eat boys. Regardless, she looks and acts great doing it. Before going on with the plot line, I must say that you cannot take this film seriously. The vibe of the movie is a perfect balance of terrifying and tongue-in-cheek dialogue. That being said, the plot line revolves around a high school princess and all around beautiful girl named Jennifer (Megan Fox). Her and her best friend, Needy (Amanda Seyfried), have been friends since they were little girls. Needy has always been the nerdy friend who follows in the footsteps of her hot and popular best friend, Jennifer. One night they attend a concert at a crappy bar in their little town of Devil's Kettle. Jennifer has the hots for the lead singer of the band, Nicholai (Adam Brody) and ends up leaving with him at the end of the night, even though the venue goes up in flames killing people. Needy, being a good friend tries to convince her not to go. Without giving anything away, something happens that night and Jennifer comes back as a cannibal who only eats high school boys. We learn that she becomes weak and tiresome if her stomach isn't full. They never really explain what type of monster she is, but she has sharp teeth and her eyes shift colors. By the way, all of the killings are all centered around hilarious dialogue which creates a very interesting balance. The film's strongest point is its script. Cody has proven yet again that she can tell a rather simple story with her unique style of conversation. If you have seen Juno enough times, you kind of get a feel for how her characters talk. Her show, "The United States of Tara" had a very similar vibe told in a completely different environment. I have heard complaints of people saying people in the real world do not talk like her characters do. Well, obviously, her films take place in a fictional movie world, so they can talk how they want. A great example of characters talking in a fashion that doesn't fit the setting is a movie by Rian Johnson called Brick. That flick had high school students talking like the old style detectives. Cody's film is set apart by her dialogue and she brings it on strong this time. To give you an example, during one of the scenes in the film a character convinces his band mate that this person should die because it will be more appealing to live a live like the lead singer of Maroon 5. It is such a random reference, yet so hilarious. Yes, Megan Fox did put on a decent performance. No, it not because she is "hot." Even though the character is not much a stretch for her, she was still very terrifying and her dialogue was well-written. This is her fourth major film and she is still very young. The real star of the film is Amanda Seyfried (Mean Girls, Mamma Mia!). Her character has the greatest transitions and character development throughout the movie. You will see this right from the start, as the film opens with her monologue while she is in a mental institution. From there, we are sent back to the time before Jennifer turned into a boy eating cannibal. The movie does deliver some great scares and counters those with great laughs. There were some really creepy scenes throughout this film, particularly in the beginning. There is a scene where Jennifer first comes back after being taken away by the band. She appears in Needy's kitchen, completely bloody, and looking for some food. The look on her face and the sounds she makes will definitely scare the crap out of you. I do want to set aside a paragraph for those people out there looking for Megan Fox to be naked in this movie. I know there were a lot of rumors floating around about whether or not she would be in this film. While, I know it may be unprofessional to talk about this matter in my review, it has been brought to my attention enough times that I feel it needs to addressed. You do not get to see any nudity from Megan Fox in this film except a far away shot of her butt as she swims naked. Anytime her top is off, the camera is either on her head or below her waist. If you get anything out of this film, you will be entertained. The movie is not a masterpiece or even great but it is an interesting movie overall and it will freak you out and make you laugh. Cody does deliver, yet again, a great script. I am giving this film a 3.5 BDK rating out of 5. Back to Top |
Love HappensGenre: Drama/Romance Released: 2009 Rating: I was all in with this film right up until the last ten minutes, when it preceded to punch me in the face with every cliché possible. They hit me in the face, then in the stomach, then in the face again. I literally felt the emotions eject out of me and transition from sadness to unfortunate laughter. Let me say that the film's trailers are a little misleading, i.e. Jennifer Aniston is not a huge star of the film and the film is actually more depressing and deep than a romantic comedy. Well, to give the film credit, it does throw you for a little bit of a loop and could have ultimately been a great film but just completely throws itself out the window at the end. The film stars Aaron Eckhart (The Dark Knight, Thank you for Smoking), Jennifer Aniston (Along Came Polly, "Friends"), Dan Fogler (Balls of Fury) and Martin Sheen. Eckhart plays Burke Ryan, the author of the best selling self-help book "A-Okay." The book was written after Ryan's wife was killed three years prior in a tragic car crash. It is used to help people deal with the death of a loved one and take that next step of moving on with their lives. The film takes place as Ryan is touring the country, giving self-help sessions to large groups of people over a few days time. The particular stop that we see is Seattle where his, recently deceased, wife's parents reside. His wife's father (played by Martin Sheen) still has no respect for what Ryan is doing; i.e. making money off of his wife's death. While in Chicago doing his tour, he comes across a woman named Eloise (Aniston), who delivers fresh flowers to the hotel he is staying at, each day. She owns a little "ma and pa" flower shop very close to the hotel. Ryan is immediately drawn to her and the trailers would lead you to believe that "love happens" between to the two. Rather than the film turning into their relationship, it actually takes a unique step where Eloise becomes someone who can help Burke deal with his situation. I almost wish the last ten minutes of the film did not happen. The film was not 100% perfect up until that point, but it had the ability to turn into a great film if the writers played their cards right. Well, in poker terms, the river came, and it was not pretty. I literally felt my mind leave the film and all of suspension of disbelief went out the window. Without ruining anything, the "nail in the coffin" scene happens during a seminar and it involves Martin Sheen and Aaron Eckhart. If I may get geeky for a second, I wanted to point out the fine direction of the film. From the opening shot with the close-up of Eckhart cutting the lemon to the phenomenally shot scene in Home Depot, this director really stepped it up. There is scene where Eckhart takes one of the self-help groups to a Home Depot because a character named Walter is afraid of hardware stores. His son died in a construction-type accident and every time he goes near a construction store, he has bad thoughts.. So there is this scene where they are shopping in Home Depot and the camera tracks down the store and we can see down every aisle as it passes by. Without the camera visibly cutting once, it tracks to each aisle and we get to see the characters fluidly shopping down each aisle in thirty-second shot. One thing that really bothered me was the fact that Aniston's character was barely in the film and this lead to me feeling hardly any connection between her and Eckhart. The film turns out to be a story about Eckhart's character overcoming his fears and less about the love story. This is why the ending is so cliché because it then changes gears. This leads me to believe they threw Jennifer Aniston in there to help push the film and for it to make money. Eckhart is not quite the leading man as of yet, even though he did lead Thank You For Smoking. I just don't think he equals box office numbers while starring in a leading role. He is definitely one of the best working actors about but many people who would see him on screen and say, "Oh that's the guy from Thank You For Smoking or The Dark Knight." I would recommend you watch this film and then leave right before the last 10 minutes of the film take place because they will ruin your whole experience. Because of those last ten minutes, I will have to knock it down to a rental, hence the 3 BDK rating. There are other bad moments throughout but none that stick out like the ending. Back to Top |
9Genre: Animation/Adventure/Fantasy/Sci-Fi Released: 2009 Rating: 9 falls short of expectations based on the trailer and feels incomplete and emotionless. The biggest problem with the film is that it frustrates the audience for the first hour and then finally comes around in the last twenty minutes. There is nothing wrong with teasing an audience about something and then finally revealing exactly what is going on. That only becomes an issue if you have already annoyed the audience to the point where the reveal/twist is insignificant. The director and writers should have sprinkled more life and teases throughout the movie because for the majority of the time you are sitting in that theater chair, you will be confused. Back in 2005, writer/director Shane Acker made a short film with the same title, which had a total running time of eleven minutes. While talking to fellow movie critic, Nell "Moviemom" Minow, she brought up a great point that the story works better as a short film. The issue was the fact that they had to expand it to a feature length film and it lost all of its depth and intensity. To be completely honest, the trailer for 9 is worlds better than the actual film. You will be more entertained if you hop on to youtube.com and watch the trailer with the Coheed and Cambria song, "Welcome Home", blaring in the background. If you have seen the trailer, I am sure you can agree it is one of the better trailers to come out in years. Ironically, the emotionless story revolves around Armageddon. When watching the film, I could not help but think of Terminator 2: Judgment Day. The film opens and we learn that machines have taken over the earth and essentially wiped out the entire human population. Shortly before/after the attacks, a scientist created nine little dolls to carry on the existence of life. These little dolls were each stamped with a number which was prominently placed on the back of their shirts. The opening of the film deals with the character 9 (voiced by Elijah Wood), waking up and discovering the destroyed earth. While walking around, he is introduced to a character named 2 (voiced by Martin Landou). 2 had been ordered by 1 (voiced by Christopher Plummer) to seek out this so-called "beast", that has been roaming the streets. 2 is captured by the beast and 9 eventually finds the home of the other numbers. 1, being the leader of the group, is a complete negative Nancy and won't allow anyone to go after 2. 9 stands up for himself and brings 5 (John C. Reilly) along with him to rescue 2. I am not kidding when I say this, but after the 2 mission goes down, 7 (voiced by Jennifer Connelly) is captured and they have to rescue her. The movie is honestly just a bunch of rescuing. Now, obviously I am belittling the film because it does have a deeper meaning behind it, but on the surface, that is all you are seeing. Once the rescue missions are over, all of the dolls go on a mission to find the source and answers to why this new "beast" has been resurrected and why it is sucking the souls out of the dolls. I could not believe my eyes when the film resets itself at the thirty minute marker. The characters did two of the exact rescue mission within the first hour, leaving the audience confused and frustrated as to what was going on. The writers do not to reveal anything about what is going on until the last twenty minutes. By that point, you will already be tapped out of the film. The characters were completely emotionless and I did not feel the least bit connected to any of them. I wanted to care for 9 as a character but I was so frustrated with the non-existent plot, that I just wanted the movie to end. It was the first movie in a long time that I almost took my phone out and checked my clock to see how much was left. Now, I will give Ackers credit for the visuals. The film does look stunning and the animation is seamless. It comes off much like Henry Selick's Nightmare Before Christmas, which has very similar looking characters except for 9 did not use stop-motion. Much like Nightmare, Tim Burton is behind the film in the producing chair, as well as acclaimed Russian filmmaker Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted, Nightwatch). Much like Selick's Coraline, the film is very dark and gritty. This really adds to the action sequences, especially in the last twenty minutes. Honestly, the movie could have just been that last twenty minutes and I would have been 100% satisfied. Based on how amazing the trailers were and how frustrated I was with the outcome, the movie receives a 2.5 BDK rating. It is not that the film is bad, but it could have been so much better. Back to Top |
Sorority RowGenre: Horror/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: It embarrasses me to say that Sorority Row entertained me considering its lack of scares and originality. Let's be honest with ourselves though, does Hollywood put out any really scary movies anymore? There is one every blue moon, i.e. Drag Me To Hell, The Descent. Other than once a year, the rest of scary films either have creepy little girls crawling up stairs or a masked killer stabbing people to death, and we know which category this film falls into. The trailers do not lie, as the film comes off as another I Know What You Did Last Summer, except they added in the sorority aspect. As you should know by now, close to everything we see coming through the major Hollywood studios is either a remake, based on a book or a television show or stolen/remade from another country. Minus The Departed, the foreign remakes have generally been disappointing. Most of the foreign masterpieces should be left alone, as they are already perfect as is. We don't need to throw in a Tom Cruise or a Will Smith to get box office numbers and lower the significance of an already great film. One of the best recent horror films, Let the Right One In, is apparently being remade here in America! Why would we touch that masterpiece? If that doesn't make you angry, what about the fact that we may see a remake of Oldboy. Speaking of remakes, Sorority Row is a remake of a 1983 flick called The House on Sorority Row. The 2009 version stars Briana Evigan (Step-Up 2: The Streets), Leah Pipes ("Life is Wild"), Rumor Willis (The House Bunny), Margo Harshman ("Even Stevens"), Audrina Patridge ("The Hills") and an interesting, yet bad-ass performance from Carrie Fisher (Princess Leia from Star Wars). The film tells the story of a sorority prank that goes terribly wrong. Theta Pi is supposedly the best Sorority on campus, featuring the most beautiful girls and the best parties. A group of the girls are very close to graduating and they are living out their senior year by partying hard. One of the sorority sisters, Megan (Patridge) decides to pull a prank her cheating boyfriend, Garrett (played by Matt O'Leary). Garrett thinks he is giving Megan "roofies" so that he can sleep with her but it turns out she takes a different pill that can make her foam at the mouth. Considering her other sorority sisters are in on the joke, they all come running in the room to "help" her. As they are all driving to the hospital with Garrett in the car freaking out, they take a detour to an abandoned area. They continue on with the prank saying they will have to cut Megan's body into pieces but she still has air in her lungs. Therefore, Garrett takes a tire iron and sticks it in her chest, killing her for real. The sisters decide to cover up the murder and all seems well until eight months later, after graduation, a costumed killer starts killing off the sisters. No one knows who the killer is but they have a suspicion that it could be Megan, even though they dropped her down a mine shaft. I know this may be hard to believe, but the film actually has some entertainment value to it. First of all, the opening sequence is pretty well-done. The writers and director do a good job at setting up this scenario and making you almost question what you would do in that exact situation. The question being, if a murder happened accidentally, would you cover it up and go on living your life. Obviously, a normal person would contact the police immediately, but it is written in such a way that they almost try to convince you that it would be wasteful to turn yourself in and go to jail. The characters use the mentality that what's done is done. What ruins this great scene is the horrendous dialogue about how these girls are sisters and that they need to follow the code of sisterhood. Leah Pipes, who plays the President of the sorority, uses the sayings of Theta Pi to convince her sisters that it would be ok to leave the body and go on living. That just felt completely unrealistic and it will make you laugh. On the flipside though, Pipes has some pretty decent lines throughout the movie that are intended for laughs. I want to give credit to a buddy of mine, Joe Harty, who saw the film with me on Thursday night at 12am. If you notice, every time one of the sorority sisters dies, they are killed by an object, orally. This is not a coincidence and obviously had to be done on purpose to give some type of underlying message about sororities. Whether or not that is true will not be known unless I talk to the writers. Either way, that is the way they die in the movie and it is on screen, plain as day. Anyone else who is killed outside of the sorority, die in different ways. The fun of the film is wondering who the killer is. Back when I was growing up, I remember having to sneak into a little Wes Craven movie called Scream. Thinking back on how great of a film that was, lowers my feelings about this movie. I finally can use that line and sound like I lived in a better time. Regardless, the fun of those films was figuring out who the killer is. Like any slasher film, they make you wait until the very end to find out and I will say that I did not see this one coming. You will definitely be surprised. I also liked the "pimped out" weapon they used in this movie. The tire iron had four different weapons on each end! This is a tough film to review because it does contain a ton of flaws but it did keep me entertained. The argument I will give is that you have seen this movie and dozens like it before. That would be the only reason I would not recommend paying the full ticket price to see this in theaters. I will say it is worth a rental, hence the 3 BDK rating. Back to Top |
ExtractGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: To be completely hack and reference Office Space, the film does not have enough flair. While the idea seems hilarious and the film is filled with a huge cast, it ends up being extremely slow with good laughs sprinkled in every once in a while. The film comes to us from writer/director Mike Judge, who brought to screen one of the best comedies of all time; Office Space back in 1999. You might also know some of his other work considering he was the creative mind behind Beavis and Butthead and King of the Hill. As we have seen in his films and shows, his humor is very dry but at times very obviously funny. This poses as a problem for Extract because there aren't enough of those hilarious moments. The majority of the film is filled with very dry humor. In my book, if you laugh out loud a few times at a comedy, it is not worth "extracting" that money from your wallet to see in theaters. The department that Judge does deliver in was the casting area. The film stars Jason Bateman ("Arrested Development", Juno), Mila Kunis ("Family Guy," Forgetting Sarah Marshall), J.K. Simmons (Spider-Man, Thank You for Smoking), Clifton Collins Jr. (The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day, Capote), Kristen Wiig (Knocked Up, "SNL"), Dustin Milligan (Final Destination 3, "90210"), David Koechner (Anchorman, The Goods) and Ben Affleck (Dazed and Confused, Mallrats). Extract tells the story of a man named Joel (Bateman). Joel runs an extract company called "Reynolds Extract" where he has scientifically figured out a better way to make extracts, i.e. vanilla, cookies & cream, etc). He considers himself to be rich, being that he drives a 7 series BMW around. He seems to have everything, a good job, lots of money and a nice big house with a pool. The only problem is that when he goes home from work at night, if he does not make it by 8pm, his wife (Kristen Wiig) already has her sweatpants on. That means absolutely no sex. This starts to become a problem when their sex schedule happens to be once every three months. His druggie best friend, Dean (Ben Affleck), comes up with a plan that Joel should hire a male whore to seduce his wife. If she takes the bait and cheats on Joel, then he will have free reign to do what he wants. It just so happens that a new young girl (Mila Kunis) is working at the plant and he has his eyes on her. What sets off Joel's crazy plan is an unfortunate accident that happens in the plant leaving one his employees, Step (Collins Jr.), with one testicle. Kunis is only working there to get to Step's settlement money. As you will see in the opening scene of the film, she plays a drifter who robs people blind. Considering that Step is about to get a huge settlement, she decides to trick him into loving her. Meanwhile, Joel is interested in her as well. The drama ensues. You honestly want this movie to be funny considering the talent on and off the camera. It just doesn't work as an overall movie, which sucks to say considering how interesting the plot line is. Personally, I kept getting a Fargo vibe throughout the film. It seemed like a similar situation where a husband tricks his wife into something but the outcome is far worse than foreseen. Now, we all know how Fargo tragically turns out, which is what separates it from this film, but I could not stop the comparison in my head. The film does have the same exact vibe as Office Space, even down to Jason Bateman's annoying neighbor in the film; played by David Koechner (who you know as Champ from Anchorman.) Koechner's character was simply a re-hashed version of Lumberg. He was the boss at Initech and walked around asking Ron Livingston's character for those TPS reports. The two characters were essentially the exact same, creepy and very annoying type of person. Personally, I found that character funny in Office Space but rather annoying in Extract. It was as if the annoyance of the character seeped through the screen and bothered me in real life, which is not necessarily a good thing. The funniest scene in the whole film deals with a huge five foot bong. That is all I will say. To be honest, shy of a couple of other scenes, the rest of the movie is just plain slow and boring. I hate using such harsh words but it really is. Affleck playing a druggie did not really work too well for me. It just seemed like we have seen that character a zillion times. I give this film a 2 BDK rating, which means to wait for the cable viewing. Back to Top |
All About SteveGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: All About Steve is painful, unfunny and lacks any form of direction, focus and entertainment. Personally, I am offended that a movie this bad would even be put into theaters. Considering the film was shot back in July of 2007, that just shows that it has been sitting on the shelf for a while. Why release the film now though? Well, Bullock had a huge success this year with The Proposal and Cooper had a monumental success with The Hangover. Why not release a movie with two of the biggest stars on the planet? Well, I could answer that question by saying that this film print should have been burned. It is just a complete waste of talented actors. The cast of this unfortunate disaster also include Ken Jeong (The Hangover, Knocked Up), Thomas Haden Church (Spider-Man 3, Sideways), Keith David (Requiem for a Dream, Delta Farce) and DJ Qualls (The New Guy, Road Trip). Before I continue with my review, I want to point out that I texted someone from the film who had a little bit part and they responded back with, "O God, I was hoping I would get cut from that movie ha ha!! I haven't seen it but Yeah, it looks awful." So, if someone in the movie thinks that, you can only imagine what people watching it will think. I don't want to say who it is because I don't want them to get in trouble. Sandra Bullock plays Mary Horowitz, who prides herself as the creator of the crossword puzzles for the San Francisco Herald. If you know me, I can say this while laughing. She is weirder than me in the sense that she will not stop talking around anyone and she has no social skills whatsoever. Being that her character appears to be in her 30's, she is still living at home with her parents and has yet to find true love. Her parents set her up on a date with a camera operator for the local television station. Steve (Cooper) works for CCN and operates the camera for their on-site news anchor, Hartman Hughes (Thomas Haden Church). Horowitz assumes that Steve will be some nerd but when he shows up at her house, she immediately jumps on top of him in the car and tries to have sex with him. This scares him because she will not stop talking and luckily he receives a phone call saying that he has to go on a shoot. To make a long story short, she starts to follow Steve around after getting fired for creating a crossword puzzle all about Steve. Moral lessons will be learned and the message is to always be you. Blah Blah Blah Blah. I would rather personally rip out each of my fingernails, one by one, than ever see this movie again. I don't think I have ever sat in a theater before and felt so antsy. If it was not for a couple of comedic moments from Thomas Haden Church, this movie would be receiving a big fat zero. Let me say this though, in case you are wondering whether or not I just hate on romantic comedies. I actually enjoy a lot of Sandra Bullock's films; i.e. The Proposal, Miss Congeniality, Speed, etc. She obviously has some terrible films on her resume but overall, she is an enjoyable actress. Well, she figured out a way to temporarily make me dislike her. Her character in this film is not only annoying on screen, but the annoyance seeps through the screen and irritates the hell out of you. The key to annoying character is to make the audience laugh, not cringe! The writers found a way to make her just as annoying to the audience and it was like nails on a chalk board. One of the biggest issues, besides the fact that the film is not funny, is the lack of direction and focus. The movie needs Ritalin or something because all it kept doing is jumping around to random scenes that did not follow a regular plot line. There were times where it felt like the editor just threw in a random shot. This hurts the film in a big way because you as the audience member lose focus on the story and care less and less if she is able to win Bradley Cooper's character over. Please stay as far away from this film as possible, hence the 0.5 BDK rating. That rating is generous! Back to Top |
World's Greatest DadGenre: Comedy/Drama Released: 2009 Rating: There's something enjoyable about seeing Robin Williams in a serious role but for this film serious is an understatement. Manipulation is one the greatest tools to use when making a film. If, as a director, you can manipulate the audience into thinking a certain character or thing is right or wrong, you have done your job. Well, World's Greatest Dad is the type of film that will have you changing your mind every five seconds. One minute you think the character has done something right and the next you think he has done wrong. This manipulation becomes a useful tool for writer/director/actor Bobcat Goldthwait to use throughout the picture. Also, who better to manipulate you than Robin Williams. The guy is pure emotion. I actually feel bad for Williams considering he will always have this comedic actor halo hovering over his head. If you notice, none of his more serious films perform that well in the box office, whether it be One Hour Photo, Insomnia and now this film which is receiving an extremely limited release under Richard Kelly's Darko Pictures production company. Williams is definitely the best actor out there who can run from a comedy to a drama to a dark comedy, seamlessly. I know that I am not breaking any ground here by saying this but the man is truly gifted. Now, the film's subject matter is a lot different than the trailers will lead you to believe. To name drop for one second, I had a chance to talk to Mr. Williams on the red carpet for Night at the Museum 2 and he mentioned that his next film was this movie World's Greatest Dad. I had mentioned that I liked his darker projects and he mentioned that his film dealt with autoerotic asphyxiation, which is the hardest word in the world to spell. So I took his word for it and went back to my house and watched the trailer. Needless to say, the film came off as a comedy about family so I just wrote it off as a typical Robin Williams sarcastic joke. Then, I started reading about what that act really means and I started to get a little disturbed. It was not until I saw the film that I realized that Williams was not kidding around. Williams plays, Lance Clayton, a school teacher/father in the film and one day he finds his son, Kyle (played by Daryl Sabara), dead after attempting autoerotic asphyxiation. To get away from any embarrassment, he actually sets up the death scene to look like a suicide. This comes with also faking a suicide note for his son. Now, just a quick background. Williams' character is a school teacher who has always wanted to be a writer but has never received the recognition he deserves, at least in his eyes. Once his dead son's suicide note gets out, his son Kyle starts getting all of this recognition for being a great writer. Therefore, now Williams' character is getting the "secret" recognition he deserves. Let's just say he takes things too far. The film also stars Alexie Gilmore and Jermaine Williams. The interesting aspect of the film is the way the audience reacts. The movie plays like dark comedy; i.e. something that is so sick and twisted, yet funny at the same exact time. Throughout the film, you find yourself picking sides. Is Williams right or wrong? The fact that the whole school is now behind him on this, he is actually changing lives and making everyone happier. You have to realize that his son Kyle was not a nice person at all. You actually find yourself hating him to the point where you really do not care that he has passed away. I found myself rooting for Robin Williams. Williams definitely shines again in a dark role. The character is sick and twisted, yet world's different from his One Hour Photo character. The range he has as an actor is just amazing and easily reaffirmed in this role. The movie uses Williams' face a lot to express emotion with close-ups. This film is perfect for a rental/matinee, hence the 3.5 BDK rating. You will walk of this movie feeling emotionally drained because, like all of the characters, you are forced to make moral decisions as to what is right and wrong. It is worth seeing for Robin Williams' performance. Back to Top |
GamerGenre: Action/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: (I apologize for the late review. The film did not screen to the critics and I was not able to see it until Monday, September 7th.) Gamer is the latest development from the dynamic duo of directors, Neveldine/Taylor. Brian Taylor and Mark Neveldine are well known for directing Crank and Crank 2 and their unique style of shooting. If you haven’t seen any of the specials done on these guys, you should head on over to youtube.com to see how they film their movies. Brian and Mark will ride skateboards, rollerblades or just latch themselves onto a vehicle while filming it. Both have sustained injuries during shooting but it is all worth it to get that unique angle of an action scene that has been done before. They try out their style with 300 star Gerard Butler, arguably putting him in his first action film since Zack Snyder’s epic masterpiece. Butler did team up with Guy Ritchie, for his comeback film Rock N’ Rolla, but Gamer is more of bad-ass type action film. While the film is nowhere near the level of 300, I still felt that it delivered some great action scenes with high intensity. Gamer’s high point though, comes from “Dexter” star Michael C. Hall. Hall puts on this beautifully theatrical performance as the villain of the film. This played perfectly into the unique vision of Neveldine/Taylor. The film also stars Logan Lerma (3:10 To Yuma, The Number 23), Aaron Yoo (21), Ludacris (Hustle & Flow), Terry Crews (Friday After Next, Norbit), Kyra Sedgwick (“The Closer”), John Leguizamo (“The Pest”) and Amber Valetta. As action packed as the film may be, it also makes you question your own morals. The film takes place in the year 2034, where the federal prisons are now using their life sentence and death row inmates in online games. The latest game, headed by its creator Ken Castle (Hall), is called “Slayers”. The idea around the game is that a player at home can control the inmate in a real life war zone, from his computer. If the inmate can survive a total of thirty games, he will be set free. This has all been sanctioned by the U.S. Government. Kable (Butler) has won twenty-seven games in a row and is three away from his release. Considering the millions of pay-per-view downloads these games have received, Castle can’t afford to let Kable win all thirty of the games. Castle creates a plan to input a player into the game, who is not being controlled by a second party. That way, the inmate has full control over any movements and shooting. The player he decides to put in goes by the name of Hackman and is played by Terry Crewes. Kable and his “gamer,” Simon Silverton (Lerma) have to figure out a plan to get out of this situation alive. When talking to director, Mark Neveldine, he said that obviously one of the biggest influences on this film was Arnold Schwarzenegger’s The Running Man. He even said there was a tiny shot in the movie where a character walks by in the same costume. Therefore, if you are already reviewing the movie in your head by saying it looks like that film; know that the directors are essentially paying homage to that. While paying homage, they are also putting their own spin. The idea itself is very interesting and the way it is executed on screen is very cool. Gamer is the type of film you go into, turn your brain off, and watch for the action. The film is ultra-violent and contains a ton of explosions. You don’t really have to think much about what is going on. I will say that at some points, you do question your own morals, i.e. whether or not is right to do this to a death row inmate. The argument being that they already ruined their chance of living in a normal society, therefore the government can do whatever they want with them. The highlight of the film was Michael C. Hall. If you have ever watched “Dexter”, the role is completely different from his character on that show. Hall, who apparently was trained theatrically, brings it all to the screen here with dance numbers and just completely over-the-top acting. It was hilarious, yet frightening at the same exact time. His character in the movie has it all, yet he only wants more. He truly lights up the screen with this performance. He was the complete opposite of Gerard Butler, who had absolutely zero light to his character. He barely said a word the entire film. Maybe I am being too nice with this movie but I really sat there and enjoyed the hour and forty-five minutes I spent in the theater, hence the 3.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Halloween II (2009)Genre: Horror/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: (My apologies if this review has grammatical errors...I saw this film at 12am and I wrote it as fast as possible to get it up. If you see any errors, feel free to email me at bdkjunkies@gmail.com) While you are it, peep my interview with ROB ZOMBIE by clicking HERE. While the film is not as good as Zombie's first, the violence is relentlessly brutal and the flick will make you jump. Zombie was recently quoted as saying that the difference between Halloween and Halloween 2 is the difference between House of a 1000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects. I sat down with him for an interview and I asked him to elaborate and he touched on the fact that it is just a darker film. His first Halloween flick was really interesting because we were able to see Michael Myers as a kid and how he became so messed up. As we saw in the first film, he brutally murders his family, leaving his baby sister, Angel, to live. He is put in an insane asylum where he undergoes treatment from Dr. Loomis (Malcolm McDowell). As the years go on, Angel grows up with new parents and her new name is Laurie Strode. At the end of the first film, she shoots Michael in the head and we all think he's dead. Well, we obviously knew he would not die considering this guy could be nuked and not killed. He's a freaking machine. They also add a couple of new features, i.e. his mask is off for a lot of the film, he grunts during his kills and stops to eat things. Zombie took on a big task remaking/rebooting John Carpenter's classic flick. Personally, I felt that he did a great job and put his own spin on the series. It became a completely different series and way more brutal. That could be a sign of the times, considering how desensitized we are to violence. Some people would argue that the original is so great because the body count was less. Carpenter scared people with the eerie walking and the slow walking. Yes, that was scary for the time and still scares me today. Zombie basically put Michael Myers on red bull and amped it up. The film opens right after Laurie Strode (Scout Compton-Taylor) blows Michael Myers' (Tyler Mane) brains out. She is walking down the street and is immediately taken to the hospital. Myers' "dead" body is put in the back of a van and on its way to the morgue, when the drivers hit a cow and Michael wakes up and escapes. The film fast forwards a year to the next Halloween and we see that Laurie is struggling with happened. Who wouldn't be? She keeps have recurring nightmares, where her mother and young Michael are terrorizing her. At this time though, she has no clue that Michael Myers is her brother. Her mother, played by Zombie's wife (Sheri Moon Zombie) is a ghost who wears all white and walks around with a white horse. This has some type of significance as you will see in the opening shot of the film. The drama ensues once Dr. Loomis' (Malcolm McDowell) book comes out stating that she is Michael Myers' sister. Let the killing begin! To be honest, and I never thought I would say this, this film is almost too violent. It got to a point where there was so much blood and gore that I felt numb to anything that was happening. The first film had that emotion where you felt for the characters. My fellow movie critic, Dustin Putnam, disagreed saying this new film had more feelings for the characters. This one was all about the violence and the sickness of Michael Myers. We were inside of his head and it was not a pretty site. He is just on a rampage killing everything in his path. Scout Compton-Taylor puts on a great performance, considering she is crying and screaming the entire film. I couldn't even imagine having to do that for an entire film. An interesting thing to think about is whether or not there were outtakes. You always see humorous outtakes after comedies. I wonder if after a killing scene or a crying, whether or not there is laughter or not. Zombie definitely stepped up his directing this time around with all of the nightmares and dream sequences of Laurie Strode and Michael Myers. I really enjoyed the bright white colors he had throughout these sequences and the quick editing. The editing made the film ten times scarier and was a great tool for the jump scares. There is one sequence where Laurie finds one of her friends whose been brutally beaten. As she walks through the scene, Zombie cuts in quickly what happened to her friend. It was a very useful tool. Overall, this is not as good as the first one, considering the violence outweighs any emotion I would feel for the characters. I wanted to feel for Laurie but I couldn't stop gasping over the disgusting stabbing scenes. Myers is just so brutal. I give this a 3.5 BDK rating out of 5. Back to Top |
The Final Destination 3DGenre: Horror/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: The film is worth every penny of your money to see in theaters but please be aware the acting and script are horrendous. For years, the first three films in this series have entertained me with their clever and well-directed death sequences. It was just always intriguing to see what new possible way the filmmaker would kill off one of the characters. In the first film we saw that Devon Sawa's character had a premonition about a plane that was going to crash before a school field trip. He and a handful of the students exited the plane and it actually did blow up right when it took off. Therefore, they cheated death and the premise of the film was that they would all start dying in the order they were supposed to die on the plane. The sequel came back with a vengeance, directed by David R. Ellis (Snakes on a Plane) and easily contains one of the greatest car crashes ever caught on film. The question is, what can you do with the third film? Well, why not channel something that everyone is afraid of; roller coasters. Everyone has thought, at one point in their life, how scary it would be to get stuck in one of those loops and fall screaming to your death. Needless to say, these films have always been very creative. Director David R. Ellis is back to direct, what the studio calls "The Final Destination." Now, do we really think this will be the last one? I highly doubt that considering it was number one in the box office and made close to $30 million dollars in its first weekend. The film comes at you in 3D this time and the cool part is that the filmmakers are using James Cameron's special camera that he created for Avatar. According to an interview that I did with the lead star, Bobby Campo, this is the first film to actually use Cameron's brand new camera and I will say that the 3D is stunning. Essentially, Cameron combined two cameras into one lens to shoot 3D footage. This creates a more realistic portrayal of the action. To top all of the other films in the series, they had to do ramp it up and trust me on this, the 3D death scenes are really awesome to watch. I will say that the creative angle of the opening death sequence isn't as great as the first three films but the Nascar race did look spectacular in 3D. The story remains the same. The lead character, Nick (Campo), has a premonition that there is going to be a massive crash at the Nascar race he and his friends are attending. He sees the entire deadly crash in his head and forces his friends and others to leave. Lo and behold, the crash does occur right as they are walking out, killing dozens of people. The rest of the film, Campo has these odd visions where he gets to see clues as to how the next person will die. These are done via CGI images of snakes, cigarettes, scissors, etc. The goal is to cheat death again so that they can hopefully skip it. This film easily has the craziest death sequences, including one which was stolen right from a Chuck Palahniuk short story called "Guts." "Guts" appeared in a book of short stories he wrote called "Haunted" and tells of the legend that a pool drain can suck the guts right out of you. Apparently, this has actually happened to people before. Think about how that will look in 3D! The interesting thing about this film is that they threw all script and acting out the window. That was completely obvious. It was as if they did not even care. Ellis knew that the death scenes were all that mattered and that came across crystal clear, in 3D, on the screen. It actually got to the point where a death scene would happen and then we would cut back to Bobby Campo and he had zero emotions whatsoever. This happened more towards the end as everyone was dying, which seems backwards. One particular death scene that really blew me away, at least in the directing department, was the scene with a mother at the hair cutting place. The mother and her two kids had left the race because of Nick's premonition and they were next to die on the list. She arrives at a hair cutting place ten minutes before they are about to close. This scene was directed with extreme close-ups of cutting hair and a close up of her getting her toe nails done. They would have a close-up angle on her toes as this sharp object was going underneath it to clean out all of the dirt and dead skin. The tension of that scene was just spectacular and deserves credit. Listen, the movie is completely and utterly ridiculous. You will be laughing pretty much the entire time. The 3D makes the film out to be more of a goofy, disgusting and violent ride. I personally would go back again and spend the 12 dollars. Normally, on my scale, this film would receive a 5 BDK rating because it is perfect theater viewing, but I can't convince myself to get over the script and acting. If you can get past that and go into this movie imagining it like a theme park ride, you will love it. If you go into the film judging plot, script and acting, you will absolutely hate it. It all depends on your taste so I went with a middle of the road 3.5 BDK rating. The cool part is that you will never think of pedicures and escalators the same ever again. Back to Top |
Taking WoodstockGenre: Comedy/Music Released: 2009 Rating: While the film starts off slow, Lee's story develops into an amazing trip; no pun intended. Personally, I have never tried the drug, acid, but I now know exactly what it must feel like to be on it. Ang Lee deserves some credit for that sequence, in which Emile Hirsch and Paul Dano deliver extremely realistic performances with amazing direction. You are probably asking yourself the exact question I am right now; why did they make another Woodstock film. Well, the answer is that this film barely even shows the actual concert. It is more of the story around Woodstock and how a little town became the "center of the universe," as Liev Schreiber's character states to Martin. Taking Woodstock is definitely worth seeing and an interesting project that director, Ang Lee, really pours his soul into. The cool thing about Ang Lee is that every film he makes is completely different. He is always trying different styles, whether it be the amazingly stylistic Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or the awful Hulkor the brilliantly acted and directed Brokeback Mountain. Now he is taking on the greatest concert of all time. The film stars Demetri Martin, Emile Hirsch, Imelda Staunton, Henry Goodman, Eugene Levy, Jeffrey Dean Morgan and a very new actor named Jonathan Groff who puts on a phenomenal performance. The story revolves around how Woodstock ended up in a little city called White Lake, NY. The film opens up and we are introduced to an old run down motel called the El Monaco, which has been run by the Teichbergs for quite some time. Elliot Teichberg (Martin) and his parents, Jake and Sonia, have been in financial troubles trying to keep the place alive. The bank keeps threatening to take the place and they have been given their final date, which will be the end of the summer, to come up with the money. Elliot hears about a concert called Woodstock that was supposed to take place in a town called Wallkill, NY, but there were some legal issues. He calls up one of the contacts involved in the production, Michael Yang (Jonathan Groff) and has him come out to check out their land. It just so happens that a man named Max (Levy) has a ton of land where this concert can be held. So, the deal is made and Woodstock will be happening in White Lake, NY. At first, they expected 100,000 people max but we all know what really happened. The story revolves around Elliot essentially becoming a man, family issues and one of the greatest events in music history. I must say that if this film wins any awards, the best actress award must go to Imelda Staunton. She plays the mother of Demetri Martin in the film and she was just fantastic. Her stories, movements and facial expressions were priceless. The interesting thing about her character was that it was so hard for her to show emotion but you knew, underneath it all, she cared so much for her son and husband. The fact that 500,000 people were on their way to their town, changed things a little bit for the family and you get to see how they are affected throughout the film. She is so protective of her family and son, yet she is always rude and cold. Martin's character actually asks his dad at one point how he has stuck with her for over forty years and he says simply that he loves her. Another surprising performance was Demetri Martin, who comes from a very comedic background. When he is first on screen, I had trouble separating him from that aspect but as the film went on, he really grew on me and his performance definitely shines. His character is very simple, yet very deep at the same time. The great thing about his character was that nothing was ever on the surface. You had to really dig to understand him. This movie is truly all about performances and another one which really surprised me was of this relatively new actor, Jonathan Groff, who plays this hippie young man who helps put together Woodstock. We are introduced to him as he lands at White Lake in a helicopter and he has this Zen like feel to him. He is always walking around care free. It made me jealous because I am diagnosed with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, so to see someone so care free, was mind blowing. He just had this outlook that everything would be alright. He was so laid back that he would ride around the city on beautiful thoroughbred horses. It really does make you laugh at some points, which was obviously intentional. Ang Lee definitely shot the film very well, especially the acid trip sequence. The cameo from Paul Dano was perfect and really added to the scene, which is full of beautiful colors. There is a shot where Demetri Martin's character is looking down the hill onto the concert while he is tripping. The hill starts moving in a wave like motion and it just looked so insane. The one thing directing-wise that did bother me were the split screen sequences. Those did bother me a little but I was able to get to over it. I will say that he did direct a very slow beginning which did turn me off the film for a little while but it does pick up once the Woodstock plan gets into motion. With great performances and a great script, I would recommend this film as a solid matinee, hence the 4 BDK rating. Back to Top |
Play the GameGenre: Comedy/Romance Released: 2009 Rating: Play The Game has an extremely cliché plot and script but the film is saved by the clever twist ending and Andy Griffith's hilarious performance. There are things in life that you think you will never see and one of those is Andy Griffith having sex on camera. Well, writer/director Marc Fienberg has set the record straight and we get a pumped up, hilarious and very sexual Andy Griffith. The film is all about playing the "game" with relationships but it takes a special spin by throwing in elderly people. Paul Campbell plays a young bachelor who always plays the game. He has set guidelines and rules that he uses when talking to women. He can pretty much win anyone over with his full proof plan. His Grandfather, played by Andy Griffith, currently lives in a retirement home and is completely miserable. His wife has recently passed away and he feels that he will not find another companion. Campbell comes to the rescue by saying that he needs to get back in the game. The film takes a turn though when Campbell's character actually falls for someone and she is essentially gives him a wake up call about relationships. Meanwhile, Griffith is having a grand old time, once Doris Roberts' character introduces him to Viagra. Up until that point, he thought his stuff did not work. Griffith's sex humor absolutely saves the film. He is so dirty and foul throughout the movie that it makes all of the cheesy moments and scenes worth watching. I would give this film a 3.5 BDK rating because I feel it would be a great matinee/rental. I know that I will never sit down the same ever again because I will be worried about the G's that happen when you sit. Back to Top |
Inglourious BasterdsGenre: Action/Drama/War Released: 2009 Rating: (I first want to say that I am writing this review at 3:30am on Friday morning after seeing the midnight showing...Cut me some slack on grammatical errors. I will re-edit it tomorrow morning - KM) "I think this might be my masterpiece," says Brad Pitt's character at some point in the film. I wonder if that was Quentin Tarantino talking through Brad Pitt. Now, I would not necessarily call this Tarantino's best film, but it ranks up there with Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. Considering the classic sense of those two films, that is a rather bold statement on my part. Speaking of bold statements, roughly two years ago, writer/director Quentin Tarantino did an interview with the morning show that I do movie reviews for. In this interview, I asked him whether or not he thought he could write a better monologue than the scene he wrote between Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper in True Romance. He said, "You're a pretty good critic...Here's the thing...That so far, I'm really proud of my monologues, that so far is the monologue that I've written to beat. Alright. That so far the best one I've done. I am writing a World War 2 thing called "Inglourious Basterds" and I think I've finally matched." Now, if I had to guess the scene he was referring to, I would say it is the beginning scene with Christoph Waltz talking to the French family on the dairy farm. If you see the film, watch that scene and tell me what you think. I hate to say this but I do not feel he topped that monologue, even though it is a great scene. Inglourious Basterds stars Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz (who is an Austrian actor that completely steals the film), Eli Roth (director of Hostel, Cabin Fever), Diane Kruger (National Treasure), Melanie Laurent (French Actress), B.J. Novak ("The Office"), Daniel Bruhl, Til Schweiger and Jacky Ido. There are also bit parts from Mike Meyers, Harvey Keitel and a short narration by Samuel L. Jackson. The film is split into five chapters, which surprisingly was edited together in a linear fashion. Usually, Tarantino shuffles the stories around, i.e. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill. He went for a straight shot here and it was very refreshing. He still kept his signature Tarantino style with his brilliant choices of music, brilliant camera angles and odd and offbeat humor. He is the master of making you laugh at horrific violence. There is a scene at the end of the film that was so horrifically violent, that you can't help but laugh. I don't want to give away much of the plot but I will just give a basic idea of the main story line. (DO NOT READ THIS PLOT LINE IF YOU ARE AFRAID OF SPOILERS. I TRIED TO KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE). The film obviously takes place during WW2. As of 1941, the Nazi's have occupied France and part of their mission is to clear the Jewish people out. Col. Hans Landa (Waltz), also known as "The Jew Hunter" arrives at the home of a nice French family one morning. He happens to be on the hunt for a Jewish family that he believes is hiding in their basement. Moving ahead so that I don't ruin anything, one of the Jewish family members, Shosanna Dreyfus (Laurent), escapes from Landa and his men. She moves to Paris, France and begins to operate a German cinema. At this point she has changed her name and has fake papers that she can show to the Germans if she happens to get stopped. Meanwhile, the U.S. has set up a crew of men to be dropped into Nazi Occupied France to kill Nazis. This group is called the Basterds and they are headed by Lt. Aldo Raine (Pitt). Their mission is to enter France in civilian clothes and each take 100 Nazi scalps to give to Lt. Raine. They will eventually cross paths with Dreyfus because at Dreyfus' theater, the Nazis are going to hold a movie premier for a film called "Nation's Pride," in which many German officials and soldiers will be in attendance. One of which, is Col. Landa, who happened to murder Dreyfus' family. She wants her revenge. It also helps that the Basterds have also been put on a mission to take out the movie theater. As a side note, Eli Roth and his brother Gabriel directed this film within the film. The film is over two hours and a half, yet it went by so quickly. A lot of that had to do with Tarantino's genius writing as well as the chapter story telling, much like Kill Bill. There were a lot of similarities to Kill Bill, i.e. music, direction and the way the story is told via narration at times. Tarantino was on Letterman the other night and he said this movie was supposed to have that "spaghetti western" feel to it, considering he was using Ennio Morriconi-type music. Morriconi did the very famous score for The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Most people had a problem with Tarantino's last film, Death Proof, calling it too dialogue heavy. That is what he is good at! He found a perfect balance with this film where he was able to perfectly balance out the absurd violence with the genius dialogue. Just when you think the movie might be getting a little too talkative, he throws in a sick shoot out. I, personally, am a sucker for his dialogue so I can never get enough of it. There is a great "Mexican standoff" in this film that could be comparable to the classic ending of Restervoir Dogs. I wish I could get Inglourious Basterds on DVD so that I could watch this one particular bar scene in slow motion. The film absolutely shows no mercy and is easily his best film since Pulp Fiction. Tarantino has just proven again that he is the greatest director of this time. The performances he pulls out of these actors, particularly from Christoph Waltz and Melanie Laurent, were just brilliant. If I could compare Waltz's character to anyone, it would be Javier Bardem/'s character in No Country for Old Men. He just had that same type of calm attitude but he could be completely menacing at anytime. What a brilliant performance that was! If I may point out the violent scenes in the film and say that they are just completely bad-ass. You will literally want to get out of your seat and scream during some of these scenes because they just make you feel explosive. It was just great to see the Jewish people fighting back in a film. You just sit there as a viewer wanting these Nazis to die which creates almost a sickening moral feeling for you as you sit there and fist-pump. Tarantino really just struck a nerve and as you watch the last five minutes of the film, you will feel something you have never felt before. The slow motion of this one shot with Eli Roth almost put me to tears. Please, I am begging you, go see this movie IMMEDIATELY, hence the 6 BDK rating! It is by far the best film of 2009 as of yet. I would go as far as to say that this is a perfect movie. I will be seeing it again, two or three more times, this weekend and if I find any flaws, I will report back. Back to Top |
ShortsGenre: Family Released: 2009 Rating: Rodriguez's latest flick is fun, immature and very imaginative. When you watch a Robert Rodriguez movie, you can always expect goofiness, exaggerated sounds, awkward close-ups and immature humor. You get these kind of aesthetics when you are watching his kids films and his adult films. He has always been one of the most innovative filmmakers in the business. The best part is that he started off making short films and one of those, Bedhead, is truly great cinema. He then took the big screen with his film debut, El Mariachi, which was made for like $7,000 and shot in 21 days. I was always weary when he went the "kids" route, but I really did enjoy the Spy Kids flicks. It's interesting to see a director known for his extreme violence, let off the pedal and bring his talent to the young ones. Out of all of the movies geared towards young kids, Shorts is the most self-aware and more fun movies to see. It is nowhere near a masterpiece or a great film, but it does deliver some good laughs and a dumbed down, good time. Shorts is exactly what it says it is. The film is comprised of six short films, which all tie together in the end. There are technically six because of the beginning short, which deals with two young children having an exaggerated staring contest to see who blinks first. These two characters then become a joke throughout the rest of the film. The plot centers around Toe Thompson (Jimmy Bennett) in a little suburb of Texas called Black Falls. The community is owned by Mr. Black (James Spader) who started a company called "Black Box," which sells a product that can pretty much turn into anything. One second the object could be a cheese grater, a hair cutter, a blue tooth for your phone, etc. Toe (Toby) Thompson is the kid at school who everyone picks on constantly and he just so happens to get picked on by Mr. Black's children, Cole Black (Deavan Gearhart) and Helvitica Black (played by first time actor Jolie Vanier). One day, Toe comes across a magic rainbow rock, which happens to be a wishing rock. Let's just say that the rock gets into the wrong hands and all hell breaks lose. There are also performances by William H. Macy, who plays an OCD dad who also works for Mr. Black. Everyone in the community works for "Black Box," including Toe's parents, played by Leslie Mann and Jon Cryer. The film is kept alive by the stupidity of the plot, if that makes sense. It is obvious that no one in this film or anyone making the film, thought this was anywhere near a serious movie. Rodriguez's quirky directing makes the story seem more fun than it actually is. It was the little things that kept me entertained. Pretty much every child has had braces growing up, so he plays on that with a hilarious bit where the lead character is cleaning his teeth. Call it nostalgia, but it brought back fun young memories. I want to point out the actress, Jolie Vanier. This was her first time acting in a film and she played one of the bullies that would not leave Toe Thompson alone. Her character was so evil that she had her own theme music, which would chant her name "Helvitica" during some of her sequences. It just made me laugh and it was just a little quirk that Rodriguez threw in there that added to the film. She was fantastic and will easily have a bright future. If you are a parent and your kids want to get out of the house, I would say take them to see this movie. The quirkiness will even entertain you, especially if you were into the Spy Kids films. Now, as a recommendation to the general public, I would stick with a rental on this one and go see something more original like District 9 or (500) Days of Summer. Back to Top |
X Games 3D: The MovieGenre: Documentary/Sport Released: 2009 Rating: No Rating To be completely honest, I would not feel right giving this movie a rating. The reason being that it is not really a film at all. If you are not familiar with X-Games, they are essentially the Olympics for the "cool" sports; i.e. skateboarding, motocross, bmx and rally car racing. They air each year on T.V. And feature the best athletes, for those sports, in the world. My buddy Josh made a great point that since these were last year’s X-Games, if you are into the sports, you have already seen these results and competitions. If I were to rate this movie as a documentary, which is the style of the film, it would receive a very poor review because the interviews are lame and the narration is laughable. That is where I reach my problem. This is easily the greatest 3D film I have ever seen on screen, besides The Polar Express in 3D. Never before have I seen such stunningly beautiful cinematography. It was so realistic at points that I actually felt like I was there. Now, on my scale, this would be a "must-see in theaters" movie, just based on the 3D aspect. Personally, the documentary portion is just awful. So, where do I draw the line? The perfect assessment would be that if you are into these sports and want to see it in 3D, then go ahead but this thing was just slapped together footage from a previous X-Games year. The documentary goes in sections starting off with motocross and they feature some of the greats in the sport like Travis Pastrana and Ricky Carmichael. Personally, I found all of the Pastrana stuff to be a little "me me me me". We learn about Ricky Carmichael's career and how he was named "GOAT" (greatest of all time). Keep in mind, that during these chunks, we get interviews from the star and the actual X-Games competition that happened in the previous year. Pastrana decides to also show us his love for rally car racing. We are then taken into the world of Shaun White, who is an Olympic Gold medalist for his snow boarding skills. Finally, the film ends with a riveting half-hour of the X-Games skateboarding competition between Bob Burnquist, Danny Way and Jake Brown. The skateboarding portion was the best part of the entire film because they set up the interviews well and the competition was actually very breathtaking to see in 3D. Again, the documentary filmmaking is not the greatest but the 3D is some of the best I have seen on screen. I would personally feel bad rating this film because as a documentary, it is awful (minus the last thirty minutes). Back to Top |
District 9Genre: Action/Drama/Sci-Fi/Thriller Released: 2009 Rating: District 9 contains some of the most innovative film making and brilliant acting ever caught on film, considering the low budget and first time actor. This is a truly original film and one of the best science fiction films in years. Neill Blomkamp has created one of the most realistic interactions between a CGI character and a human being. The same thing could be said about the first Transformers flick but that was made for over $200 million. District 9 had a small budget of $30 million. How the hell did he get these aliens to look so realistic while interacting with the humans? There were times where it looked so real that I thought it could have been someone in a suit but based on the alien's body structure, it would have been in impossible. Turns out, after interviewing the star of the film, Sharlto Copley, that he improvised pretty much all of his lines and during the scenes where he was interacting with an alien, he was talking to a man in a gray suit. In post-production, they added the aliens into the film. Based on that little nugget, this movie will change science fiction films for a long time to come. The best part is that, much like earlier films this year like The Hurt Locker, there are no big stars and therefore you are able to watch the movie without thinking of who the actor is. Like I said in my review of The Hurt Locker, it just adds to the realism of the film and helps you suspend your disbelief much more. To quote Peter Griffen, what really grinds my gears, are the articles coming out right about this film; specifically in Entertainment Weekly. Even if you just see the cover of this magazine, it contains a major spoiler. My advice is to stay as far away as possible from articles and trailers. To give producer Peter Jackson and director Neill Blomkamp credit, they did a hell of a job with the trailers. Even if you just watch the teaser or the two minute theatrical trailer, they barely give away any information on the plot. Much like the trailers, this plot synopsis will contain no spoilers. Twenty-eight years ago, an alien spaceship randomly landed just over Johannesburg, South Africa. Currently, 1.8 million aliens live directly underneath that ship, which has not moved in over 20 years. These 1.8 million aliens live in District 9, which is a blocked off area and they are completely separate from the humans, except for the Nigerians who live within the fences. As we saw in the teaser trailer, the aliens accidentally landed there and they do not want to hurt the humans. One day though, it is decided that it would be a good idea to move the 1.8 million aliens to a tighter location, much like a concentration camp. A military based operation called MNU puts the order out and they begin to serve the evictions to the aliens. The MNU appoint an employee named Wikus (played by Sharlto Copley) to head head the mission but when he discovers something along the way, his life and the rest of the movie take a huge turn. Let's just say the aliens are not to happy with MNU and let the drama ensue. As a little side note, the movie is shot like a documentary with documentary style interviews and sometimes a very shaky camera. This all adds to the realistic effect. As I write this review, I am still baffled as to how the hell Blomkamp created these realistic aliens. They are 100% flawless looking and the interaction is dead-on. To sum up this movie in two words; bad ass. When the last twenty minutes of this film hit me, I almost got out of my seat and started screaming because I couldn't handle the intensity and mind blowing feeling of the action that Blomkamp created. It is rather astonishing to see a film that cost $30 million, but looks like it cost ten times that amount. Sharlto Copley deserves and Academy Award nomination for his performance in this film, which according to him was highly improvised. I was reading the Entertainment Weekly article and apparently he hired director Neill Blomkamp as a computer engineer years back and then Blomkamp wanted to return the favor by letting him try out for the film. Copley mentioned in the interview that he was also being used for test footage to help Neill figure out how he was going to shoot the film. Then, Neill just decided to hire him as the lead. This obviously turned out to be a great move because he did not have to hire major star power, which added to the realism. One of the really cool experiences you take away from the film is the emotional ride. When you initially see the teaser trailer, you feel bad for the aliens because of how terrible the humans are treating them. Throughout the film, your emotions do change about the aliens, as do the main characters of the film. Trust me, this movie is much more than explosions and special effects. There are really dark themes and messages about humanity. It's rather genius if I may say so. If you have six minutes to spare before heading to the theaters to see one of the best films of the year, head on over to Youtube and type in "Alive in Joburg" to watch Blomkamp's short 6 minute movie that he made back in 2006. District 9 is a follow up to that short flick and when you see the special effects in that movie, multiply those amazing effects by 100 and you get the new film’s effects. This is my 3rd 5 out of 5 BDK rating of the year and it is an extreme, must-see film. I promise you that the last twenty minutes of the movie will just blow you away and you may even shed a tear at the last couple of minutes. Back to Top |
The Time Traveler's WifeGenre: Drama/Romance/Sci-Fi Released: 2009 Rating: The perfect word to sum up this film is, fascinating. Yes, the film is overacted and completely over dramatic, but my feeble brain was able to suspend my disbelief enough to feel for these characters. Based on the very popular book by Audrey Niffenegger with the same title, the filmmakers bring this brilliant story to life. The execution could have been a lot better but overall, the love portion and story work out. If people walk out of this movie saying that it is completely unbelievable, they totally missed the point. The whole entire premise is science fiction. So, you need to leave your realistic thoughts at the door. You are being entertained with a love story that contains a different premise. To be honest, among all of the science fiction, the love story sticks out enough where you almost do start to believe what is happening. Forgive me for this comparison because these two movies are on a completely different wavelength and level, but think about how you feel when you watch a movie like E.T. You are able to suspend your disbelief that an alien has landed on earth and become friends with a boy. The comparison that I am making is that you are able to believe that something impossible is happening, yet you can feel emotion for the characters involved. The Time Traveler's Wife stars Eric Bana (The Hulk, Munich) and Rachel McAdams (The Notebook, The Wedding Crashers). When Henry (Bana) was six years old, his mother died in a horrific car accident but that was not the only thing on his mind. He was also confused as to why his body would disappear at times and he would end up different places in a different year; hence he traveled through time. He is not able to control this and it always happens when he least expects it. One day, while in his 40's, he travels back through time and meets a young girl named Clare (McAdams). He immediately explains who he is, considering he is butt-naked and has to borrow her picnic blanket to cover himself. From that point on, throughout her life, he continues to visit her until one day she physically meets him while at the library. This version of Henry has not yet met her because he is only in his 30's. As you can tell, the movie is a bit confusing. They fall in love but the problem is that he keeps disappearing and coming back at different ages. Throughout the movie, we deal with their relationship and the struggles they go through. Their relationship is put through different problems because there are times where he would be away for two weeks at a time. The biggest problems with the film are the overacting and the over dramatic moments. They definitely beat the emotions into the ground. Whether or not this was done on purpose, I don't know, but it came off as cheesy at times. There were lines of dialogue throughout the film that you will feel as painfully bad and one's you will look over at your buddies and make total fun of. Call me crazy, but much like Twilight, I felt a strong connection between the two leading characters. Even with a teen crazy film like Twilight, the love connection was strong enough to pull the movie through to victory. The same goes for this film where the two lead stars are dealing with some type of super natural problem between them that is keeping them apart. You want nothing more than for these characters to some how find a way to be together. My favorite parts of the film were the little quirks about the time travel. The filmmakers played out some really cool ideas about time travel and things that could occur; i.e. having Bana's character come back at different ages and they played with this in the sexual department as well. Essentially, they had as much fun as they could with a PG-13 rating. I want to point out that the wedding scene in the film is my favorite. This movie will not change the world but it is a very fascinating and interesting story line. I would recommend a rental/matinee for this film, hence the 3.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |
The Goods: Live Hard, Sell HardGenre: Comedy Released: 2009 Rating: The Goods is one of the more crude, hilarious and jaw dropping comedies of the year. Just when you think the movie is getting a little soft, director Neal Brennan and producer Adam McKay hit you with a hilarious one-liner or a great cameo, which will just knock you out completely. This is nowhere near a perfect comedy, being that it does have many dull moments throughout. The beginning starts off so strong and then it tapers off for a while and does finish with a good bang. Think about this resume for a second. The film is directed by the co-creator of Chappelle's Show and the writer of Half-Baked. The film is produced by the guy who wrote Anchorma, Talladega Nights and Step Brothers. Then, the film stars Jeremy Piven (Entourage), David Koechner (Champ from Anchorman), Ving Rhames (Marcellus Wallace from Pulp Fiction), Katherine Hahn (Step Brothers), Ken Jeong (The Hangover, Knocked Up), Alan Thicke (Growing Pains), Craig Robinson (Zack and Miri Make a Porno), Rob Riggle (The Hangover) and a hilarious cameo by a huge star who will remain unnamed. Jeremy Piven was recently featured in Men's Fitness magazine about how his life is almost parallel to the character of Don "The Goods Ready. Ready is an almost super hero-like, car salesman who is hired by dealerships to help move cars. So, if a dealership is in a huge slump, they call up Mr. Ready and his crew and fly them out to help you clear your lot. Therefore, Ready has been on the move his entire life. Much like Piven's career, he has never really found balance. He receives a call one day from Ed Selleck (James Brolin), who desperately needs help moving cars or his dealership will be shut down. Ready brings his crew, which includes hilarious performances by Ving Rhames, Katherine Hahn and David Koechner, to Temecula, California. When they arrive for the fourth of July weekend sale they have over 200 cars to sell. An opposing dealership ran by Stu Harding (Thicke) and his son Harding (Ed Helms) are trying to buy out Selleck's lot so that Harding can continue with his "man band" career, which is very similar to a band like N'Sync or Backstreet Boys. The movie is all over the place and the jokes come out of nowhere so the description I just gave is extremely bare bones. The movie does have some dull moments where the jokes do not hit, but those moments are easily forgotten when Brennan and McKay hit us with a horrifically disgusting, racist or just downright wrong line of dialogue. There are definitely some classic lines in the film that people will be using, under their breath, for years to come. Piven's last leading role was in PCU back in 1994, so this was an interesting step for him. Considering he is now more famous than he has ever been, why not? He stars on one of the biggest shows on television, Entourage and the funny thing is that his character of Don Ready is very similar. You could see Ari saying some of the exact same lines. Honestly, I think his leading role in this movie was a bit weak but luckily his back up characters (i.e. Katherine Hahn) were able to keep the film alive. It was not that Piven was unfunny. I just had a hard time believing and buying into the changes his character was going through. The filmmakers wanted to give you a character that goes through changes and realizes the error of his ways, but you do not care enough about him to feel any emotion. The MVP for acting in this movie has to go to Katherine Hahn. She completely steals this movie with hilarious lines of dialogue and just a killer role. I don't want to spoil much but let's just say that her character’s main goal in this movie was to sleep with Rob Riggle's character, who is actually a ten year old boy. Think of him like Robin Williams in Jack. Her character was just so fearless and brutal and it really came off as perfect raw comedy. One of my favorite things about this film are the little things. Neal Brennan and Adam McKay definitely through in some hilarious jokes that certain film nerds will pick up; specifically the one with Ving Rhames. It was such a great Pulp Fiction reference. Little things like that and the jokes about Bo Bice will just make you smile. This film deserves to be seen but I would not spend the full ticket price on it. Check it out as either a rental/matinee, hence the 3.5 BDK rating. Back to Top |