Mikey @ The Movies: 2009 Edition

The 2nd Annual Mikey @ The Movie Awards!

2010-02-03T12:00:00.002-07:00

Here are my winners for the 2nd Annual Mikey @ The Movie Awards! Sorry it's nothing special. I'd like to note that I matched 7 or the Oscars 10 nominees for Best Picture. The Blind Side just barely missed my list. I was glad to see it got nominated though at the Oscars! I also matched 4 our of the 5 best director nominees. I also matched 12 of the 20 total acting nominees. Not to shabby Mike. Well here are my winners, marked in RED.

Best Film:
-(500) Days of Summer
-Avatar
-District 9
-Hurt Locker
-Inglourious Basterds
-Precious
-Star Trek
-Up
-Up in the Air
-Where the Wild Things Are

Best Comedic or Musical Film:
-(500) Days of Summer
-Funny People
-Hangover, The
-I Love You, Man
-Zombieland

Best Animated or Family Film:
-Disney's A Christmas Carol
-Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince
-Monsters Vs. Aliens
-Up
-Where the Wild Things Are

Best Documentary Film:
-Cove, The
-Disney's Earth
-Food, Inc.

Best Other Genre Film (Action, Horror, Foreign etc.)
-Last House on the Left
-Paranormal Activity
-Sherlock Holmes
-Sin Nombre
-Sugar

Best Screenplay:
-(500) Days of Summer
-District 9
-Hurt Locker
-Inglourious Basterds
-Up in the Air

Best Director:
-James Cameron for Avatar
-Neill Blomkamp for District 9
-Kathryn Bigelow for Hurt Locker
-Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds
-Jason Reitman for Up in the Air

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role:
-Joseph Gordon-Levitt in (500) Days of Summer
-Sharlto Copely in District 9
-Jeremy Renner in Hurt Locker, The
-Morgan Freeman in Invictus
-George Clooney in Up in the Air
***I have not seen Crazy Heart or A Serious Man so that's why you don't see Jeff Bridges or Colin Firth***

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role:
-Zooey Deschanel in (500) Days of Summer
-Maya Rudolph in Away We Go
-Sandra Bullock in Blind Side, The
-Meryl Streep in Julie & Julia
-Gabourey Sidibe in Precious

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role:
-Anthony Mackie in Hurt Locker, The
-Brad Pitt in Inglourious Basterds
-Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds
-Matt Damon in Invictus
-Woody Harrelson in Messenger, The

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role:
-Diane Kruger in Inglourious Basterds
-Melanie Laurent in Inglourious Basterds
-Mo'Nique in Precious
-Anna Kendrick in Up in the Air
-Vera Farmiga in Up in the Air

Best Comedic Performance Lead or Supporting:

-Bradley Cooper in Hangover, The
-Zach Galifinakis in Hangover, The
-Ryan Reynolds in Proposal, The
-Jude Law in Sherlock Holmes
-Robert Downey Jr. in Sherlock Holmes

Best Youth Performance Lead or Supporting:
-Jae Head in Blind Side, The
-Bailee Madison in Brothers
-Kodi Smit-McPhee in Road, The
-Max Records in Where the Wild Things Are

Best Performance in a Limited or Cameo Role:
-Fergie in Nine
-Nicole Kidman in Nine
-Mariah Carey in Precious
-Charlize Theron in Road, The
-Robert Duvall in Road, The

Best Cast for a Film:
-(500) Days of Summer
-Hurt Locker, The
-Inglourious Basterds
-Precious
-Star Trek

Best Film Editing:
-(500) Days of Summer
-Avatar
-District 9
-The Hurt Locker
-Inglourious Bastards

Best Musical Score:
-Avatar
-Hurt Locker, The
-Inglourious Bastards
-Sherlock Holmes
-Star Trek

Best Set Design/Art Direction:
-Avatar
-Inqlourious Bastards
-Sherlock Holmes
-Star Trek
-Where the Wild Things Are

Best Costuming/Make-Up:
-Avatar
-District 9
-Inglourious Bastards
-Sherlock Holmes
-Where the Wild Things Are

Best Cinematography/Camera Work:
-Avatar
-District 9
-Hurt Locker, The
-Inglourious Bastards
-Sherlock Holmes

Best Visual/Special Effects:
-Avatar
-District 9
-Star Trek
-Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
-Watchmen

Best Sound Effects/Editing:
-Avatar
-District 9
-Paranormal Activity
-Star Trek
-Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Honorary Worst Film of 2009:
-The Box
- Runner up: Nine

Honorary Worst Male Performance of 2009:
-James Marsden in The Box
- Runner up: Daniel Day Lewis in Nine

Honorary Worst Female Performance of 2009:
-Cameron Diaz in The Box
- Runner up: Megan Fox in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen

Honorary Worst Screenplay of 2009:
-The Box
- Runner up: Nine

Mikey @ The Movies Presents: The 2009 Fall/Winter TV Awards

2010-01-13T17:40:00.000-07:00

Hello readers!! Yes it is true...this crazy movie fan is also one crazy fan of TV! I watch a lot of TV...and now I sound like a lazy nerd. But believe me, I get out a lot. Don't worry, I'm not just a couch potato. I love immersing myself in the worlds of numerous TV characters on a weekly basis. The TV season generally is split in two. We have the fall/winter season and the Spring/Summer season. So I thought I would do my own awards (better than the Emmy's of course, duh!). However, this time I will be including show from last Spring/Summer due to the lack of drama's I've watched this Fall/Winter. So without further ado, here are my nominees for the 2009 Fall/Winter TV season.

Winners are in RED

Best Comedy Series:
- 30 Rock
- Family Guy
- Glee
- Modern Family
- The Office

This was a tough choice. It was between Glee and Modern Family. But Modern Family is the one comedy so far this year that has really stayed consistently funny, I don't know if any show has made me laugh that much EVERY episode.

Best Drama Series:
- 24
- Flash Forward
- Harpers Island
- Lost
- Medium

Lost came back strong last year and had one of it's best seasons ever. I really cannot wait for the conclusion.

Best New Show:
- Better Off Ted

- Community

- Flash Forward
- Glee
- Modern Family

One would think since I gave Modern Family best comedy, it would also win this award. Well it was also close. Glee is more of a dramedy, it could fall in any category. This show is by far one of the best shows on TV right now, it's funny, it's moving, it's got it all. A brilliant show.

Best Reality Show (Competition or Other):
- The Amazing Race

- America's Got Talent
- American Idol
- Mythbusters
- Survivor

9 times out of 10, this would go to Amazing Race. I love Survivor, don't get me wrong, but Amazing Race is much more of an engaging reality program these days. However, this past season of Survivor was arguably one of the best they've ever had, and they've had 19 of them! Great characters, lot's of blindsides, it really was amazing this season. Bravo!

Best Writing for a Comedy Series:
- 30 Rock
- Family Guy
- Glee
- Modern Family
- The Office

Best Writing for a Drama Series:
- 24
- Flash Forward
- Harper's Island
- Lost
- Medium

Best Directing for a Comedy Series:
- 30 Rock
- Community
- Glee
- Modern Family
- The Office

Best Directing for a Drama Series:
- 24
- Flash Forward
- Harper's Island
- Lost
- Medium

Best Lead Actor in a Comedy Series:
- Alec Baldwin for 30 Rock
- Joel McHale for Community
- Matthew Morrison for Glee
- Ed O'Niel for Modern Family
- Steve Carell for The Office

Best Lead Actress in a Comedy Series:
- Tina Fey for 30 Rock
- Portia DeRossi for Better Off Ted
- Courtney Cox for Cougartown

- Lea Michell for Glee

- Sofia Vergara for Modern Family

Best Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series:
- Tracy Morgan for 30 Rock
- Chris Colfer for Glee
- Ty Burrell for Modern Family
- Eric Stonestreet for Modern Family
- John Krasinski for The Office

Best Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series:
- Jane Krakowski for 30 Rock
- Dianna Agron for Glee
- Jane Lynch for Glee
- Julie Bowen for Modern Family
- Jenna Fischer for The Office

Best Lead Actor in a Drama Series:
- Kiefer Sutherland for 24
- Christopher Gorham for Harper's Island
- Matthew Fox for Lost

Best Lead Actress in a Drama Series:
- Elaine Cassidy for Harper's Island
- Evangeline Lilly for Lost
- Patricia Arquette for Medium

Best Supporting Actor in a Drama Series:
- Carlos Bernard for 24
- Josh Holloway for Lost
- Michael Emerson for Lost
- Terry O'Quinn for Lost
- Jake Webber for Medium

Best Supporting Actress in a Drama Series:
- Cherry Jones for 24

- Sonya Walger for Flash Forward
- Elizabeth Mitchell for Lost
- Yunjim Kim for Lost

Best Reality Show Personality/Host:
- Phil Koegan for The Amazing Race
- Simon Cowell for American Idol
- Steve and Tango for Ghost Hunters and Ghost Hunters Academy
- Adam and Jamie for Mythbusters
- Jeff Probst for Survivor

Best Character on TV:
- Jack Bauer from 24
- Peter Griffin from Family Guy
- Sue Sylvester from Glee
- Cameron Tucker from Modern Family
- Phil Dunphy from Modern Family

Best Season Opener (From this season or last season starting Jan '09):
- Family Guy
- Flash Forward

- Glee
- Lost
- Survivor

Best Finale (from last season or winter finale this season):
- 24 (last season)

- Flash Forward (winter finale)
- Glee (winter finale)
- Harper's Island (last season)
- Lost (last season)

Best Comeback Award:
- The Office 2009 fall season. Last season was one of the worst in my opinion and now it has done a complete 360 and gone back to it's usual hilarious antics! YAY!

Biggest Downward Spiral Award:
- Ghost Hunters (all versions). All three versions of the show (the original, International and now Academy) are all struggling to entertain and even come across as belieavable. I miss the old days. I fear it is the beginning of the end of TAPS on TV.

I will announce the winners in a week or so!! Thanks!

Mikey @ The Movies: Best Movies of the Decade!

2010-01-06T13:22:00.004-07:00

It appears many people are releasing their top ten films of the decade list, now that we are moving on to a new one. So I thought I would try the same thing!! So this is my personal list of what I think are the ten best movies of the last decade. And yes...these are in order!

10. Chicago

9. Minority Report

8.Wall E

7. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

6. The Dark Knight

5. Atonement

4. Pan's Labirynth

3. Memento

2. Inglourious Basterds

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

So that's it for my personal decade list....I know I know...some of you may disagree with my choices, but that's why we all have our own opinions...right???

2009 Review #73: Nine

2009-12-27T11:03:00.009-07:00

Nine

Rated PG-13
(sexual content and smoking)
1 hour 50 minutes

Storyline:
Famous film director Guido Contini struggles to find harmony in his professional and personal lives, as he engages in dramatic relationships with his wife, his mistress, his muse, his agent, and his mother.

Starring:
Daniel Day Lewis
Marion Cotillard
Penelope Cruz
Nicole Kidman
Judi Dench
Kate Hudson
Sophia Loren
Stacy "Fergie" Ferguson

Critics Grade:
D
(Consensus: It has a game, great-looking cast, led by the always worthwhile Daniel Day-Lewis, but Rob Marshall's Nine is chaotic and curiously distant.)

My Grade:
D-

Let me run some numbers by you real quick. Between the 7 main cast members (excluding Fergie because she hasn't really been in films), there are a total of 18 Oscar nominations, 7 Oscar wins, 36 Golden Globe nominations, and 11 Golden Globe wins and let's throw in 2 honorary awards (1 Oscar and 1 Golden Globe). And hell let's not exclude Director Rob Marshall's 1 Oscar nomination and 1 Golden Globe nomination. Now one would think, "Man, that's a LOT of proven talent, there's no way this movie could be bad!". Well...this movie has now proven that no matter how many award caliber actors and filmmakers you put in one movie...you aren't always going to get a good flick. Because this movie was just plain awful in my stupid little opinion.

Talk about disappointing, this movie defines that word!! I was so very much looking forward to this film based off the really engaging theatrical trailer from earlier in the year. But this movie was far from engaging. It had no energy, and most musicals are full of pizazz and heart and have tons of energy. This film however, is damn near lifeless. There is no heart in it's story. It's empty and bland. Most of the characters are written so one dimensionally and are barely on screen long enough for us to even give half a crap about. Almost none of them are likable. The musical numbers had no emotion and the songs themselves for the most part were either incredibly inappropriate or just boring as hell.

We have a leading man, played rather quietly and dully by Daniel Day Lewis (There Will Be Blood, to which he was phenomenal in). This character, Guido, was a jerk who cheated on his wife with many women. He seemed never to truly care about that fact about him until the last act of the movie. He half attempts to seek redemption, but way to late in the story and it just seems to fall flat and he gives up. He's not a likable character, but Day Lewis could have at least given this guy some flair or personality to make us "love to hate him" so to speak. Marion Cotillard (Public Enemies, La Vie En Rose) was the only actor in this movie that delivered a good performance worthy of any Oscar attention. I believe she deserves a supporting actress nomination, because she was the only one who gave life to this movie. She was the one character you felt any connection to. The only performance to show heart and pain realistically. She was great, and I for one enjoyed her "My Husband Makes Movies" number.

The rest of this big name cast: Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Nicole Kidman, Sophia Loren, and Fergie are reduced to mere extended cameos. Cruz and Dench have slightly meatier roles but that means they are in like...3 or 4 scenes a piece. Hudson, Kidman and Fergie basically just have one scene a piece where they have any relevance to the story. They kind of just pop up, sing a song, and then go away never to be seen again. Kidman's character (to which her brief cameo performance was very good) revealed some big story arch involving Daniel Day Lewis...but we never hear about it before this scene (which comes a good 3/4ths into the film!!). They just drop this big bombshell on us for a brief 4 minute scene, then bam...it's done for. So why should we even care?? I didn't. Cruz is getting a lot of award attention and I don't know why. Her musical number was messy and not good. Her brief appearances were slightly comical but not all that great. The only truly fun, entertaining musical number in the whole film was Fergies "Be Italian". You hear it in the previews for the movie. It was the only one that was choreographed like an actual musical scene, it actually belonged in a musical unlike the rest of them. Yeah, it was a bit dirty, but it was entertaining and blew up the screen. It was one of the very few scenes that I will remember. She did a great job with it.

So I don't know...this movie was just a giant mess. It didn't really go anywhere. I felt like the movie had no direction, no ultimate goal to reach. If this movie was given to us to entertain...it failed miserably. This is one of the least entertaining musicals ever, and one of the least entertaining and plain old worst movies I've seen this year. Sure it had some redeeming qualities: wonderful set designs and costuming. One really good musical number and or two slightly OK ones. Other than that though...this movie was just all over the place and I had no clue where it was going. And it didn't really go anywhere. It just left you hanging. It started empty, and ended even more empty. No soul, or heart to this crap. I didn't like it one bit. I really hope it doesn't get any Oscar nomination for best picture, that would be a travesty.

What I just can't grasp onto though is...with a cast as big as this, why is the show stopping number, the sequence that brought the house down, the one scene that featured the best song and best film making...centered around a person who does not act in films...Fergie? Really? I mean I'm happy for her...but really? Of this big Oscar caliber cast, the one person to show all of them up by 100 miles is a non-actress, member of the Black Eyed Peas? Pretty sad. Enough said.

If I learned one thing from this movie it is this....................be Italian.

2009 Review #72: Sherlock Holmes

2009-12-26T13:29:00.005-07:00

Sherlock Holmes

Rated PG-13
(intense sequences of violence and action, some startling images and a scene of suggestive material)
2 hours 8 minutes

Storyline:
Detective Sherlock Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson engage in a battle of wits and brawn with a nemesis whose plot is a threat to all of England.

Starring:
Robert Downey Jr.
Jude Law
Rachel McAdams
Mark Strong

Critics Grade:
B-
(Consensus:Guy Ritchie's directorial style might not be quite the best fit for an update on the legendary detective, but Sherlock Holmes benefits from the elementary appeal of a strong performance by Robert Downey, Jr.)

My Grade:
A-

It's elementary my dear Watson, elementary! Well that line is never actually uttered in this film, but we all know it from the Sherlock Holmes stories and films from yesteryear. During a time where film's didn't have the capabilities to be flashy and explosive. The days when a good mystery film were all about story and characters. Flash forward now to 2009 and cinematic techniques have reached all new levels and old stories like Sherlock Holmes can get a serious face lift. Most of the time, when you take a classy mystery character/storyline from way back when and blend it with today's film style, usually you get crap. However in the case of Sherlock Holmes...you have near entertainment perfection in almost every sense of the word.

This film is not a masterpiece. This film is not amazing. This film is not really best picture quality. But this film is damn exciting and fast paced. This film is non stop fun and entertainment. I loved the 2009 version of Sherlock Holmes. A film series like this definitely benefits from the new Hollywood-ized film styles. Guy Ritchie directed the film and really didn't hold anything back. He didn't just make a standard whodunit mystery that focuses solely on the characters. He created this brilliantly exuberant world to immerse ourselves into to make us feel like we are part of the story. Everything about his filmaking style here is incredible to watch. It's just bang bang bang and he never lets the pacing slow down. He captures the essence of Sherlock Holmes eccentric personality and amplifies it throughout the whole film. It resonates in the action and the story. He did a great job at handling this film.

You don't really think of Sherlock Holmes and explosive action do you? I never did, and I honestly did not think the two would work well together. I'm glad I was wrong. I'm glad they made Sherlock and Watson these kick ass detectives who aren't afraid to battle with guys who should be in the NFL. It was never to much or to over the top though, which was good. But this movie had some really fun action sequences. I really got into them and at times felt a bit tense. I knew that Holmes or Watson wouldn't die of course, but still it was fun! These scenes, as was the whole film, were accented by a brilliant musical score! One of the best I've heard this year. The scoring was action packed all itself and I freaking loved it! Yes I'm the nerd who enjoys good background music in a movie...think about it...if the music sucked or didn't fit the scene right...the movie would suffer, you all know it. You all love musical scores in film, just most of the time you don't typically notice it or it doesn't stand out to you. To me...it does.

The writing was good, but not great. The mystery in the story was told rather well but at times got a tad overwhelming and it lost me at a few points. There were times where I was quite sure what the big crime was going to be or what Sherlock Holmes and crew were really trying to stop from happening. I don't know if they ever really stressed on that aspect, or maybe I just missed it...very possible. I mean yes, I knew what the bad guy's/gal's plan was I guess what I'm saying was I didn't get how he planned to make it all work and what overall effect he/she was going for. I also didn't care to much for the side storyline involving Rachel McAdams character having secret meetings with a man shrouded in darkness (literally). I thought this was going to lead to some big reveal or twist in the end, but it doesn't really. That kind of falls flat...at least for me. I know they were probably setting up a sequel of sorts, but not much was really explored in that territory. We knew what the secret person wanted, but I don't know...I just didn't see the relevance of that storyline in the end.

Mark Strong (Stardust, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day)plays a pretty good villain. He wasn't to flashly like there was the serious potential of him being. He plays the bad guy pretty convincingly. Rachel McAdams (Mean Girls, The Notebook) was fun as usual, she's never really had a truly stand out performance and she doesn't here either. But she was good as the mysterious woman who may or may not be on the good guys team. Oscar nominee Jude Law (The Talented Mr. Ripley, Cold Mountain) was a superb balance to Oscar nominee Robert Downey Jr. (Tropic Thunder, Iron Man). He gave Dr. Watson some much needed life and energy that I just loved. Law has always been a good actor, and he was so here again. Robert Downey Jr. is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors. The guy has become so damn reliable all of a sudden. He plays Holmes perfectly, he was the right choice for this role for sure. He gives Sherlock Homes some charm, some lovable qualities, some not so lovable ones, he rounds out this guy really well. Just a great, solid performance once again!

Overall this is very fun movie for the holidays! It was just great entertainment that I loved from beginning to end. It could have used a more clear cut screenplay with a slightly better storyline direction, but I mean it wasn't bad at all. Just not very concise. But who cares right? This is cool movie to go out and see with friends and family! I highly recommend it to anyone!

Happy Holidays!!

2009 Review #71: Invictus

2009-12-25T16:21:00.005-07:00

Invictus

Rated PG-13
(brief strong language)
2 hours 8 minutes

Storyline:
Nelson Mandela, in his first term as the South African President, initiates a unique venture to unite the apartheid-torn land: enlist the national rugby team on a mission to win the 1995 Rugby World Cup.

Starring:
Morgan Freeman
Matt Damon

Critics Grade:
B-
(Consensus: Delivered with typically stately precision from director Clint Eastwood, Invictus may not be rousing enough for some viewers, but Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman inhabit their real-life characters with admirable conviction.)

My Grade:
B-

To all of you who are probably confused by the title of this film, like I was before seeing it, let me tell you what it means so you can stop wondering. First, the word invictus is Latin for "invincible" but also, and more so for the purpose of this film, Invictus is the title of an 1875 poem by William Ernest Henley. Nelson Mandela read this poem many times while in prison and the character quotes in the film. So...there you go! Now onto the film. This movie basically follows the life of South African President, Nelson Mandela in his first time as President. He had spent 26 years in prison, for reasons I won't go into on a movie review blog. He was released in 1990 and some years later was elected President. Well the movie tells the tale of his attempts to unite his divided nation by using the sport of rugby to influence peace and bring South Africa together.

The first half of the movie was a tad slow for my liking, and believe me I like slow movies. But for some reason I was just having a really difficult time getting into the story. There was no emotional pull or power in the first half of the film. And this is the story of a great man, but I wasn't really feeling that at first. It all tended to drag and I thought it was never going to pick up any kind of pace. They didn't delve deeply into the heart and mind of Nelson Mandela, I feel like the movie only briefly scratched the surface of what he represented at that time. Now this is not in any way knocking Oscar winner Morgan Freeman's (Million Dollar Baby, Shawshank Redemption) performance as Mandela, only the pacing his story was told. Oscar winner Clint Eastwood (Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino)did a great job at bringing this world to life in his direction, he's always been a reliable film maker. So I think the problem rests in the hand of the screenwriter. I just wasn't connecting to the story or the character.

Then the second half started, which was very rugby oriented. I think the story slowly took it's attention off of Mandela himself and focused mainly on what he was trying to accomplish through Rugby and through Francois Pienaar, played by Oscar winner Matt Damon (screenwriting Oscar win and acting nomination for Good Will Hunting). For me, that's when this movie kicked into high gear and really became something amazing. I don't know much of anything about rugby, and I don't think I really learned much about it after watching the film. But damn that sport looks intense and kind of weird. Both teams crash into each other in a strange huddle and grunt at each other, then there's elements of American football, some soccer, I just have no idea what the game is about. However, the second half of the film where all the rugby scenes dominated the story was just darn intense and awesome. I really got into the movie at that point. Eastwood did a masterful job at directing these matches and created this tense atmosphere and at some points puts you on the edge of your seat. Brilliant camerawork, beautiful scoring, the works. I wish the first half of the film had that much energy and heart.

Matt Damon has always been hit and miss with me personally. I don't think he's a bad actor, I just never have found him to be an astonishing performer. I never got into the Bourne movies either, the first one just bored me. For me, this was one of my favorite performances of Damon. It wasn't anything remarkable, but it was damn believable. That second half was his to lose, and he showed some great energy on screen and nailed his performance. His acting was very subtle overall, but he had spurts of charisma that really showcased him in a film dominated by a brilliant performance from Morgan Freeman. Freeman is a genius on screen in Invictus. We sea a lot of films where actors have to portray real life people. Some do a very good job at acting like these people, but it's rare when these actors become these real life people. That is exactly what Morgan Freeman does here with his portrayal of Mandela. He strips away all we know of Morgan Freeman the actor and just IS Nelson Mandela in this film. Easily one of the best performances of 2009, Morgan Freeman is a powerhouse in this film and deserves some serious award attention.

So overall I would say I generally liked this film. This is a very good movie that was dragged down by a slightly dull first half but was elevated with a powerful and engaging second half. For me, I would say this film deserves a best picture nomination based off the second half of the film, but I could also see it not getting nominated. At this point, it is teetering between the top ten and top fifteen or so on my end of the best movies of the year. I guess you will find out when my award nominations come out. Hehe. But yeah, I would definitely recommend this film because it is overall, a good flick. Keep in my mind, this is a slow, dramatic film for the most part so it's not going to appeal to a lot of today's movie going audience...which is just sad. A lot of today's audiences just don't appreciate these types of movies. But I'll shut up now. Just go see it if you want, I did...and I liked it!

2009 Review #70: (500) Days of Summer

2009-12-23T11:15:00.007-07:00

(500) Days of Summer

Rated PG-13
(sexual material and language)
1 hour 35 minutes

Storyline:
An offbeat romantic comedy about a woman who doesn't believe true love exists, and the young man who falls for her.

Cast:
Joseph Gordon-Levitt
Zooey Deschanel

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
A

Well many many months later I have finally jumped aboard the crazy 500 Days of Summer train! The indy romantic dramedy that took the nation by storm earlier in the year. Most people I know have seen this movie, and most people that those people know have seen it. This was a huge success and the film has a massive following. To top it off it got rave reviews from the critics and is now racking up awards every once in a while. It scored two Golden Globe nominations, so that's something big! It may even sneak in the Oscars for a nomination or two. All of this hoopla is incredibly deserving now that I've FINALLY seen the film...I know...it took me FOREVER!

Here's the thing, we see tons and tons of stupid romantic comedies year after year and they have all started to just mesh together and they are basically all the same exact movie over and over. I've been hating the fact that there is no fresh take on the genre, there's never any originality. But now...now there is, with the release of this film. This movie has NO cliches. You don't know how this movie will ultimately end up. These characters are real, not some dolled up Hollywood cliche you see in ever romantic film. These characters have real life feelings and problems. You can relate to both of these characters. Not everything in these characters lives are happy go lucky and have issues that are resolved in a matter of days. These characters were written masterfully and were given some nice quirkiness. You really feel for both people in the movie, even though at times you hate Summer (at least I did).

I've never been in love, I've never even been in a relationship. Granted, it's a bit different for me based off my preference (hehe), but it doesn't mean I can't love anyone...right? Even though some people out there think it's "wrong" for me to love the people I do. But I digress. Even though I've never felt love, I feel like this movie hits relationships on the head perfectly. From the ones I've observed in my life. This film captures the harsh realism of human nature. We all want something more and sometimes it isn't what our boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse, whatever, wants. Sometimes people think they have found "the one" but really they are not the one. This film begs the question, does true really exist? Is fate something of reality and not just fantasy? Do things really happen for a reason? Well by the end of the film, those questions are never 100% answered, because that's how life is. We will never really know the answers to those questions. That's why this movie was so good, because it was so authentic.

Even with all the oddball quirky things thrown in there every once in a while. There was a really neat musical number, and a few other things that took a step out of reality. Still, it remained true to life. It had a very unique style of filmaking. This is just one of the most perfectly crafted films of the year. Amazing original screenplay that Oscar gold is made for! It had a fast pace and never dragged on. It was also really funny at times. There were some hilarious quotes throughout the film. It was just a very fun movie when it wasn't sad and dark hehe. The two main stars, Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Brick, The Lookout) and Zooey Deschanel (The Happening, Elf) were both brilliant. You connect well with both of them. Their performances were so realistic and heartfelt and you kind of feel both of their sorrows as well as their happiness. They relay their emotions well. I really didn't like the Summer character, but that was kind of the point. I mean, at times I thought she was cool, but I hated how crazy and indecisive she was and how much pain she brought to Tom. But again, real life issues so she played it very very well. I think they were some of the most humanistic performances of the year and they both deserve Oscar nominations.

This is easily one of the ten best films of 2009. Not THE best film for me personally, but it ranks up there. Just a near perfect romantic dramedy. I loved almost every moment of it, and I wished it ran longer. This is a fun movie, it's a realistic movie, it's a quirky movie. This is a MUST SEE movie...if you are one of the 7 other people who haven't seen it yet. Enjoy!!!

2009 Review #69: Avatar

2009-12-22T11:19:00.013-07:00

Avatar

Rated PG-13

(intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking)

2 hours 40 minutes

Storyline:

A paraplegic marine dispatched to the planet Pandora on a unique mission becomes torn between following his orders and protecting the world he feels is his home.

Cast:

B+

My Grade:

A-

James Cameron is back! Avatar is his first film since his Oscar winning classic film, "Titanic". He also brought us such action packed movies as "Aliens", "Terminator", "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" and "True Lies". Action is what he does best, and it's very rare that Cameron fails to entertain an audience. He is typically a filmaker that knows how to make a film that will appeal to a wide variety of people and won't leave many people disappointed. Avatar is no exception. Avatar might very well be Cameron's masterpiece right next to Titanic. Do I think it is Best Picture WINNER quality? No...but I certainly think it deserves a nomination.

Avatar lacks in one major category, and that is solid storytelling. Cameron wrote the screenplay to this film a very long time ago, and I don't know if he really brushed off the dust and re-wrote this film, because it doesn't appear to have been touched. I think Cameron could have benefited from hiring an outside screenwriter for this film, but honestly the story wasn't awful. I just thought the story was rather uninspiring and lacked any emotional depth or connection. I totally saw the real world messages throughout the film. The message to support going green. The anti-war messages. The message that basically says "hey...leave things the way they are". That's all great, but it didn't come off as meaningful or powerful as it could have. The characters were also written a bit dry and came off as overly cliched most of the film. The story goes exactly where you think it's going. You know exactly who's going to die and who's going to live. It was not a bad story, it did have some good elements to it, it just was a tad weak.

BUT...we do not go see a movie like Avatar for remarkable storytelling. We go to see this movie because of the visuals. Because of the non stop action. This movie has all of that and then some. James Cameron has delivered some of the most breath taking and stunning filmaking I think I may have ever seen. Especially in the second half of the film. The second half is essentially non stop fun and excitement. Pure action that is brilliantly relentless and I loved every minute of it. To start, Cameron created this amazing visual world like I've never seen before. 3D and motion capture technology used to the absolute max. This film was made for over $230 million, and you can see every penny on screen. These creatures look real, you can see pain in their little animated eyes. It was incredible. The scenes of them flying around on their dinosaur bird like creatures were something to marvel at.

I can't go on enough how phenomenal this movie looks. And it works so very well with the action. It works well with the characters. It works well with the story. This whole movie blends together so well. The second half of this film is basically a giant battle sequence that is some of the best action I've seen in a film. It's definitely some of the most exciting and tense. It was remarkably captured on camera and brilliantly put on the large screen for our enjoyment. Cameron deserves a best director nomination for breaking down walls in the filmaking world. This film is revolutionary in the cinematic sense. It amazes you, it puts you in awe. This is easily one of the very best films of 2009. Not THE best, just one of the best. Simply because it immerses you in a world that we've never really seen before. The action flows so beautifully and the whole films keeps you in wonder and amazement. At least it did for me.

Avatar may have lacked in the story department. It may not have had the greatest performances of the year. But this is still a hell of a great movie based on the fact that the filmaking by James Cameron is one of a kind. You haven't really seen this kind of film before. Please go out and see it, I really don't think you will be disappointed. It's damn good fun, it's damn exciting and it's just a hell of a film to stare at for almost three hours. Really solid film!

2009 Review #68: Julie & Julia

2009-12-17T19:45:00.008-07:00

Julie & Julia

Rated PG-13

(brief strong language and some sensuality)

2 hours 3 minutes

Storyline:

Julia Child's story of her start in the cooking profession is intertwined with blogger Julie Powell's 2002 challenge to cook all the recipes in Child's first book.

Cast:

(Consensus: Boosted by Meryl Streep's charismatic performance as Julia Child, Julie and Julia is a light, but fairly entertaining culinary comedy.)

My Grade:

B-

I am a huge fan of cooking. I love creating delicious food from many different ingredients. Julia Child was on the forefront of teaching people all over the world how to make amazing meals at home for your entire family and all your friends to enjoy. She was an inspiration to millions of people. Including a woman named Julie Powell, who blogged for one whole year about how she was going through Childs complete cook book and cooking all 524 recipes in 365 days. The film follows both woman's stories and inter connects them. I love cooking. I love Oscar winner Meryl Streep (Doubt, The Devil Wears Prada) so the two of those things combined should equal a hell of a fun movie for me to watch!

Well I can't sit here and honestly say this was a great movie. I really just thought this was a standard movie. It was good, but I found nothing about it's storytelling or direction to be all that remarkable or fresh. I mean sure, it has a sweet tale to tell, and I loved the half of the film that was about Julia Child. But I don't know, there wasn't anything raw or risky about any of these woman's lives and I hate to say that because Julia Child is an American icon. She had a pretty great life, and had a phenomenal husband. There never seemed to be a moment in her life (that was shown to us in the film) that was all that heart breaking. But I guess this is more of a high spirited tale after all. Same goes for Julie Powell. It was written well, and the story was not bad, I just didn't get completely into this film.

What I did get into was the fantastic performance by Meryl Streep. This woman does no wrong. She will probably get another Oscar nomination for this film, and she may even get herself a win this time around. She was brilliant as Julia Child, there was this impeccable, uncanny resemblance between the two look wise as well as vocally. Streep captures our hearts as this love able and vibrant woman that once blessed our TV screens. She's funny and charming. She's an absolute joy to watch, and this is easily one of my favorite performances of the year. Amy Adams is good as she usually always is, but she wasn't all that stand out-ish. Her performance was pretty average and nothing was all that great about it other than the fact that it was just a good performance. Stanley Tucci needs to get recognized by the larger awards. He is just such a reliable and talented actor as he once again was in this film. Very good performance!

So I don't know what to really tell you. This IS a good movie. It's better that a lot of movies this year. It has a sweet story, that is just a bit bland for my liking. I just never really got immersed in the story or really the characters...that being said there were one or two very good performances. This is one of those movies...that if it looks good to you, than you should see it. But if you think it looks boring...that for you it probably will be. I don't know, I liked it...I just didn't love it.

2009 Review #67: Paper Heart

2009-12-15T22:01:00.007-07:00

Paper Heart

Rated PG-13
(Some language)
1 hour 28 minutes

Storyline:
Charlyne Yi embarks on a quest across America to make a documentary about the one subject she doesn't fully understand: Love. This is part mockumentary part actual documentary.

Cast:
Charlyne Yi
Michael Cera
Jake M. Johnson

Critics Grade:
C-
(Consensus: Equal parts charming and refreshing, Paper Heart is a quirky mockumentary led by the endearing Charlyne Yi.)

My Grade:
B-

Paper Heart can be kind of a confusing film. It is advertised as a documentary, and in certain aspects, this is a documentary. The main storyline about Charlyne Yi and Michael Cera (who both really play themselves) building a slow relationship is all staged. The guy playing the director of the film (Nicholas Jasenovec) is actually played by Jake M. Johnson, while Jasenovec is busy directing the film within a film. It's all quite confusing when you read all the back story to the film. Everyone outside the three main actors in the film...are 100% real and their stories are 100% authentic. Yi really is interviewing these people, and she really is trying to do a documentary on what love is and what it means to different people. Just inside that documentary is a scripted storyline that ties in with the documentary subject...mainly to accent the film and prove it's point. The real life stories blending with the scripted one all got a little blurry and muddled at certain points, but overall it was done pretty well.All the stories featured in the film (the real ones) are so sweet and so charming. Some of them bring tears of happiness to your eyes (but not for this tough guy reviewer!!). There stories truly make you think about love in all aspects. Love of friends, love from family, love of a boyfriend/girlfriend. These tales make you ponder your life and what love means to you. It made me question if I really knew what love was (in all of it's many versions), and the answer is: I don't know. I've never felt love from a relationship standpoint (I've never even been on a real date!). I know my family loves me, and I love them. And I know love from friends. The movie and it's true stories really just open your eyes. They showed all walks of life: couples who have been together for 30 years, new couples, gay couples, divorced couples, even children are interviewed about what they think love is (really cute scene!). This part of the film was brilliant, and I loved it. I loved the authenticity of these people and it was captured so warmly and was really heartfelt.

The fake story, about Yi (Knocked Up, Semi-Pro) and Michael Cera (Superbad, Year One) was overall pretty tastefully done. The writing was not cliched and it actually did come across as realistic for the most part. I found their relationship to be believable and sweet. The main issue is that you can clearly tell they are acting. I'm not knocking their acting though, because they were both really good in their roles. Yi was super charming and charasmatic, and you cannot help but love the hell out her. She fills the screen with such happiness and joy, and her performance is actually one of my favorites so far this year. Cera has become typecast as the awkward nerd funny guy. Here he actually plays himself which is a nice distraction from his typical roles. He was really good, I have to give him that. He was funny and subdued, and came off as a pretty cool dude. Their story was well written and the scenes of them together were superbly acted, but that's the only downfall...you know they are acting. Yi comes off as more "real" than Cera does in these scenes. Overall it wasn't THAT much of a distraction.

This is just a solid movie that isn't fantastic but is not bad at all. I would totally recommend this movie to my friends. This could actually be a pretty good date movie. It's not a sad or grim look at love, it basically accents all the positives about love. Done so quite well. It's just a fun movie that I enjoyed watching through and through. Not a brilliant or highly original film, but good nonetheless. Good performances from the actors, and touching stories from the real life people. Sure...go rent Paper Heart!!

2009 Review #66: The Cove (Documentary)

2009-12-14T23:40:00.004-07:00

The Cove

Rated PG-13
(Disturbing content)
1 hour 32 minutes

Subject:
Using state-of-the-art equipment, a group of activists, led by renown dolphin trainer Ric O’Barry, infiltrate a cove near Taijii, Japan to expose both a shocking instance of animal abuse and a serious threat to human health.

Critics Grade:
A+
(Consensus: Though decidedly one-sided, The Cove is an impeccably crafted, suspenseful expose of the covert slaughter of dolphins in Japan.)

My Grade:
A+

The Cove is a documentary everyone should see! It is now available to rent or own on DVD. I feel like this is an extremely important film for people to watch. Getting right down to it, this film is about the extreme slaughter of dolphins in Taijii, Japan in a secret cove. 23,000 dolphins a year are led to torture and slaughter. Most of them are brutally killed so their meat can be sold to food companies throughout Japan. The thing is...no one in Japan knows they are eating dolphin meat, they hide that fact. Dolphin meat is extremely high in mercury, one of the most toxic chemicals on earth. They were provided dolphin meat to schools throughout Japan and not saying a thing. Some dolphins are lured and captured in harsh manners so they can be sold (for $150,000!!) to water parks, or "swim with dolphin" organizations throughout the world.

The images in the film are extreme at times, and very hard to watch. There were some things that just caught be surprise and it disgusted me. I will admit right now that I got teary eyed while watching some scenes in this film. There was a scene of a dolphin who managed to escape the cove, but was already fatally injured. It swam like crazy but was suffering convulsions and extreme pain as blood poured out it. It screamed in pain. It tried so hard to get away, but eventually it took it's final breath and sank to the bottom of the sea. These dolphins are trapped, clubbed, stabbed and severely beaten. It is animal abuse to the max. There is no justification to what happens to these animals. This happens to 23,000 dolphins a year in just this one little cove.

The cove is kept top secret, because no one can truly know what goes on in it on a daily basis. There is a perfect rock formation and along with barbed fences and armed guards, this cove is completely covert. If people found out what really went on there, these people could be in serious trouble. Well this film shows us what goes on. These filmmakers risked their careers and possibly even there lives to get this haunting footage. The film follows them as they conduct interviews and confront certain people in this dolphin killing organization. They can't get the truth from anyone, they kept pushing them away (quite literally actually). These people in this little town walk around this cove with signs that say "NO PICTURES" and will get right in front of you if you try to take one. They will scream in your face. Well this crew did the unthinkable and snuck in in the early hours of the morning and managed to hide underwater audio devices as well as HD camera disguised as rocks. The footage they captured is disturbing.

You may very well cry in this film. You will most likey at least get very emotional. I did. This is a wonderfully brilliant and shocking film that is one of my all time favorite documentaries. It taught me about a certain event that I had no idea was going on, much like the rest of the world. I'm a lover of animals. There is no reason a dolphin should be treated this way. Dolphins are not meant for food. Their meat is potentially very dangerous. Dolphins are extremely intelligent and very loving creatures. When you see this film, you will see that side of them as well see their fatal ends in this cove. Please rent this movie. Watch it, let's do our part in helping end this awful travesty that occurs every day. This is an Oscar worthy documentary by all standards. Amazing movie, must see movie...so go see it! Please!

2009 Review #65: Up in the Air

2009-12-13T16:22:00.000-07:00

Up in the Air

Rated R
(language and some sexual content)
1 hour 49 minutes

Storyline:
With a job that has him traveling around the country firing people, Ryan Bingham leads an empty life out of a suitcase, until his company does the unexpected: ground him.

Cast:
George Clooney
Vera Farmiga
Anna Kendrick

Critics Grade:
A-
(Consensus:Led by charismatic performances by its three leads, director Jason Reitman delivers a smart blend of humor and emotion with just enough edge for mainstream audiences.)

My Grade:
A

Ah, the weather is cooling, the smell of turkey is in the air, it is the time of giving...can only mean one thing: Oscar season! This is my favorite time of year, and not for Christmas. This is the time of year when movie studios pull out all the stops and give us movies that make us think and wonder, the amaze us, that put us in awe, that make us laugh and cry, the movies that make us feel something. Up in the Air is one of those movies, and is easily one of the very best films so far in 2009 and I was NOT expecting it by any means. I have to point out, as I have before, that I am not a big fan of Oscar winner George Clooney (Michael Clayton, Syriana). I don't think he's bad, I just don't understand this hype. But more on that later.

Up in the Air is a film that has a current and meaningful story. Clooney plays a man who's job is to go around the country and fire employees for companies who don't have the courage to do so themselves. I don't know if this type of thing exists, but it's pretty damn grim if it does! The film has numerous shots of people getting fired and saying exactly what's on their mind! Here's a neat fact that adds so much authenticity to this film: they hired real life people who were recently fired from their jobs due to the recession, so that they could speak their mind on camera and get off their chest all the pent up anger. It actually creates quite an emotional connection to these people. We are all going through a rough time, I was without a job for almost three months so I know how it feels. That aspect of this film was told depressingly well.

The other part of this film is about people. Is about being alone and sheltered. How some of us hide ourselves from people because we feel they create to much baggage. Some of us want to just live our own stories alone and have no idea how many people want to step into our lives and love us and care for us. Some of us are comforted by this seclusion, as is the Clooney character in this film. Occasionally he interacts with other people, but it's only to get a quick fix. Perhaps this makes his job easier to fire people so that he doesn't have to relate to anyone or connect. This man is a well written character, and I think a fairly realistic look at what society is becoming. Selfish individuals who rather put ourselves in the number one slot.

He eventually connects with a stranger, a woman he meets at an airport played by Vera Farmiga (The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Orphan) to which an affair ensues. But it becomes much more than that, and it confuses Clooney's character. He doesn't know how to feel or how to react to this. Then he is assigned a partner on his travel, a young strong willed woman played by Anna Kendrick (Twilight series). This woman has developed a more centralized way of doing Clooney's job...firing people via web cam. Clooney does not like this, he likes his home on the road. He shows this woman the ropes and she soon learns this job needs to be more personalized then just a computer. On their journey they sort of teach each other a thing or two about life.

This movie really just captivated me in a weird way. First of all, the film was directed wonderfully by Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking, Juno). He has this way of telling stories from a personal standpoint. We can relate to these characters he directs. He is excellent at creating people we can feel for and love. His shots are simple and never to eccentric, because this movie needs to be about human feeling and connection so his direction has to be grounded and he does a freaking great job at doing this! The screenplay deserves all sorts of award attention this season because it is one of the best of the year. There is actually some pretty meaningful and powerful dialog throughout this film that kind of grabs your heart strings a bit. The scenes of Clooney giving his motivational speeches are some of the best of the film, and are oddly moving in a dark kind of way.

Like I said before, I'm not a huge Clooney follower. I don't think I've ever seen him give a powerful performance, and he doesn't really do so here. However, his acting style was perfect for this character. Because I have to say that I thought he was quite brilliant in this film and for the first time I feel he truly deserves some Oscar attention (even though he's already won, I know). His performance is very low key but at times haunting and sad. It's a character that displays so many characteristics that most of us have. One of the best performances of 2009 for sure! Vera Farmiga has managed to slide under the radar the past few years, but I'll be damned if she sneaks by again this year! Again, there's nothing powerful about her acting here, but she creates this complicated character that none of us is really all that sure about. Do we like her? Do we trust her? What's her story? She does a masterfully subtle job at showing us the "temptation" (so to speak) in our lives. I can see her racking up a nomination. The biggest surprise for me was from young Anna Kendrick who plays Clooney's strong willed sidekick. You almost want to dislike this character for being the way she is, but my gosh, you can't help but love her! She's awkwardly charming and funny. She's adorable but also a bit annoying. She's just a young woman who doesn't know exactly what she's getting herself into in any aspect of her life. She already gave up on her dreams at the age of 22. If ever there was an Oscar worthy performance in this film, it is definitely Anna Kendrick (forget about Twilight!!!). She gives us something to smile about but also something to think about. Loved her!

This movie is currently playing very limited, and I don't know when it will get an expanded release. But this is one hell of a great film that should not be missed! I don't know if it will win Best Picture this year, but it will certainly give other films a run for their money. This is just one of those films you can't really say to many bad things about. It's funny, it's sad, it's current, it's just damn amazing! I loved this movie from beginning to end and I say to all of you to go and see it!!!

2009 Review #64: Brothers

2009-12-10T23:00:00.002-07:00

Brothers

Rated R
(language and some disturbing violent content)
1 hour 45 minutes

Storyline:
A young man comforts his older brother's wife and children after he goes missing in Afghanistan.

Cast:
Tobey Maguire
Jake Gyllenhaal
Natalie Portman

Critics Grade:
C
(Consensus: It plays more like a traditional melodrama than the Susanne Bier film that inspired it, but Jim Sheridan's Brothers benefits from rock-solid performances by its three leads.)

My Grade:
B-

Oops, I saw this movie last weekend and it totally slipped my mind to write a review. Busy busy week ya'll, I apologize. Unfortunately I have to keep this review short and simple. Brothers is definitely a good movie, but it's kind of a good movie about nothing. Of course it has a plot, and a pretty dark one. What I mean though, is that this movie didn't evoke many emotions from me and I think it was supposed to. This has a pretty deep core: a soldier who was tortured in the middle east comes home to learn that his wife may or may not have slept with his brother. He's already scarred from his trauma in the middle east, now he comes back to a broken home. His daughters are afraid of him, and they love their uncle more. Pretty tragic sounding right? But for me...it wasn't really tragic. The movie in the end felt a bit empty handed. It was actually kind of lopsided. The first three fourths were pretty subdued. The last fifteen-twenty minutes were where the real explosions were, and you see most of them in the preview. It kind of falls flat in the end, I felt like not much happened or got accomplished. It's like the movie teased you all the way through, then just gave up.
At the same time though, it was a well written screenplay. It had some great dialog and definitely some tense moments. Yes it ended a bit empty handed but at the same time, that is life. Not everything is wrapped up neatly in life, and certain things are left unsolved. Families become torn, but continue to live together not knowing how life is going to turn out. In that aspect, this movie captured that beautifully. It wonderfully showcased a happy, fun family slowly deteriorate into darkness.

The movie is heightened by some solid, stand out performances. First, the two little girls were freaking adorable and also delivered some heartfelt performances and both did an outstanding job. Oscar nominee Jake Gyllenhaal (Brokeback Mountain, Donnie Darko) is actually a pretty reliable actor as of late. He doesn't disappoint here. Nothing powerful comes from him, his performance is quite subtle, but that's something he does very very well. Oscar nominee Natalie Portman (Closer, Star Wars saga) displays some pretty authentic emotion as the wife who lost her husband in war (but really didn't). She doesn't just bust out in tears and scream, she reacts like nothing really happened. She doesn't process it. Then slowly spins out of control. She does so brilliantly. Tobey Maguire (Spiderman series, Cider House Rules) I think gives the performance of his career. The first half of his performance is pretty standard, good, but standard. The second half is where he really shines. You don't expect a ferocious performance out of him, but that's what you get. The scene where he completely looses it is dark, haunting, and freakishly amazing. That scene alone could garner himself a nomination at Oscar time, but I don't think it will happen. He does good enough to get award attention though, no doubt about it!

So overall...this is a solid movie that for me, just lacked some serious emotional tug. It was carried by a well written story and some great performances. It's not a dull movie really, but not all that exciting either. I could go either way when recommending this movie...so I'll leave it up to you!

2009 Review #63: The Brothers Bloom

2009-11-30T22:30:00.002-07:00

The Brothers Bloom

Rated PG-13
(violence, some sensuality and brief strong language)
1 hour 54 minutes

Storyline:
The Brothers Bloom are the best con men in the world, swindling millionaires with complex scenarios of lust and intrigue. Now they've decided to take on one last job - showing a beautiful and eccentric heiress the time of her life with a romantic adventure that takes them around the world.

Starring:
Rachel Weisz
Adrian Brody
Mark Ruffalo
Rinko Kikuchi

Critics Grade:
C-
(Consensus: Despite strong performances The Brothers Bloom ultimately does not fulfill its lofty ambitions.)

My Grade:
B

The Brothers Bloom is a pretty a standard con man movie with a few good laughs. It doesn't stray to far off the normal formula of this type of story, a lot of the plot line is fairly predictable. That being said, it's not a bad movie at all. I actually liked this movie a lot! I thought it was just quirky enough for me to look past the blandness of the overall plot. I think it was mainly the characters that make this movie really entertaining.

It has a good cast. Oscar winner Adrian Brody (The Pianist, King Kong) has always been pretty dependable, but so far not that profitable of an actor. He's one of those good actors that not many people really know about. His movies don't make bank at the box office (well with the exception of King Kong, but that wasn't because of him). I liked him here in this movie, he has this quiet charm about him that makes him appealing as an actor. That sounded totally gay, haha! Mark Ruffalo (Zodiac, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is also one of those actors that people can't quite get their finger on as to exactly what he's been in. He plays the 'way in over his head' character in this film that you are supposed to dislike but kind of root for in a weird way. He's good, he's usually always good. He just typically goes quiet into that good night when it comes to people recognizing him for doing good work. The best part of this film, hands down, was Oscar winner Rachel Weisz (The Constant Gardner, The Mummy series). She plays a very eccentric, off the wall character which was totally fun to watch her come out of her shell so to speak. She was so engaging and charming. She was funny. Her performance was so addicting, if that makes any sense. I loved it whenever she was on screen. To bad this movie went under the radar, or else she could have been looking at another Oscar nomination. Maybe.

It's hard to review this movie based off the storyline and technical aspects, because it all kind of...typical. Not in a bad way, just not in a fresh take kind of way either. It's definitely good enough for me to recommend that you go out and rent. For sure! I may even buy this movie sometime soon. It's charming and quirky and entertaining. It has some really fun performances. It just lacks in the story department, but that's OK...right?

2009 Review #62: The Road

2009-11-29T09:05:00.009-07:00

The Road

Rated R
(some violence, disturbing images and language)
1 hour 59 minutes

Storyline:
A post-apocalyptic tale of a man and his son trying to survive by any means possible.

Starring:
Viggo Mortensen
Kodi Smit-McPhee
Robert Duvall
Charlize Theron

Critics Grade:
B
(Consensus: The Road's commitment to Cormac McCarthy's dark vision may prove too unyielding for some, but the film benefits from hauntingly powerful performances from Viggo Mortensen and Kodi McPhee.)

My Grade:
A-

OK yes, The Road is one heck of a dark and bleak film. A holiday release may have been a bad time to put this movie out there, because it isn't all that uplifting and for the most part it's pretty grim. There isn't much color to this film, it's all pretty morose and bland looking. The performances are subdued and low key. The pacing is slow and there isn't much of any back story to these characters. To some people, it may sound like I'm describing a movie that is just OK but not all that great. Well for me, I thought The Road was one of the best movies I've seen this year, and I know that a lot of people won't agree with me on that. But that's OK, because that is why we all have separate opinions.

The Road has a very simplistic story, in fact there isn't to much of profound storyline at all. I've never read the book by Cormac McCarthy (who also wrote the novel in which No Country for Old Men was based), so I don't know how much of the book story transferred over to the film. I know the book is just as dark as the film however, that much I've heard by word of mouth. But here we have a post-apocalyptic world and there aren't many human's left (as far as we are shown at least). We follow the story of a father, played by Oscar nominee Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises, Lord of the Rings trilogy) who is constantly on the move with his young boy played by Kodi Smit-McPhee. They have no home, the world has been taken over by destruction. It is constantly dark and cold and rains a lot. They are just trying to survive the weather, hunger and the crazies (the bad guys as they call them in the film).

Not much really happens in this movie, I'll be completely honest about that. There isn't much excitement and virtually no "action" type movies. This isn't a "2012" type end of the world movie. In fact, it's the polar opposite. While some people may find that to be a bit dreary and even boring, I found it to be quite engaging and somewhat captivating. We don't have a large cast to focus on here, it's mainly this father and son. I was never bored. I was hooked from scene one and it never let me go. There was something about this father son relationship that was so moving and I thought it really elevated this film to a beautiful level. Sure we don't know a ton about them before this apocalypse, but to me it didn't really matter. You get to know their characters well enough throughout the film's pacing and I couldn't help but feel for both of them. I thought the writing here was excellent, it may even entice me to read the book eventually. But I didn't need much background for me to enjoy these peoples tale of survival.

Again, this is a post-apocalypse film. However, I will tell you right now that you pretty much never learn what the heck happened to the world. It's never told to us, and maybe it is in the book I don't know. Something awful clearly happened, but there didn't appear to be any toppled over buildings and stuff like that. It was implied that there may have been some severe earthquakes, but again it's never officially told to us. Again, that might bother some people. To me though, it didn't really effect my view of the movie. Why should it matter what happened? That's not what THIS story is about. Sure in movies like 2012, we need to see the 'what', but here we just care about the after effects. This apocalypse was just the even that set the story in motion. They did a good job though at creating this after world. I'm sure most of it was done with some computerized effects, and they looked damn convincing if you ask me. Set designs were totally foreboding and grim and they accented the film beautifully. This world had to look convincing, it had to look dark for us to believe these characters journey. So however they pulled off the look of the film, whatever they did, it was brilliant!
The movie also has two very strong performances. Viggo Mortensen has typically been one of those under appreciated actors. He's always doing great work and rarely getting recognized for it. Now I'm not saying he should get an Oscar nomination for this performance, but I am saying he did a really fantastic job with this part. I mean I believed the love this guy had for his son. I believed his protectiveness and his heart ache. Mortensen proves in this film how truly great he is at playing that every man we can all relate to in some way. His performance here is so quiet and toned down, but it was just so amazing at the same time. He deserves Oscar attention for this performance, but I don't think he will get it. Backing him up brilliantly and shockingly was young Kodi Smit-McPhee who plays his son. You don't get a lot of Oscar worthy performances from kids his age, but this kid tugged at my heart strings with his acting in this film. I mean this was a real kid. He did so well at playing this kid as scared for his life, scared for his fathers life. He bonded so beautifully with Viggo, there were times where you swear they really were father and son. McPhee does a superb job at delivering real emotion and authentic fear that you can't help but get choked up at certain moments of his performance. Because you really being to fear for his safety. Solid performances!

So my overall consensus on The Road is that it is one hell of good movie. You have to go in knowing you are about to see a low tone, grim film though or else you might be off put by it all. This is a slow film, there is no big explosions. No gun fights. Barely any blood. This is a story based film that takes place AFTER a earth shattering destruction of some sort. This is a film about a journey of a father and son who are trying to stay sane together, and who are trying to survive together. Every aspect of this movie was done so brilliantly in my mind. This is a move that had me reeled in from the very beginning. I loved this film, and maybe everyone won't feel the same way I did, but I still highly recommend you see it! Definitely one of the best 2009 has had to offer so far!

2009 Review #61: The Blind Side

2009-11-27T13:30:00.005-07:00

The Blind Side

Rated PG-13

(one scene involving brief violence, drug and sexual references)

2 hour 8 minutes

Storyline:
Oversized African American Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), the teen son of a murdered father and a crack-addicted mother, is homeless at age 16. Taken in by an affluent Memphis couple, Leigh Anne (Sandra Bullock) and Sean (Tim McGraw), Michael embarks on a remarkable rise to play for the NFL. Based on Michael Lewis's bestseller, this inspirational sports tale also stars Kathy Bates as Michael's persistent tutor, Miss Sue.

Starring:

B-

(Consensus: It might strike some viewers as a little too pat, but The Blind Side has the benefit of strong source material and a strong performance from Sandra Bullock.)

My Grade:
A-

I wasn't 100% sure about this movie when I saw the previews. I don't really know why I wasn't sure if I'd like, but I still wanted to give it a shot. I'll let you in on a little secret, I've always been a fan of Sandra Bullock (Crash, The Proposal). I don't know why she get's a lot of crap from people, but she's reliable when she picks the right role. So yeah, 85% of the reason I ultimately saw this movie was because Bullock is the star, and a $35 million weekend at the box office next to "New Moon" means that a lot of people probably have the same feeling I do.

I'm glad I went and saw The Blind Side. I actually thoroughly enjoyed this movie as a whole. The consensus at Rotten Tomatoes is right, this movie has a strong source material which makes the film that much more better. It's not the same old football story about a crappy team that never wins that defies all the odds to win a championship. This is a remarkable story about one man who never had any real love on his side, find love from a family who help him get through school and ultimately drafted by a pro football team. It's a pretty solid tale, and a true one at that. You can tell they "Hollywood-ized" the story however, and that's where most of it's flaws come from.Mainly it's littered with cliches. There are many moments that I don't know actually happened in the real life story. Some of things only happen in movies to make it more appealing and to add more drama. Lines like, "I'm not changing his life, he's changing mine" sounded kind of corny. Mainly because we don't really know how he affected this woman's life because for we know she was already a very loving, strong willed woman. We don't know much back story of the family, so when we hear lines like that it all sounds too "scripted" and not very authentic. There are a couple lines like that in the film that just added on the cheese factor.

That being said, this has quite a moving story to tell. Overall it was very well written. It has this engaging, fun spirited quality to it. You really love these characters, they make you smile, they make you think about your own inner self. They make you wonder if YOU could do what this family did. It kind of inspires us to think about our situations in life. Makes us wonder how much of ourselves we focus on, as opposed to thinking for and caring for others. We have to care for ourselves of course, but there are tons and tons of people out there who need that love to be focused on them and not our own selfishness. Maybe I'm getting off track here, but these are the things this movie made me think of after my trip to the theater. Is it going to change my life drastically? No, sadly not. I wish I could be as selfless as that woman. I wish I had her courage and inner strength.

That being said, let me move on now. Sandra Bullock probably gives her very best performance here. I thought she deserved some award attention for Crash, where she proved she has dramatic acting chops. She takes that ability to the max in this film. Her whole performance feels so true to life and authentic. You believe her as this woman, she becomes this woman. We pull for her, we root for her, we love her. At least I did. If she got an Oscar nomination for this film (which yes, there IS talk of) I would certainly not complain. I just don't know if it was powerful enough to garner a nod, but we will see. She held her own though, she deserves attention for this performance. Finally she comes out of that romantic comedy shell and shows us what she can really do. Bravo to her! The guy who plays Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), doesn't do such a good job at acting here. He's actually kind of bad, which makes me feel bad for even saying that. He doesn't really get much time to speak in the film though (kind of weird since the story is about him). We learn a lot about his past, but we don't really get to much of an insight into the guy. The few lines he does get, I think Aaron could have done a better job at bringing this character to life. We still like him though, and we want him to succeed.

This movie won't appeal to most manly men out there. This is NOT your normal football movie. In fact, football doesn't become to much of the story until about mid-way through. This is more of a story about how a Christian family selflessly takes in an orphan that no one wants to give a rat's ass about, and shows him love. They show him the kindness of people. They give him a new life. It really is a touching story that I just loved. Stick around after the credits to see the real life pictures of these characters and it all comes together. It did for me. It hit me when I saw those pictures how real this story is, and I'm glad I got to see this tale come to life. This movie is carried by a solid story and career best, award worthy performance from Sandra Bullock and I would say to anyone to go and see it!! I thought it was one of the better movies of the year. Not the BEST, or even in the top five, just one of the better ones I've seen. Solid flick!

2009 Review #60: Disney's A Christmas Carol (in 3D)

2009-11-27T13:00:00.007-07:00

Disney's A Christmas Carol

Rated PG
(scary sequences and images)
1 hour 36 minutes

Storyline:
An animated retelling of Charles Dickens' classic novel about a Victorian-era miser taken on a journey of self-redemption, courtesy of several mysterious Christmas apparitions.

Starring/Voices Of:
Jim Carrey
Gary Oldman
Colin Firth

Critic's Grade:
C-
(Consensus: Robert Zemeckis' 3-D animated take on the Dickens classic tries hard, but its dazzling special effects distract from an array of fine performances from Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman.)

My Grade:
B-

Animation just keeps better and better, quality wise. There were numerous shots in this film I swore were real life actors on screen. I guess in a way they were, I think they used some kind of "gollum" like technique with these actors to animate them on screen. Well anyway, here we have another version of the timeless Christmas carol about nasty old Ebenezer Scrooge and his journey of redemption on the eve of Christmas. We have all seen many versions of this story, but I don't know if any have been quite so dark as this one.

Personally I like the older versions better, because I grew up on them and they were simple and pretty much kid friendly. Here we have a version of the film that is a little heavy with the dramatic side of the story, and pretty much strips away most of the charm and fun of the other versions. Yes there is some entertaining, fun moments that everyone can enjoy. There is a good dose of mediocre humor that kids might like. I softly chuckled a few times. But I find that this movie is more appealing to adults than it might be for the young ones. It's almost to scary for kids. It's definitely to slow for most children these days to stay focused on. We really get a glimpse into the deeper and more frightening core of these timeless characters. The ghosts are somewhat threatening looking, especially that last one. The first one felt like some kind of "drug trip". All of them were played by Jim Carrey (Liar Liar, The Truman Show).

For me, the best parts of the movie were the performances. Carrey plays a handful of characters, including all three ghosts and every version, young and old, of Mr. Scrooge. Don't laugh at me here, but I thought this was one of Carrey's better performances. Now I've always been a fan of Carrey's dramatic performances, more so than his comedic ones (but I like them all the same too). Here we have a nice taste of both sides. They captured his face so realistically on Mr. Scrooge, that you are pretty much watching Jim Carrey act out this whole performance on screen. He did a fantastic job, he didn't do any of his usual antics to capture cheap laughs. He WAS Ebenezer Scrooge, and he was very good at doing so. I also like Gary Oldman's performance as Mr. Cratchett. It was sad and emotional portrayal of a man who has almost nothing but still maintains his love and happiness.

The animation was damn brilliant as well. Like I said it was freaking realistic as all hell! I also saw this movie in 3D. Usually I would say not to waste an extra $2 on a movie ticket JUST for 3D, but here it really helps bring the magic to life. The effects get a little to much to handle sometimes, the director, Robert Zemeckis, get's a tad carried away. They do all these intentional things to stick outside the screen, but don't really have that awesome "in your face" 3D effect. It just got a little heavy handed with the effects is all, but for the most part the animation and the 3D were great!

This is not the best version of this tale by any means. This is not one most kids could probably sit through and enjoy whole heartedly. But I still would recommend people to see it. It's good enough that I enjoyed it. And heck, it's Christmas time...you gotta see it right??

2009 Review #59: The Messenger

2009-11-26T17:30:00.001-07:00

The Messenger

Rated R

(language and some sexual content/nudity)
1 hour 45 minutes

Storyline:
An American soldier struggles with an ethical dilemma when he becomes involved with a widow of a fallen officer.

Starring:
Ben Foster
Woody Harrelson
Samantha Morton
Jena Malone

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
B-

I don't really have a whole lot to say about this movie. No I did not think it was bad, I actually thought it was overall a good movie. The problem this movie had for me is that it tried to be to much. It tried the whole "artsy" feel thing a little to hard, and it kind of falls flat in many points in the film. There are a few scenes that go on WAY to long and literally stay focused on one shot for what feels like an eternity. It drags a lot, and in the end, carries a lot of the story down with it.

I liked the scenes where they had to deliver the news to the families of their deceased loved ones. For the most part they were quite devastating to watch. They felt very authentic and they were pretty emotional. I wish they would have touched more on how it was affecting these two soldiers though. These were the best scenes in the film however. Very well done.

There was the side story of Ben Foster (3:10 to Yuma, Alpha Dog) trying to hook up with one of the women who recently lost her husband played by Oscar nominee Samantha Morton (In America, Sweet & Lowdown). These scenes played out a little to dry for me. I didn't really understand the direction they were taking. They could have been in better taste I guess. Oscar nominee Woody Harrelson's (The People Vs. Larry Flynt, Zombieland) story arc was some of my favorite parts of the movie. He plays this soldier who hasn't actually seen much war time and he is deeply disturbed for some reasons we never fully know. But he's a hard ass. A hard ass with a heart. He's a pretty complicated character, and Harrelson plays him brilliantly. I feel if this movie got more attention, we could see Harrelson garnering himself an Oscar nomination for supporting actor here. He was very, very good. I love that he's surfacing back in the movie world. Ben Foster was also excellent here, but not powerful enough to provoke to much emotion from the audience. At least not from me. Honestly I think he turned an Oscar worthy role in 3:10 to Yuma a few years back, but he was ignored. He will probably be ignored again this year for lead actor, but I think this guy is well on his way to award glory.

You know this is a good movie, but it's centered around kind of a messy movie. I feel like it goes in a few different directions and I never really knew where it was going. It had to many "down" moments and scenes that just took forever to get going. But it has some brilliant performances with some deep and emotional moments that it's enough for me to say, yeah, The Messenger is a solid movie. However, it's just not a movie I would urge you to go see in theaters. It falls into that black hole of "forgettable good movies" such as Alpha Dog and American Gangster to name a few. That's just my two cents.

2009 Review #58: The Proposal

2009-11-26T17:25:00.001-07:00

The Proposal

Rated PG-13
(sexual content, minor nudity and language)
1 hour 48 minutes

Storyline:
A pushy boss forces her young assistant to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada.

Starring:
Sandra Bullock
Ryan Reynolds

Critics Grade:
D-
(Consensus: Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds exhibit plenty of chemistry, but they're let down by The Proposal’s devotion to formula.)

My Grade:
B

I didn't have the highest of hopes for this movie. It is a romantic comedy after all, and we all know by now that this isn't my favorite genre of film. But I heard enough good things about it through my friends (even though the critics virtually smashed this film to pieces) that gave me enough push to watch it via Netflix. I have to admit, I kind of liked this movie.

Sure it wasn't anything all that special or new, but it was charming and sweet. It wasn't over the top, and didn't try to hard to make the audience laugh. I didn't laugh a ton while watching the movie, but I still found it to be humorous, but I also liked the story. The story of course, was full of cliches and it ended the way we all knew it would end. At the same time, none of that really mattered. It was written well enough for us to lose focus of the usual romantic comedy formula, and pay more attention to the fun characters that this movie was all about.

I've secretly always been a big fan of Sandra Bullock (Speed, Crash), and I know just as well as the next person that she has had some big swing and misses in her career. But when she picks the best movie for her, when she is in her element, she rocks it! I thought she was perfect here. She was funny, she was hate-able AND likable at the same time. I loved her in this movie! Ryan Reynolds (Waiting, Smokin' Aces) has developed himself quite a fanbase, and I can understand why. He has some near perfect comedic timing, and he's great at being the funny, sometimes awkward guy. Just as he was here. The two of them together worked super well, it was a great duo!

Overall, this isn't an amazing movie. But was anyone expecting it to be? Listen, yes it's completely cliched and you know how it's all going to go down. But at least it has some unique characters that you grow to love and move the usually boring storyline in a funny direction. I liked The Proposal, you should like it too! Hehe. Oh and the best part of the movie plays right as the credits role...classic scene!

2009 Review #57: Precious

2009-11-21T11:30:00.000-07:00

Precious

Rated R
(child abuse including sexual assault, and pervasive language)
1 hour 50 minutes

Storyline:
In Harlem, an overweight, illiterate teen who is pregnant with her second child is invited to enroll in an alternative school in hopes that her life can head in a new direction.

Starring:
Gabourey 'Gabby' Sidibe
Mo'Nique
Paula Patton
Mariah Carey
Lenny Kravitz

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
A+

Wow. Precious is one of the most heart breaking films I've seen a very long time. This film is devestating to watch. I saw it all by myself, which probably wasn't a good idea. This is a movie that should be embraced with other people. I will not lie to you, Precious is an extrememly difficult film to watch because the subject material is dark as dark can be. It reaches down to the trenches of how evil people can be and how tormented other people are. It captures the disgusting act of judgment that we all possess. Precious is a brilliant film. A must see film, if you can take it. This film is not only FULL of extremely vulgar language, but it goes into much more sinister territroy that is not something everyone could probably see. I'm talking incest (Precious was raped by her father twice and now has two children from him). That isn't ruining the storyline at all trust me. It shows phsical and emotional abuse to the max. It features a scene where a baby is tossed to the side. I'm telling you, this is a film that is hard to see but it is one I think all should see.

I'm not going to dive into the storyline in this review, it would take to long. Read my synopsis above and also most people by now know what this film is about. It's all over the place. My theater was jam packed last night! Anyway, the screenplay here was one of dismal beauty. I've never read the book, but I feel like the screenwriter captured it well enough. They did not hold back in this film, they threw it all right in our faces. They shoved a message right down our throats. No matter what a person may look like on the outside, no matter what you may THINK they are...never ever assume that about them. Never assume the worst of someone and tear them apart.

Who are we to judge? How do you think people feel when they are judged? You see the main character in this film and hear her story and you think nasty things about her. But then we get to know her. We begin to learn her story, and through that, we feel her pain. We've all been guilty of judging people like Precious. I've been judged in the same ways. What the film makers do here is capture the essence of this heart ache and amplify it to the max. This is something that happens in real life. This is a film that needs to be seen so that our eyes can be opened. We need a slap in the face to see the reality of this world. The sadness that is going on all around us. It may have been shown to us in a very harsh way in this film, but they did a phenomenal job at bringing this to us. Oscar worthy screenplay, and absolutely Oscar worthy directing by Lee Daniels.

This film has gotten a lot of word of mouth mainly because of the performances. We've been hearing a lot about the ladies in this film. This is Gabourey 'Gabby' Sidibe's very first film and I'm telling you, you would never have guessed that. She delivers one of the most emotionally devestating and heartbreaking performances I've seen in years. If there is front runner for Best Actress at the Oscars so far this year, it is Gabby. She was simply amazing as Precious. She delivered this authentic performance that could bring a grown man to tears (not this one though, sorry). She has a scene in the classroom towards the end that is hard to watch. She breaks down and releases all her pain and in the moment you see a real girl in real pain and then you think...wait, this is just a movie.

The supporting ladies weren't chop liver. First we have Mariah Carey (Glitter). She only has about three scenes in the whole film and maybe about ten minutes of screentime. Her character is really "toned down" from her real life image. This was not done to embarass her, but to have us relate to her. Her short performance was very monoton but I'll tell you what, it was incredibly believable. She plays a social worker who appears unhappy, of course she's monotone. She see's turmoil every day. With what she had, she was convincing and did a great job. Paula Patton (DeJa Vu, Mirrors) seems to have been ignored in all the award buzz, and I don't understand why. I thought she carried herself beautifully in this film. She connected with Precious in such a sweet and convincing way and really showcased her acting chops in this film. It's shame she will go un-noticed this year in the awards area, because she was very good.

So now we come to Mo'Nique (Phat Girlz, Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins). I was not believing the hype about her performance. I mean come on, how could this woman who does raunchy stand up, has an annoying voice and stars in movies title "Phat Girlz" deliver a serious dramatic performance that's worthy of an Oscar? Well you remember that judging thing I spoke of eariler? You see how easily I fell prey to that? Because I could not have been more wrong, and I'm glad I was. Mo'Nique has about 5 or 6 scenes in the film. Every time she is on screen and she opens her mouth you hate her character. She is the definition of pure evil. She is nasty, vile person who treats her daughter like filth. And that's me being nice. She is super crazy in this film. But damit...she was brilliant. Shock of the century for me. She...was...brilliant. She was frigtening real, she was scary as hell and you didn't see comedian Mo'nique in this character at all. I don't how she did it, but I'm glad she did. Her final scene was probably the most heart breaking moment of the film. She gives this haunting monolugue that made me teary eyed. How can you feel for a character as sinister as this? Well you can't, but you come close in that scene. You begin to understand her. You begin to believe she's incredibly mentally unstable. She's hurting too. But how can you feel for her? That's the beauty of that scene. If she does not win an Oscar for the moment alone....it will be an Academy Awards travesty. She HAS to be a shoe in?? RIGHT?

Bottom line...this is one of the very best films of 2009. It should be nominated for Best Picture, no doubt in my mind. It's captivating. It's haunting. It's tragic. It even has some very sweet, funny moments to brighten up the dread of the film. This is an all around amazing motion picture. A must see film. Just be warned. The movie gave me goosebumps at times. Woo, freaking phenomenal film!

2009 Review #56: Food, Inc. (Documentary Feature)

2009-11-21T10:55:00.002-07:00

Food, Inc.

Rated PG
(some thematic material and disturbing images)
1 hour 34 minutes

Subject:
An unflattering look inside America's corporate controlled food industry.

Critics Grade:
A+

My Grade:
A

Well the tagline for this film is correct, I am NEVER going to look at my dinner the same way again! I must warn you right out of the gate, if you enjoy eating food...like really, really enjoy it...do not watch this movie even though I HIGHLY suggest that you do! This is a must see film for EVERYONE! You're stomaches may turn, you may want to gag, you may be repulsed, you may be pissed, you may be sad, heartbroken, etc after watching this film but you must see it. So you may never buy a bag og Tyson chicken again...but that is the point of this film...to inform us of the disgusting truth about the food we love to eat.

This film shockingly shows us the inside to some of the slaughter houses and "plants" where they grow and eventually kill these animals for our food. I'm not talking farms where cows are free to roam and eat grass. I'm talking cages and small enclosements where chickens, cows and other animals are jailed, tortured and pumped full of chemicals. They genetically enhance these animals to make them grow faster, and the same time make these poor animals suffer unimaginable pain and anguish during their lifespans. Chickens who aren't able to walk more than two steps without falling over. Some chickens just simply die. Cows that are bullied. They push them over with tractors and push them back into their cages as they scream.

They feed these cows corn instead of grass and the cows don't digest it right which can cause their meat to be infected with E Coli. Causing widespread epidemics of E Coli breakouts killing many people. There was a story of a young boy who died twelve days after eating a hamburger that was infected with E Coli. And what do these food industries do about it?? Absolutely nothing is what. They have made it illegal in some states to protest and critisize their idustry. Are you kidding me? Remember the Oprah scandal? These food companies control damn near 90% of the food industry. They are like their own government...hell they even have the government on their side!

Well I don't want to ramble to much. You sould really just see the movie. Go rent it...please! This is an EXCELLENT documentary. A brilliant look into a world we are shunnd from learning anything about until now. It is sickening what is going on in our food, and this movie has inspired me to take a much closer look into what I'm eating. Great movie! Better be nominated for an Oscar this year! I'm calling it RIGHT NOW! Hehe.

2009 Review #55: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

2009-11-18T17:20:00.006-07:00

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Rated R
(violence and pervasive language)
1 hour 46 minutes

Storyline:
Armed men hijack a New York City subway train, holding the passengers hostage in return for a ransom, and turning an ordinary day's work for dispatcher Walter Garber into a face-off with the mastermind behind the crime. This is a remake of a 1974 film of the same name starring Walter Matthau.

Starring:
Denzel Washington
John Travolta
John Turturro
James Gandolfini

Critics Grade:
D-

My Grade:
B-

So this film is apparently a loose remake of a 1974 thriller of the same name. I've never seen said film, so I cannot compare the two. Critics say the original is much better, and I'm sure they are probably right. By all standards, this should have been a movie I was destined to not like in the least. It's hard these days to take Oscar nominee John Travolta (Pulp Fiction, Face/Off) seriously. But on the other hand Oscar winner Denzel Washington (Training Day, Deja Vu) is usually a reliable performer. But then back on the flip side you have a film directed by Tony Scott, whose films such as Man on Fire, Deja Vu, The Fan, etc have been crapped on critically for being "to much" or "seriously bad over the top action"(even though I typically enjoy them). Then you have the tired storyline of a crazy hostage take who wants a tremendous sum of cold hard cash (10 million dollars in this case) and only wants to deal with a person who has no experience in hostage negotiation. This formula should add up to a pretty ridiculous, over the top and fairly stupid action thriller right?

Well not for me it didn't. I was actually surprised, because I enjoyed this film overall. It is not a perfect movie. It is not in the top ten or twenty action films ever made. It has it's flaws, of course. Yes some of the action does get a little "Tony Scott" on us. But it never escalated to being "to much to handle". There were also numerous moments where the movie would do this weird slow motion thing with the train or the shots of the city that became distracting after a while. There was this elongated action sequence of the money being transferred by the NYPD that became so cliched and annoying. You would have to think they would have had a better method of getting this money over with a deadline of only an HOUR! Instead the whiz through the streets getting in numerous fender benders without a care in the world. I don't know...that part was a little silly to me. Also the constant use of John Travolta's character saying "Mother F**ker" with this weird inflection...bothered me. Ha, whatever though.
Overall those are minor delays, and ones that were to be expected in a film like this. But I thought the movie played out pretty well. There was no ridiculous motive for the villain, no sinister and overly intelligent and well thought out evil plan. The bad guy was smart, but also didn't think things through. He screws up a few times. Almost "humanizes" the guy in a strange way. I have to say too, Travolta was actually pretty darn good in this movie. He had every opportunity to just go nuts with this performance and fall into the crazy hostage taker cliched role but I don't think he did. He was actually pretty cool. I mean he wasn't to far off from said cliche, but he was different enough for me to like. Also good was Denzel. Duh. The guy is almost always good in anything he does. He plays his character so calm and collected but also shows some bad ass tendencies. You really like his character even though he isn't the best person in the world. He was funny at times, and just really good. Great job from both leads.

Tony Scott's direction was pretty normal for him again here. Yes there were some insane over the top moments, but this film was more toned down for him I thought. I think he handled the film well. You don't have this awesome screenplay, so he did what he could for the film and relied on strong performances from the two leads to carry the movie along the way. I also liked how he tried to humanize a couple of the hostages. Most of the time, we see very little of the victims, only glances. For the most part, it's the same here, but they showcase a couple hostages enough for us to know they do exist in the movie and that we are supposed to care for their safety. So pretty good job there.

You are probably thrown off by the fact that I liked this movie, but whatever I'm in a good mood today! This is just a fun, entertaining flick that passes the time really well. I would totally suggest it to people who are into a movie like this. It's not as terrible as you may thing or as the critics are letting you on. It's not the coolest action movie of the year, duh! But it still holds it's own I think. Good flick! So sue me!

2009 Review #54: Adoration

2009-11-16T22:45:00.002-07:00

Adoration

Rated R
(Language)
1 hour 41 minutes

Storyline:
For his French-class assignment, a high school student weaves his family history in a news story involving terrorism, and goes on to invite an Internet audience in on the resulting controversy.

Starring:
Scott Speedman
Rachel Blanchard
Kenneth Welsh
Devon Bostick

Critics Grade:
C+

My Grade:
B-

Oops, I just realized I watched this movie like three or four days ago and forgot to review it. Well I'm going to keep this review very short, so I'm sorry in advance.

This was definitely a good movie. It was certainly well made and had some fairly good performances all around. The first two acts of the film were the best aspects of the story. It was really interesting and I found it to be quite captivating. However, the last act of the film seemed to spiral downwards in a direction I was disappointed by quite honestly. I almost felt like the first two thirds did not tie in to the "climatic" last third. All the events in the beginning and middle seemed to just be forgotten about by the end. Maybe I missed something, which is certainly a possibility but...as of now I did not understand why the movie concluded the way it did without really wrapping the whole story up. They hinted at this teacher being fired, and the boy being caught for what he was doing but we never actually see this happen, it's as if it all just a minor after thought. Even though it was the prominent aspect of the story.

So I don't know. I'm not really knocking the overall film, because for the most part it was actually pretty good. This isn't a movie everyone is going to see, I just happened to find it on Netflix one day and thought I'd check it out. If you are into indy type dramas with fairly unknown casts...I'd say sure...check this movie out. Otherwise, most people I know wouldn't care a less for this movie.

2009 Review #53: Dance Flick

2009-11-16T19:15:00.005-07:00

Dance Flick

Rated PG-13
(crude and sexual content throughout, and language)
1 hour 24 minutes

Storyline:
Spoof comedy about Street dancer Thomas Uncles is from the wrong side of the tracks, but his bond with the beautiful Megan White might help the duo realize their dreams as the enter in the mother of all dance battles.

Starring:
Shoshana Bush
Damon Wayans Jr.
Critics Grade:
F-

My Grade:
D-

OK so I admit...I was bored. Also Netflix is being totally stupid about sending me movies, everything is a "Long Wait". So I was partially desperate to have them send me ANYTHING. So...I got Dance Flick, the new spoof comedy from the Wayan's family that basically spoofs all those great dance movies out there. Now I typically don't like these movies after the great travesties called "Meet the Spartans" and "Disaster Movie" but what the hell...you have to watch a dumb movie every once in a while right? Right??? Anyone????

Dance Flick is just that...a really dumb movie. It's hard to review a spoof movie though, because they are intentionally bad. They have intentially corny storylines and intentionally bad acting. I'm cool with that. These movies bank on their styles of humor and hope that they can make audiences laugh. I'll admit...I laughed more in this movie that those other two garbage films I listed above. Not saying much though, because I only laughed about four or five times. The rest of the jokes were all so cliched and just so bad. I mean really really bad. Really outdated and so forced that it just stunk up the whole movie.

So I'm not going to ramble on to much about it. This movie has some good funny moments, but a rare few. That's why I didn't give it an F grade. I've actually seen worse movies than this, this year. Believe it or not! At least it was kind of entertaining...at least that's what I keep telling myself.

2009 Review #52: 2012

2009-11-16T16:50:00.008-07:00

2012

Rated PG-13
(intense disaster sequences and some language)
2 hours 38 minutes

Storyline:
An epic adventure about a global cataclysm that brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.

Starring:
John Cusask
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Amanda Peet
Thandie Newton
Oliver Platt
Danny Glover

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
D

Ok so I'm a liar. I may have said or at least implied to some people, that I would never see this film. Based off the previews, the movie looked just stupid to me. It looked like just yet another giant special effects (and bad special effects at that) movie about the end of the world. A movie we've seen so many times before, but now we have one with the 12/21/12 end of the world storyline those pesky Mayan's predicted many a moon ago. But yes, I did see this film. Listen, I enjoy hanging out with my friends. A good buddy and I go and see movies a lot...we were going to see Pirate Radio...but I guess we both felt like a good laugh...so we decided to see John Cusask in "2012".

Well, this wasn't the worst movie of the year, it has that going for it at least. This wasn't a truly AWFUL film. Hell it even had some borderline redeeming qualities (mainly the great Woody Harrelson in a brief role). But overall, yes, this was a fairly bad film in most aspects. Clearly this film is not going to have a profound storyline, I get that, and I accept that. Clearly it's not going to have an Oscar worthy performance from anyone. This movie, and all movies like this, rely on the entertaining and "bad ass" factor. This movie wasn't all that entertaining and certainly not "bad ass" in anyway. I actually thought it was a bit boring and ran just a tad to long (It's 2 hour and 40 minutes for petes sakes!!).

I think we got MOST of the "cool" special effects shots in the previews for the film. There's a lot of gap between the action in the film. When the action happens, it's all so...blah. The same crap we have seen time and time again. A bunch of cities and famous landmarks get demolished by various weather disasters or what have you. Volcanoes destroying national parks, major earthquakes sucking in major cities into the vast abyss. Blah blah blah. Been there, done that. The other half of the movie is the main characters trying to escape such chaos...and in such over the top, insane ways. For God's sake, if you have a plane, fly UP...not down and towards the destruction. But again...those scenes are there for our "entertainment". The scenes of these people just barely escaping death from horrific events became almost irritating and had no tension. Then it had all the cliched moments such as: the lives of thousands of human's rest in the hands of a mere book author who has to go on a suicide mission to save everyone. But before that, as the clock is ticking down, he of course must say his "I love yous" and make out with his estranged ex-wife for a minute or two. These types of moments just become so frustrating after a while. Not because they are unrealistic...because they are tiring and cliched.

The visual effects, for the most part looked pretty bad. There were times where I thought I was watching some kind of XBOX 360 game or something. They looked realistic enough for a video game...but not a major film if you catch my drift. A lot of them had this "cartoony" look to them too, almost to a point where they were just silly! It had some cool shots, mainly the rushing waves of water pouring over mountain tops...that was pretty cool looking. But the fire effects, and things going "boom"...all looked so corny. I've seen much better special effects in many other movies. The camera work also drove me nuts. Hell if people can complain about the hand held camera work in movies like "Cloverfield" and "Blair Witch" you can't tell me this movie didn't make you feel slightly sick. The camera was just all over the place and it was driving me bonkers!

Here's my main issue with the film. The whole 2012 thing is a big deal right now...it's the new vampire thing (in the past year or two vampires have taken over TV and film). They are now making a TV show based on the after effects of the 2012 disaster. Please stop! But anyway, the 2012 thing is a big deal and this movie was advertised like it was ALL about our impending doom the Mayan's predicted would happen. Here's the thing...I think I counted 1 very minor scene and maybe one kinda sorta big scene where they even bothered to mention the whole Mayan prediction. It was basically an afterthought!! It was barely mentioned! Then they threw all this science mumbo jumbo in our faces and boom...we were completely distracted away from the Mayan storyline...that never really existed in this film. Talk about a deceiving marketing ploy! All this movie turned out to be was a big hoax...just like the 2012 thing in real life. All it was, was an excuse to make another big budget end of the world disaster flick...and how do you get people to see it...eh, say it's all about the 2012 business...that will fill seats right? Well...it did, and everyone was duped! Sad!

I'm not proud I suffered through this film...but like I said...I enjoy hanging out with my friends and seeing crap movies sometimes! Sue me! I can't stop you from wasting your money on this film, who knows, maybe you will find it entertaining. I certainly did not. My friend also did not and he's less of a movie snob than I am. We both found the whole movie to be laughable...and yes, we laughed a few times in the film at parts that weren't meant to be funny. Whatever though, I'm just stupid movie snob right? Ha! Whatever, I like a good, ridiculous action flick just as much as everyone else...this one just fails in so many categories. Boo "2012", Boo! Hell I think last year's "Disaster Movie" was a better disaster movie than this...ooooooooh!

2009 Review #51: The Box

2009-11-12T14:50:00.004-07:00

The Box

Rated PG-13
(thematic elements, some violence and disturbing images)
1 hour 54 minutes

Storyline:
A small wooden box arrives on the doorstep of a married couple, who know that opening it will grant them a million dollars and kill someone they don't know.

Starring:
Cameron Diaz
James Marsden
Frank Langella

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
F-

You may be thinking, "Really Mike, you gave this movie an F-??" You may also be thinking, "How can this possibly be a film that deserves the lowest possible grade when you gave a movie like 'Meet Dave' a D??" Here's my answer: I have never, and I mean NEVER been so unbelievably pissed off from watching a movie like I did after watching this crap fest called "The Box". The trailer for this film should win some award titled 'Most Misleading Trailer Award." You see the trailer for this film and you might think, "Oh that looks like it could be somewhat of an original thriller about some psycho who makes a happy couple kill a random stranger for a million bucks." If you thought that, you were wrong. You were very, very, very wrong. Like me. Sure it has a creepy old man who offers a million dollars for a seemingly nice, but struggling couple to press a button that would kill a random person somewhere in the world. But there is SO much that trailer does not tell you. I had NO idea this movie would go the direction it went in...and I still have no idea what it is exactly I witnessed in this film.

***SPOILER ALERT*** This movie I think...I THINK...is about aliens. The creepy old man was a NASA employee who was struck by lightning and killed. Half of his face is burnt off and now he looks like Harvey Two Face from The Dark Knight. Now he's come back to life as....ummm....well they never truly say. He says the line "I am now controlled by who controls the lightning". So...God maybe? No that can't be right, he's making people kill each other. Well OK, he has "employees" that look like you and me, but act like robots and bleed from the nose. Then there's this apparent portal system that's basically vertical boxes of water free floating. You have three choices, one leads to the right path the other two lead to eternal damnation. Also these...."beings" lets call them, have the ability to make a person deaf and blind permanently but can change them back as long as someone kills another person. The film also tries to deliver a few messages such as: we as a human race are so greedy that we just may do anything not only for money, but for our own selfishness to make ourselves happy and could care a less about others. It also has a biblical reference to Adam and Eve (at least I picked up on it) about how Eve ate the forbidden apple. Except in this movie, the women are far to quick to press that damn button and now the human race and the world has to suffer from their selfish decision. ***END SPOILER ALERT***

So if you read my spoiler paragraph...did any of that make sense to you? Because it sure as hell did not to me when I watched this movie! This has got to be the single most frustrating and confusing movie I've ever seen. There was WAY to much going on and they were trying to feed us WAY to much information. It was mysterious for a good hour and twenty minutes before they really started explaining their twists...which also made no sense. It becomes annoying when they start throwing all of these explanations and reasons for things at you when they become to cluttered and all over the place. I couldn't put any of this film together. The storyline went just way to far way to fast and took the movie to a level that it did not need to venture to. Please if you see this movie (which I don't suggest doing) can you please make some attempt to explain it to me?? Man this movie pissed me off!! I was angry from watching it because of how nonsensical it was.

This really was the very worst movie I've seen for 2009 so far. I'm not typically going to movies this year that I absolutely do not want to see...so I actually wanted to check this movie out. Holy crap was I disappointed and livid after watching it! This may be one of the most upsetting and stupidest movies I've ever had the misfortune of watching. I hated virtually every aspect of it. I'm sorry for the waste of talent of the main cast, what a crappy ass movie to choose to be a part of. All three can do so much better than this filth! I'm sorry...but I HATED The Box. This was a dumb movie than I would not suggest to ANYONE to go see. If you have to see it...wait for it to be on DVD in like...a month and rent it for cheaper. Ugh, this movie was so, SO bad!

2009 Review #50: Inkheart

2009-11-10T15:22:00.004-07:00

Inkheart

Rated PG
(fantasy adventure action, some scary moments and brief language)
1 hour 38 minutes

Storyline:
A young girl discovers her father has an amazing talent to bring characters out of their books and must try to stop a freed villain from destroying them all, with the help of her father, her aunt, and a storybook's hero.

Starring:
Brendan Fraser
Paul Bettany
Helen Mirren
Eliza Bennett
Andy Serkis

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
D+

I decided to a throw movies onto my Netflix list that people really dogged on, just to see if they really were that bad. Inkheart was critically smashed for the most part when it first arrived in theaters. Not to many people gave this movie any average praise. They all said kids would not care for this flick because it lacked charm and charisma and had no heart and was just plain boring. Well I was curious to see if this was all true.

Inkheart is not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination. Trust me I have seen some BAD movies in my life, and this is Oscar worthy compared to those said crap fest films. That being said, Inkheart isn't exactly "good" either. This is one of those kid movies that is way over the head of most children the film is targeting. I don't know if any child under 10 would really understand this movie as a whole or really be all that into the movie. Kids that age like "flashy" things, and comical sidekicks and funny gags. This movie doesn't have any of that. It's all to serious for a childrens flick. That's what kid movies are doing these days...they are becoming to sophisticated for the brain of a young child. They don't take into consideration what kids really like. Sure this movie has some cool effects that might make a kid go "ooooooooh" but not enough.

This movie played out more like the film "Stardust", which I was a fan of. That at least had the guts to say it was meant for adults and it was rated PG-13. I'm not saying that Inkheart should be PG-13, but it almost plays out like a movie like that. It's a much less fun version of the "Pirates" movies. This movie is just bland, not only for kids but for adults. It doesn't have any thrills or really any likable characters. No you don't hate the main heroes of the story, but you don't really care for them either. This movie isn't funny. I don't think I laughed once. Brendan Fraser has done this same old movie time and time again, and he really needs to stop now. He needs a new genre of film to work on. Let someone else take over the helm please.

I can't sit here and say this movie sucks or that it's bad it's just not fun in any way. It's not entertaining. It has a really cool idea about a man who can read a book and the story comes to life instantly...cool right? Well this movie poorly executes that idea. It could have been done so much better. If they just said, "alright, this isn't a kids movie, lets have fun with this" it might have been better. But it just ends up getting lost in the mix somewhere. Please, go rent the movie "Up" for your kids to enjoy, laugh at and be inspired by...Inkheart really isn't the movie to do that.

2009 Review #49: The Education of Charlie Banks

2009-11-10T14:16:00.003-07:00

The Education of Charlie Banks

Rated R
(pervasive language, some violence, sexual content, and drug and alcohol use)
1 hour 40 minutes

Storyline:
College student Charlie Banks has to face old problems when the bully he had an unpleasant encounter with back in high school shows up on his campus.

Starring:
Jesse Eisenberg
Jason Ritter
Eva Amurri
Chris Marquette

Critics Grade:
D

My Grade:
C

This is a movie that clearly not a whole lot of people have even heard of. It's been out since around the beginning of 2009 and has less then 1000 voted on IMDB. It only has a total of 26 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes...which is really low. This movie was never really "out there" for people to see. But now it is available on DVD, and I saw it on Netflix and it caught my eye. The movie is basically about a quiet, kind of nerdy kid named Charlie who has come face to face once again with a childhood/high school bully that he has always been deeply afraid of. Charlie one ratted this bully out to the cops only to recant but the bully never knew that. Now Charlie is just trying to get through college and also trying to become more than friends with a fellow female student.

This movie has "independent" written all over it. Did you know this was the directorial debut of musician Fred Durst? I kid you not! Honestly I never would have guessed he could ever direct a film and if he did I would have imagined it would have been pretty bad. However my thoughts would have been wrong. I think he did quite a good job for his debut. I didn't think that was a great film and it is ultimately forgettable, but all things considered, Durst did a fairly good job capturing the realism of college and all the potential problems that could arise amongst college aged people.

That being said, this movie has a pretty big flaw in my eyes: it is very dull. The writing especially, falls very flat and for the most part is incredibly one dimensional. Yeah yeah yeah, I'm not a screenwriter and I have no idea how hard it is to write a screenplay. I know all that. But that doesn't mean a person who watches enough movies can tell when a screenplay doesn't pop. It didn't pop for me. Nothing stood out as being powerful or magnificent. It isn't poorly written by any means, there are some well written scenes, but in the end nothing really inspiring comes out of this tale. I don't know how else to critique it other than it just doesn't have any "oomph".

The film does have some good performances. Mainly from Jason Ritter (Freddy Vs. Jason) who plays the bully with some pretty good depth. His performance is so authentic I thought. He shows us the deeply mean and troubled side to a bully but also the side of him that wants to be good and to be redeemed. You feel bad for him. I also liked Chris Marquette (Alpha Dog, The Invisible) who plays the friend torn between the good (Charlie) and the bad (the bully) who is friends with both. He's been a bit actor for probably all of his career, but I thought he was solid this time out. Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland, Zombieland) actually annoyed me in this movie. I can't exactly put my finger on it...but his performance was just annoying as all hell. I couldn't stand him and he was the main character! He had this high pitched naisley voice when he was angry, and at other times he was to quiet and his voice "fidgeted" to much. It just bothered me, it was a distraction.

Overall this is a fairly good movie with some good direction by Fred Durst but it fails to have a captivating storyline that packs a very weak punch. Some good performances and some OK ones. Overall just a good but forgettable film. That's all I can really say.

2009 Review #48: The Men Who Stare at Goats

2009-11-09T22:00:00.007-07:00

The Men Who Stare at Goats

Rated R

(language, some drug content and brief nudity)

1 hour 33 minutes

Storyline:

A reporter in Iraq might just have the story of a lifetime when he meets Lyn Cassady, a guy who claims to be a former member of the U.S. Army's First Earth Battalion, a unit that employs paranormal powers in their missions.

Starring:

C-

My Grade:
B

The Men Who Stare at Goats is certainly not going to be a film for everyone. This is one of those movies that has a very quirky oddness to it, that may fly right past some audiences. I'm not saying this movie is to smart for "dumb" audiences, I mean that it's attempts at a story and especially it's sense of humor may be a little out there for some people, and a lot of folks just simply may not get it. Well I got it...and that's because I have a weird sense of humor.

This movie however, lacks a centralized and sensible storyline. I don't mean that I was expecting a storyline that makes sense, just a storyline that fits with the movie...but it didn't really have that. In fact, there wasn't much of a plot at all. If I were to descrive this movie, I don't think I really can. I would just say to a friend, "Yeah, it's that weird new George Clooney movie about soldiers who who trained to fight battle using their minds"...and that's all I would really be able to muster. This movie has a LOT going on...just not much of a confined screenplay. There is SOMETHING there though, enough to hang onto in a way.

The performances and sense of humor is what drives this movie. The two of them combined add up to a pretty darn entertaining and fun flick. It's one of those guilty pleasure type movies. There is no reason to truly love this film, but I found myself intrigued by it's charming style. I've always felt Oscar winner George Clooney (Syriana, Michael Clayton) has been slightly over rated. However this time out I thought he was perfect and near brilliant as the deranged ex-paranormal military man. His character was so bizarre and amazingly entertaining and Clooney portrayed him fantastically. Ewan McGregor (Star Wars: Episode One, Moulin Rouge) has never really been a "great" actor, but he's had his moments. He was pretty average here, but had some great moments, especially with Clooney. Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey were good as well in their limited roles. The casting for this film was awesome! It's what really made this film.

So despite a plot that has literally no direction, this movie is carried by a well balanced cast of nut jobs and borderline sane folk and some witty and fun humor that I recommend it to any fan of film. It's not a perfect movie, it's not even all that great of a film. But dammit, it's good wholesome fun and entertaining as hell. Even though hell is probably not all that entertaining. But you know what I mean. I don't think you'd be wasting your money going to see this movie...so go ahead...see it. Tell me what ya think!

2009 Review #47: Grace

2009-11-05T12:52:00.005-07:00

Grace

Rated R
(bloody images, violence and some sexual content and brief nudity)
1 hour 24 minutes

Storyline:
After losing her unborn child, Madeline Matheson insists on carrying the baby to term. Following the delivery, the child miraculously returns to life with an appetite for human blood. Madeline is faced with a mother's ultimate decision.

Starring:
Jordan Ladd
Gabrielle Rose
Samantha Ferris

Critics Grade:
C

My Grade:
F

How this movie has a 71% on rotten tomatoes is beyond me. This movie should have come with some sort of warning like: "Caution, this movie may induce vomiting or the urge to gouge your eyes out with a dull butter knife." Basically this movie is disgusting. I did not get this movie whatsoever. I don't see the appeal. It is not much of a horror film, so much as it is a pure gross fest!

I didn't understand the point of the movie. Was this baby supposed to be the devil? Some kind of demon? Something pure evil? The baby has this thirst for blood but the baby doesn't actually do anything evil other than that. It's just a cute little baby that drinks blood. The mother is obsessed with keeping the baby happy and kills for her...OK...so what's the overall point or message of the film? I have no idea, is the answer!! I think this movie exists to make people squirm...that's it! Ha! It doesn't have much of a good storyline. Because there is also the crazy mother in law who wants the baby for herself because she misses breast feeding her son (who died). There is a disturbing scene of this older woman having her husband suck on her breast because she craves it. It's sick!

This whole movie is sick! I didn't like it at all! Between the crazy breast feeding obsessed older woman and the baby sucking down bottles of human blood...ugh! For most people that I know...none of them would ever want to watch this crap. There are plenty of people who WOULD like it...and good for them...but this movie was wrong in my eyes. It was disgusting and extremely, over the top, disturbing. I never want to lay eyes on this film again. Despite the fact that it was filmed well and had semi decent performances...this movie is terrible! Sorry to those who may have enjoyed it...but I REALLY REALLY disliked it!

2009 Review #46: Year One

2009-11-05T12:29:00.005-07:00

Year One

Rated PG-13
(crude and sexual content throughout, brief strong language and comic violence)
1 hour 37 minutes

Storyline:
Zed, a prehistoric would-be hunter, eats from a tree of forbidden fruit and is banished from his tribe, accompanied by Oh, a shy gatherer. On their travels, they meet Cain and Abel on a fateful day, stop Abraham from killing Isaac, become slaves, and reach the city of Sodom where their tribe is now enslaved. Zed and Oh are determined to rescue the women they love, Maya and Eema. Standing in their way is Sodom's high priest and the omnipresent Cain.

Starring:
Jack Black
Michael Cera
David Cross
Oliver Platt

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
C-

Well I won't waste much of my time reviewing this movie. I originally thought this was some kind of spoof movie, but it isn't. It's a stand alone comedy about two hunter gatherers who travel together and meet several biblical characters doing some crazy hi jinks. Eh, it wasn't all that good or all that funny. I don't think it's an "F" movie like rotten tomatoes basically has it at because it does have some pretty funny moments. Just not enough. It's not very consistent. Of course it's poorly written, but I wasn't expecting an Oscar caliber screenplay here. But a lot of the jokes seem either out dated or just plain tired. Michael Cera and Jack Black's styles of humor work well together, but both of them seem to be passed their prime. Both of their styles of humor are kind of old now and not many people laugh at them. They are old news. This film might have benefited from maybe some unknowns with a new sense of comedic style. All the biblical references were obviously a bit silly and inaccurate...but whatever. I don't know, this isn't a good movie. It's not very funny...to me at least. This may be hilarious to other people...I just didn't really get it. It had some redeeming moments, but not enough for me to really recommend it to anyone. It's just OK. Simple as that.

2009 Review #45: Fragments (AKA Winged Creatures)

2009-10-25T22:00:00.004-07:00

Fragments (Winged Creatures)

Rated R
(violent content, sexuality and language)
1 hour 40 minutes

Storyline:
A group of strangers form a unique relationship with each other after surviving a random shooting at a Los Angeles diner.

Starring:
Kate Beckinsale
Dakota Fanning
Guy Pearce
Forest Whitaker
Jennifer Hudson

Critics Grade:
D-

My Grade:
C-

Fragments (also known as Winged Creatures) is a film that tries to do the whole "Crash" and "Magnolia" thing. This is a more centralized story though. In the other films, peoples (who may or may not have ever met one another) lives and stories intersect and ultimately have a great message. This film begins with all the main characters being in the same place at the same time, and something happens to them all and the rest of the film is how they all deal with it. They are all in a diner and suddenly a man comes in and starts shooting a gun. He kills a couple people and injures one.

I'm going to say right now, you never find out who this shooter really is and why he did this. Never. In fact they don't show any aspect of the investigation into this man and we don't get any glimpse into his personal life. It's as if his character had no role in the film. That kind of angered me a little. I didn't need some huge chunk of the film dedicated to him, but he was the reason the film existed. His actions catapulted the films storyline, but we never learn a thing about him.

The rest of the film follows the main group of people, played by an "all-star" cast. I don't care to list them all, but overall the cast was very good. Oscar nominee Dakota Fanning (I Am Sam, War of the Worlds) has usually always annoyed the living hell out of me. I'm not a fan. She always performs her roles way to "grown up" and you can totally tell she's trying to "act" and not just "be". I never saw I Am Sam so I have no comment on that film. Here she is basically the same old same old. Most of the movie her character annoyed me because her performance annoyed me. However in the final act, I must admit she was very very good. I think the stand out performance was probably Josh Hutcherson (Zathura, Journey to the Center of the Earth). In a movie full of big named actors, his performance was the most sincere and most authentic, and he didn't even have that many speaking lines. He did a great job conveying his emotions and reactions towards what happened.

The main issue was this film was that it had no direction. I had no clue where this movie was going. There was supposed to be a message here, but for the life of me I do not know what it was. There were way to many characters to focus on and some of them weren't even involved in the shooting. The film was SUPPOSED to be about how these characters lives changed after the tragic event but I feel like that got lost in the mix somewhere. The story was sort of a jumbled mess. Some of the story arcs either went nowhere or really had no reason to exist. For instance the storyline of Guy Pearce (Memento, LA Confidential) and his wife...what was that about? OK his character just barely missed the shooting at the diner...but I don't understand how his story even pertains to anything. I didn't get the connection. This movie was full of missed connections. Or Oscar winner Jennifer Hudsons (Dreamgirls) role...there was nothing pertinent about it. That was a huge issue with this film. WAY to many characters with WAY to many useless storylines. If there was a message it got lost in all the clutter.

The film was shot really well, I did love the way it looked. The film kept cutting back to the shooting and giving us more pieces to the puzzle. It's a shame those pieces really led to nothing at all. It had some fairly decent writing when it made sense. It wasn't an awful screenplay, just there was to much packed in. That will really lose an audience, and it nearly lost me. It left no breathing room for any real character development. Wow as I write this, I realize how much I didn't really like this film. I really want to like it, because it has this quality of being a good film but I don't know how to explain it. This is a good film that is wrapped up in a very bad film. Does that make sense?? Probably not.

This is one of those movies I can't honestly suggest to anyone as something to go out and rent. However, if you have seen all the movies you wanted to see and need something to fill time...please rent this one because I want to know how you feel about it. I'm totally lost with this movie. Or if you see it on HBO or something like that...just check it out, I'm curious to know what people think. I don't know. Like I said it had a good production value and the performances were really good it just lost a TON of points on story. That's not good for a movie. But you be the judge.

2009 Review #44: Sin Nombre

2009-10-25T18:45:00.004-07:00

Sin Nombre
(Foreign Language Film)

Rated R
(violence, language and some sexual content)
1 hour 39 minutes

Storyline:
Honduran teenager Sayra reunites with her father, an opportunity for her to potentially realize her dream of a life in the U.S. Moving to Mexico is the first step in a fateful journey of unexpected events.

Starring:
Paulina Gaitan
Edgar Flores II

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
A-

I'm not in the mood to write some super lengthy review today. But I will give it my best shot to review the Spanish language film, Sin Nombre, now available on DVD. The movie opened up limited back in March and was very well received by the critics, and deservedly so. A lot of people have a hard time sitting through foreign language films, I was one of those people up until about 2 years ago. I'll be the first person to tell you that it is not that bad folks. People think they won't be able to focus on the action because they have to read the movie, well that simply isn't true. It's very easy to read the subtitles and stay up with the action on the screen. If you can't muster the strength to sit through a foreign film, you are truly missing out because they are some of the better movies out there.

Sin Nombre follows a young woman from Honduras who is traveling with her uncle and estranged father, up Mexico to reach the states. They are trying to flee Mexico with hundreds of other immigrants to try to find a better life here in the US. We also have the story of a young man who's knee deep in a Mexican gang but clearly wants out. He gets himself into some serious trouble and has to go on the run which is where he meets the young woman and her family. The two of them, who are completely different, share this journey and each others company. There are hints of something "more" developing but they walk in much different shades of life, so it could never really be.

This is a beautifully crafted film on almost every single level. Everything from stunning cinematography to a masterfully written screenplay. There is some really great and inspiring writing here. It's the sort of tale we've kind of seen before, but told in such a different and beautiful way. At least I thought so. It was captivating and at times riveting. It pulled you in, you really root for these characters. What I also loved was how authentic the film felt. There were times when I felt I was watching a documentary about the risks and scares of immigration. We here in the states, or at least a lot of us, look down on immigrants and say ignorant things like "go back to your country" but when you see a movie like this you tend to lose that mentality. This is a scary real film. Honestly, I have a new outlook on the issue. I feel bad for people like this film depicts. The film also has some solid performances. Realistic performances I should say. They really helped bring this film to a whole new level.

This isn't a movie for everyone. It can be hard to watch at times. It does get violent, and the scary thing is, is that this stuff is happening right now today. Anyway, I highly suggest you at least try this film out. Don't let the subtitles bring you down. This is a brilliant, brilliant film that you should definitely check out! I loved this movie. It was excellent! That's what Mikey says!!

DVD Update Reviews (10/25/2009)

2009-10-25T16:15:00.006-07:00

Hey gang! Well it's been a while since I've done a DVD update blog. These are the movies I've watched recently that aren't a new 2009 flick. I like to keep track of what I've seen ya know? Primarily because I'm a geek, but ain't nothing wrong with that right? So I haven't really watched a ton of "older" movies in the past month or so, but I'm going to at least let you know what I've seen. So here ya go!

Wind Chill (2007, 1 hour 31 minutes, Rated R): I feel sorry for Emily Blunt for chosing to do a film like this. I don't know why she thought she had to do it, she's a good actress who's been in fairly big films. She's becoming a "big" name now. This movie is ridiculous in a very bad way. Essentially there is no point to the film. It's a cluttered mess. Things happen that are never explained so they come off as looking like really poor editing. This is supposed to be horror/ghost movie but there is no scares whatsoever. The "ghosts" are laughable. Just like the storyline and the performances. These characters lightly crashed into a soft patch of snow and somehow the guy breaks a bone and is bleeding and slowly dying. That's how badly done this film was. I would say it's not ever worth your time, but some people get a kick out of this type of movie, and that's great! Not for me though, not for me at all. My Grade: D-

----------

Dead End (2003, 1 hour 25 minutes, Rated R): Man alive there are cheesy straight to DVD movies and then there are straight to DVD movies like Dead End. I don't know if words could possibly describe how awful this movie is. I know it was meant to be funny and cheesy and sometimes I have fun with that, but this movie was so stupid that all the attempts at humor escaped me. I would recommend this movie though to people who enjoy a campy, corny, cliched horror flick, but for me it was one of the dumbest, and worst straight to DVD movies I've ever seen! The acting from some of these people was horrendous. Ugh, this movie sucked! My Grade: F

----------

Eden Lake (2008, 1 hour 31 minutes, Rated R): Eden Lake is essentially another torture porn flick like we've all grown used to since the Saw/Hostel movies first debuted. Personally I didn't like this movie all that much, mainly because I'm so sick and tired of gore and torture being used in horror movis to provoke fear...it's getting old and is NOT scary! This movie is just sick. It's gross. However it was filmed rather well and had some solid performances. This movie just isn't my cup of tea, because I don't like getting the feeling of nausea while watching a film. It has some redeeming qualities, and it's not a BAD movie...but overall I wasn't a fan of the movie. My Grade: C-

----------

Grindstone Road (2008, 1 hour 33 minutes, Rated R): This is a cliched spookfest if there ever was one. This follows the exact same formula as all those American, Japanese remake movies we keep seeing a couple times a year. A ghost is trying to communicate with a woman about solving their murder, and is leaving clues. No one believes said woman, and people think she's nuts. Blah blah blah, we've seen this a million times before, and done a lot better than this movie. You can pretty much figure out who the "killer" is/was, and the whole story is utterly predictable. Bad performances, poor production value, crappy writing = one piss poor horror film. Not the worst I've ever seen, just not one I'd ever suggest anyone watch. It's not even funny in a bad way. Blah! My Grade: D

---------

Stuck (2007, 1 hour 25 minutes, Rated R): This movie has a cool premise: a woman on the verge of a big promotion gets wasted on drugs and alcohol and hit's a random bum but does not call the police or take him to the hospital. He is stuck in her windshield and she leaves him in the garage. He is not dead, and he struggles to get free while she goes about her life. I wish the movie was as interesting as the plot. Apparently this is something that happened in real life...sort of. Some of this movie was pretty good, it had some good tense moments. Then there were times when it dragged on or became annoying. This isn't a perfect movie, and it's not even a great movie. Overall though, I'd say it was pretty entertaining and just an OK, average flick. It has flaws but it also has some cool aspects. Performances are fairly standard. Production value is pretty good. Writing could have used some work. It also could have been a bit more suspensful. But I don't know, I'm right in the middle on this flick. I can't recommend it either way. So I'll leave it up to you. My Grade: C

----------

So that's all I have for now! Hope you like what I had to say...I know it wasn't very nice this time around. As usual, all these films are available on DVD!

2009 Review #43: Where the Wild Things Are

2009-10-20T21:55:00.008-07:00

Where the Wild Things Are

Rated PG
(mild thematic elements, some adventure action and brief language)
1 hour 41 minutes

Storyline:
An adaptation of Maurice Sendak's classic childrens story, where Max, a disobedient little boy sent to bed without his supper, creates his own world--a forest inhabited by ferocious wild creatures that crown Max as their ruler.

Starring:
Max Records
Catherine Keener

With the Voices of:
James Gandolfini
Lauren Ambrose
Catherine O'Hara
Forest Whitaker
Chris Cooper
Paul Dano

Critics Grade:
B-

My Grade:
A

Like most people in my age range, I read the Maurice Sendak novel, "Where the Wild Things Are" when I was a child. It is a beloved classic and probably the most memorable childhood book I read, and I know a lot of others can say the same. It told the story of a young boy who's imagination had no boundaries and he meets these incredible creatures called the wild things and he becomes king of their land. Never in a million years did I think they would adapt this tale into a major motion picture, but dammit to hell, I'm so glad they did! The film version of "Where the Wild Things Are" is hands down one of the very, very best films of 2009. I can even foresee a potential best picture nominee with the new extended 10 nominee bracket.

Everything I loved about the book from many years ago is right here in this movie and then some! Oscar nominated writer/director Spike Jonze (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation) gave life and personalities to the wild things for the big screen adaption. He gives them storyline, he gives them heart, he humanizes them. Each one of them is so very unique and quite different from one another. They are funny, and they are sad. They are just like you and me...except they are 9 foot tall furry creatures with scary looking faces. But I applaud Jonze for bringing these wild things to life for us to care about even more.

Then we have Max, the little boy who's the focus of the film. We get a glimpse into his home life. He has this incredible and vivid imagination and wants to share that with everyone around him but no one wants to listen. Everyone is either to "cool" or to busy to play along with Max. But Max isn't a perfect, cute little boy. He shows signs of potentially having some kind of bi-polar disorder or at the very least some deep rooted anger issues. He tries to get attention from his mom, Oscar nominee Catherine Keener (Being John Malkovich, Into the Wild) but she isn't rresponding the way he wants. So he lashes out at her. His imagination becomes to much for her at times. He runs away and long story short, comes across an island where he meets the wild things. They are just like him. They listen to him. They care for him. They are led by him. They are everything he wants, but at the same time they are nothing that he needs.

I know what you are thinking...this all sounds a little dramatic for a childrens movie. Well here's the thing, if you want to take your young child to see a kid friendly movie...don't take them to see this film. This is a movie that will probably bore the hell out of a kid under the age of thirteen. It isn't flashy or colorful, in fact it's quite somber and dark at times. Literally and also in tone as well. This isn't exactly a sweet story, it does tend to lean towards "depressing" at times. There is a message to be learned, but I don't think the younger kids will grasp onto it. This is a movie, I think, meant more for the younger adults or for parents. I think it's geared more towards people who read the book all those years ago. It has a wonderfully brilliant story to tell, and it is incredibly well written but kids are just not going to get it.

The writing, as I stated, is superb! It's simplistic enough for an adult, but it is also very deep. We as adults might even learn a thing or two from this story. Some of the best writing I've seen a film all year. The direction is also quite stunning. Jonze really captures this mythical world with some true beauty. One thing I really loved was the choice NOT to make this an animated film. There is no sense of realism or danger in animation. Here we have this real young actor running and jumping around with these beasts in the woods. It makes the feel of the film so much more authentic and you connect a lot easier to the characters and story that way.

It has some beautiful cinematography as well. This film was shot extremely well. Like I mentioned earlier, it's a very "grim" looking film. A lot of dark tones, a lot of dreariness. They are all accented well with some dark characters and dialog but also there are some wonderful moments of genuine happiness and humor to balance it all out. It is not ALL dread, there is PLENTY of positivity in this film.

I want to point out that young Max Records did a phenomenal job in his performance. I was very surprised by how convincing he was as the little boy with the same name. This was not your typical child performance, this kid was freaking great! Max is not all happiness and joy, he actually has moments of getting on your nerves. He's a real kid, I guess is my point. Then there's moments of his vulnerability that subtlety shows his adult side, or his adult like thinking. Maybe Max is well beyond his years. But deep down, Max is a kid with an awesome imagination and a free spirit. And Records does such a great job at showcasing all shades of of Max's personality. You love him, you hate him (how can you hate a little boy right??), you root for him, you feel sad for him. Really good job!

I was also a fan of all the voice over acting. They really found the perfect cast for this movie. None of them are "huge" stars. None of them have had huge summer blockbuster films. But they added such a human tone to these creatures. They were humorous, they were at times scary, they were depressing, they were very human like. Some of them you didn't like at times, and some of them you loved and felt really bad for. This voice cast did a fantastic job at bringing life to the wild things, and made the film a wonderful experience.

So in the end...this is a MUST SEE film for young adults all the way to the oldies but goodies (hehe). A wonderfully written screenplay, brilliant directing, and some truly great and heartfelt performances. This movie can move you and inspire you. It will touch your heart. The only downfall is that it looks like a kids movie, but really this is not a film for young children. I would say not to bring the kids, not because it's bad or scary...but because most kids won't get it and the movies pacing is pretty slow and kids WILL be bored by it. But other than that...please, please, please go see this film!! It is THAT good! Brilliant even! It may even be my favorite movie so far this year...I don't know. Go see it, and you be the judge!

2009 Review #42: Drag Me to Hell

2009-10-17T11:57:00.005-07:00

Drag Me to Hell

Rated PG-13
(sequences of horror violence, terror, disturbing images and language)
1 hour 39 minutes

Storyline:
A loan officer ordered to evict an old woman from her home finds herself the recipient of a supernatural curse, which turns her life into a living hell. Desperate, she turns to a seer to try and save her soul, while evil forces work to push her to a breaking point.

Starring:
Alison Lohman
Justin Long
Lorna Raver

Critics Grade:
A

My Grade:
A-

When I first saw the trailer for Drag Me to Hell...I laughed. I thought this movie looked insanely stupid and corny as hell. I thought this was just another one of those dumb horror movies we see over and over again with really bad special effects, awful acting, a pathetic storyline, etc. I didn't see this movie in theaters, even though it opened to extremely rave reviews. I finally saw this movie yesterday via Netflix. I'm so bummed I did not see this movie in theaters.

This is easily the most ridiculous horror movie in years. It's about a woman who is cursed by a gypsy type old lady, because she would not give her an extension on her loan...and then chaos ensues. This isn't your typical chaos either. This is one MESSED UP curse!! The woman is haunted by the old gypsy lady, she has various bugs crawling in and out of her body, she has shadow demon things punching her in the face and throwing her around like a rag doll, she has a weird ghostly handkerchief with a face on it following her around...yeah...freaking weird I know!

But this is the kinda weird that's good...real good. Shockingly good! I was so surprised by how much I like this movie. Drag Me To Hell is a total 100% throwback to 70's and 80's horr

or films. It was directed by Sam Rami who did not only Spiderman, but also the Evil Dead series way back when. Evil Dead was a "freaky" movie but it was also really funny. Just like Drag Me to Hell. It isn't really all that scary (at least to me it wasn't, but I know it will scare many other people), but it's kinda freaky in a weird way, but also funny. Intentionally funny I will have you know! That is what Rami does, and he does it well. There were so many over the top sequences that had you laughing, but had you completely and utterly entertained. I loved every minute of it.

That's what this movie comes down to: entertaining. It's not going to rack up any awards, but that can't stop you from enjoying it. Hell it has a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes...that's insane for a horror movie! It's because it grabs your attention from the get go and never lets up. It never gets boring, it never drags (pun intended) it's just damn good fun! Everything about it was good. The acting was good, which was nice to see. Alison Lohman (White Oleander, Matchstic k Men) was perfect for this movie. She doesn't have a big name in Hollywood, so it worked well for her because she isn't some big star. She was funny and convincing. So great to see Justin Long (Jeepers Creepers, Accepted) in a role like this. He didn't really play the funny guy, more so he played the caring and sweet boyfriend, and I thought he did a great job!

The production of this film was awesome as well. That's where the real 80's throwback came from for me. The effects were really good but in a super cheesy way. Again, I believe this was intentional. They weren't these beautiful and masterful effects shots like what we see in MOST summer blockbusters these days. They were ridiculous and so obviously CGI but they worked so wonderfully for this movie. It captured the essence of the film perfectly. That goes f or the screenplay as well. It was so bizarre but at the same time really well written if that makes any sense. The whole production of the film had this very "classic" feel to it, you know what I mean? It felt and looked like a vintage film and it was so great to look at!

This is by no means a perfect horror film, but you can't really judge this movie to much. It is NOT meant to be taken seriously, it is meant to provide some fun thrills and some great wholesome entertainment and it seriously succeeds in doing that. This is a very good, "bad" film. I know that made no sense to most of you, but whatever, I know I what I mean! It's not a film for everyone for sure, but at the same time it IS only PG-13. This is probably the best PG-13 horror film you are going to find. Not a lot of bad language, no sex or nudity (very unique for a horror movies these days), but quite a bit of gore and violence. So be cautious when showing it to young children...you don't want them to have nightmares...or do you??

But whatever, Drag Me to Hell works as a classy throwback horror film. It's damn good fun, and it's damn entertaining! At least it is in my book...if that means anything to you!

2009 Review #41: Zombieland

2009-10-10T11:36:00.002-07:00

Zombieland

Rated R
(horror violence/gore and language, with brief nudity)
1 hour 20 minutes

Storyline:
In the horror comedy Zombieland focuses on two men and two women who have found a way to survive a world overrun by zombies...

Starring:
Woody Harrelson

Jesse Eisenberg

Emma Stone

Abigail Breslin

Critics Grade:
B+

My Grade:

A-

A lot of people have compared this film to the 2004 zombie comedy Shaun of the Dead but I think it's a bad comparison. OK yes, both are comedies about zombies, but to me they are two different films. Shaun of the Dead is essentially a borderline spoof comedy about zombie flicks. Zombieland is a straight forward comedy about a world taken over by zombies. This movie is basically the type of movie Shaun of the Dead was making fun of...am I making any sense?? Probably not. I loved Shaun of the Dead. IF we are having to compare both of these films, I say Shaun of the Dead wins my vote by a landslide. However Zombieland is no crappy movie by any stretch.

I think Zombieland is a pretty darn good and very entertaining flick. It's actually one of the better comedies I've seen this year (but I haven't seen a ton this year). They are not alike in anyway, but this movie is a much better comedy than The Invention of Lying (check out my review!). This one at least stays consistently funny and has a few genuine laugh out loud moments. The cast here works so well together as well, this cast makes sense. Story wise, there isn't much to to tell. Four strangers, who are the last humans on earth, meet each other and stick together to fight off the zombie Apocalypse while they try to survive each other.

So you don't have much of a screenplay here, at least nothing to extravagant. What we have here is a small, but incredibly entertaining main cast (and one awesome cameo) that drives this movie. We've seen this sort of thing a lot before, of course, but at least this film takes some fun risks that pay off. I'm so glad to see Woody Harrelson (Semi-Pro, No Country for Old Men) back in movies, that guy simply rocks! For me, he was the best part of this movie. Him and his damn Twinkies! He is great at playing that funny man that you kinda love to hate at times. Jesse Eisenberg (Advetureland) is becoming kinda big now eh? I didn't care for him all that much in Adventureland (what's with these "land" movies he's doing??), but he worked really well here! He was perfect for this movie, and his type of character was a good fit for this film. He was funny too, not so much in that other "land" movie. I also have to say how WEIRD it was to see cute little Oscar nominee Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine, Signs) wielding a shotgun and shooting zombies...but I liked her in the movie. It was just creepy to see her like this.

I've seen and heard people asking if this movie is "scary" and I even saw a person in the audience covering their face during a scene. My answer is that no, of course this movie is not scary...it's a comedy for crying out loud! There are one or two jump scenes though, is that considered scary? For a movie about zombies, there isn't much zombie action. At least not consistent zombie action. But when they are on screen, it's awesome. Especially the ways some of them are killed. The car door to the zombie's face is great! The last major scene of the film contains the most zombies, and there are a lot of them. But the first 2 acts of the movie is more about the living characters. So no...it's not "scary". If anything, it's a fun kind of scary.

I do highly recommend this movie to people! It is a little violent...of course. There is a slow motion scene of a partially nude zombie woman. There are a few bad words here and there. So what I'm getting at...don't take the young kids to see it, it's not for them. Teenagers probably, but not the youngins. But this is just a super entertaining zombie comedy that I think anyone could completely enjoy! I did...very much so!

2009 Review #40: Away We Go

2009-10-10T11:03:00.003-07:00

Away We Go

Rated R

(language and some sexual content)

1 hour 38 minutes

Storyline:
A couple who is expecting their first child travel around the U.S. in order to find a perfect place to start their family. Along the way, they have misadventures and find fresh connections with an assortment of relatives and old friends who just might help them discover "home" on their own terms for the first time.

Starring:
John Krasinski

Maya Rudolph

Critics Grade:
C

My Grade:

B+

I just recently watched "Away We Go" on Netflix. This is a movie I wanted to see, but I honestly didn't have any high hopes for it being a great film. This isn't a great film, at least not in my eyes. However, it is a very good film; a well made one. This is one of those oddball independent films sort of along the same lines as Juno or maybe even something like Little Miss Sunshine, both of which are films I very much enjoyed. Both were Best Picture nominees as well. I don't think Away We Go will make the shortlist (actually the extended list this year), but that does not mean it's a bad movie.

This film is a dark comedy, or moreover a dark dramedy. It doesn't have any super hilarious moments, but it's funny in a quirky, strange kinda way. The writing of the film gets a little weird at times which reflects through a couple truly bizarre cameo characters. I think the screenplay and the humor might fly over a lot of peoples heads (I don't mean some people are stupid, I mean that the humor here is to out there for some people's liking). I think there were a few parts that were meant to be funny, but I didn't get. Really though, this is more of a dramatic tale of a couple trying to find the right home for their soon to be born baby. In that aspect, this movie is incredibly well written. It has a genuinely sweet and charming story and I really loved the couple that we follow the whole film. There was nothing daring about the screenplay, and it had some cliche touches, but overall, a solid written story.

The performances were also quite enjoyable. John Krasinski (TV's The Office) might as well change his name to Jim Halpert because that's all people really know him as these days. I love him on The Office and it's shame he's been virtually snubbed for any award attention for that show, because I think he's very funny. He's taken a few shots at the big screen, but for me this is his big moment in film. His dramatic turn in this film is excellent. He plays a lovable character that is impossible to hate. He did a fantastic job at portraying this character, and he has major promise for when The Office says it's final goodbye...whenever that may be. I don't know to much about Maya Rudolph (TV's Saturday Night Live), but I know that this is basically her first genuine starring role in a film. Boy oh boy does she nail it! I loved her in this movie, I thought she did a great job! Her and Krasinski both play these incredibly fun people who you just instantly love. She isn't the "bitchy" pregnant girlfriend, she's sweet and funny. Rudolph really demonstrates that even the funny ladies can deliver a star performance in film.

The movie also has a slew of pretty funny cameos: Allison Janney, Jim Gaffigan, Jeff Daniels, Catherine O'Hara and Maggie Gyllenhaal. All played characters who the two leads meet up with on their journey across the country to find the perfect home. They were all perfect fits, and were all so different and added some great balance to the film. The movie looked good too. The direction from Oscar winner Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Revolutionary Road) was awesome. He's known for his dark, dramatic films about messed up families so this was a cool change of pace for him and I though he did a brilliant job piecing this story together.

This movie is now available to rent or own...I suggest you go out and rent this flick at least. It's well worth watching once, but you do have to be "in" to this kinda of quirky, independent dramedy...so that's its main downfall, that it doesn't appeal to a broader audience. But...I know plenty of people who love this kind of movie, so for you I say...see it!

2009 Review #39: The Invention of Lying

2009-10-07T13:00:00.004-07:00

The Invention of Lying

Rated PG-13
(language including some sexual material and a drug reference)
1 hour 40 minutes

Storyline:
A comedy set in a world where no one has ever lied, until a writer seizes the opportunity for personal gain.

Starring:
Ricky Gervais
Jennifer Garner
Rob Lowe

Critics Grade:
D+

My Grade:
C

Well the last movie Ricky Gervais brought us was Ghost Town, which was a freaking hilarious movie that I loved! He also is the creator of the British The Office which of course inspired the American version we have today. He's a funny man. There's no denying that. However, I don't really know if his brand of comedy worked this time around.

The movie has a really cool, funny idea: what if the entire world did not know the concept of telling a lie. Not even a harmful little white lie. What if everyone said exactly what they thought and felt at that moment? It would be one messed up world right? Well the characters in this movie are shockingly honest...because that's all they know. That is where all the comedy comes from in this movie. I have to admit there were a lot of very brutal but hilarious comments said in this film. But after a while, they grew kinda tiresome. They got old real quick. The jokes lasted to long. Don't get me wrong, it was a "funny" movie, but not consistently funny. I never laughed out loud (or LOL'd to some of you text savvy people) in this movie. It just got a few hearty chuckles out of me...as well as the audience I was with. Actually there was a lot of dead silence through a handful of the "funny" moments. I don't think most people "got it". I don't think I did.

The writing was OK, but it could have been better. It had an interesting premise, but a pretty bland and unoriginal storyline. It ends up being this gimmicky romantic comedy by the conclusion of the film. It's predictable. It's actually kind of boring. Not awful, just...eh. It had some good performances though. Ricky Gervais has perfect comedic timing and I hope he does more films. I like his genre of comedy. Most of the time. For me the star of the film was Jennifer Garner (TV's Alias, Juno). I was really impressed with her work here. She was perfect for this character. She was funny. She was blunt. She was great, and I'm not normally a huge fan of her movies. This film also had a slew of cool, sometimes funny cameos or small roles: Rob Lowe, Tina Fey, Louis C.K., Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Jeffrey Tambor and Jonah Hill. It was a good cast.

Overall, I thought the movie was kinda funny but also kinda a snoozefest. Ricky Gervais is capable of being so much better than this. I was not impressed with the overall film. However, I think some people will still enjoy it. I can't recommend that you go out and pay for it full price, but maybe see it at your dollar theater in a few months, or just wait for the DVD. That's my thought.

2009 Review #38: Paranormal Activity

2009-10-02T11:40:00.006-07:00

Paranormal Activity

Rated R

(Language)
1 hour 39 minutes

Storyline:

A happy, carefree couple is haunted by a demonic spirit and their story is captured on camera.

Starring:
Katie Featherston
Micah Sloat

Critics Grade:

My Grade:
A

I have been waiting a solid two years for this movie to finally be released. Technically it hasn't been "released" yet. It's only playing in a grand total of 33 cities in the entire country, and it's only getting exclusive midnight showings just for this current weekend. There is a rumor floating that the movie will be getting a more wide release in 40 markets, with more normal show times starting October 9th, and I really hope this is true. This is a movie that every fan of horror should see. THIS is a true horror movie. THIS movie shows you do not need a drop of blood, you don't need any torture scenes, you don't need any clichéd jump scenes, you don't need ANY of that to unnerve an audience. This is absolutely one of the best horror film's I've seen and yes I have to say it is probably the most creepy and scariest film's I've seen. That comes with a side note though, more on that later.

The story is very simple. A young San Diego couple is haunted by something in their house. They believe it is a demon who has been following the Katie character. They don't think it's the house that's haunted, but it's her who is haunted. So they can't go anywhere, that this thing won't follow. That's the first element of creepy in this movie. The movie is all hand held camera, but not all that shaky. We see the day time drama between the two, and we get a great glimpse into their relationship and you quickly love both of them and root for them. They were very believable as a couple, which just adds to the realism of the film. At night they have a camera set up in the bedroom to capture any strange happenings. And there are some straaaaannge happenings.

The performances of these two were shockingly good and extremely authentic. This movie is not real, but it felt as if we were watching actual lost footage. Their performances were not clean and never seemed scripted. They spoke like actual people and not all "Hollywood". Like I mentioned above, their realism as a couple and as normal people added so much to the likability of these characters as well as the tension of the film. You really felt for these guys. They also were quite funny, which just was a nice benefit to them as well as the movies story. Their humor eased the tension at times, which is needed for a film like this.Now on to what everyone really wants to know: is this movie as scary as everyone says it is? My answer: no. It was just a tad bit overhyped, and I fell victim to the hype. I now wish I had seen no previews for the film, or had read so much about it because it would have been a much more terrifying movie to experience. The preview was also way to revealing. HOWEVER, this movie IS extremely creepy and has some pretty darn scary moments and most of it is just so unnerving and tense. It may not have been super scary, but it was easily the creepiest movie I've ever seen (mind you I don't get scared easily in movies, and this movie creeped me out like no movie has since Poltergeist...so there ya go).

The movie was as realistic as watching one of your own home movies. THAT is why this movie is so scary. You can relate to these people, you can relate to hearing weird noises in your home. So you immediately connect with their situation. You find yourself immersed in their world so easily. When things start happening, it is done with no obvious visual effects or CGI. The visuals in this movie were incredible. This movie was made for $11,000, and had more impressive visuals than it's millions of dollar counterpart: Cloverfield. I had NO clue how they pulled off the stuff they did in this film, and I don't even care to find out.

The first half of the film is all build up, but it does have some freaky moments. Simple things like doors opening and closing, footsteps, banging on the walls, etc. It really builds up some intensity and you just KNOW something is going down by the end of this thing. In the first half when all the nightvision scenes come on, you can't help but feel a little nervous that something crazy is going to happen. When something really scary doesn't happen, you don't feel let down, at least I didn't, because that makes it more tense. The events escalate throughout the film. The second half is probably the scariest stuff I've ever seen in a movie, especially that final twenty minutes. I also want to point out that NONE of the scares were over the top and never became way to much. They were never laughable. For the most part all the scares were simplistic which just made it that much more freaky! I don't want to reveal ANY of the scares though.

There is a scene in this movie that really freaked me out as well as the audience, but I'm not about to reveal what it was. But it was just so unsettling and trippy that it made me partially uncomfortable to sleep in my bed. It has something to do with the bed, and everyone who has seen it probably knows what I'm talking about. It was THE most convincing and terrifying effect I think I've ever seen in any horror movie, and it was brilliant and scary.Also the last scene was super tense. I already knew what was going to happen, if you've seen the trailer, you can put two and two together and pretty much know how the movie will end. However, the minute leading up to the final scene was SO intense and I won't lie...even though I knew what was about to happen, my heart was racing. It was eerily quiet for a good 30 seconds, then....well....I won't go on. Ugh, gives me the heebie jeebies.

This movie may not scare everyone, but I will be honest with you...it scared me. Now that I'm here writing about it, and thinking about it...yes, this is easily the creepiest movie I've ever seen and I urge everyone to see it! It wasn't AS scary as it could have been though, if that makes any sense. But yeah...really freaky. It will give a lot of people nightmares, and it will make a lot of people to go home and sleep in their bed. Who knows what's really going on? I also just want to point out that this is a good movie in general. It is worthy of its current 92% on rotten tomatoes. Simple but entertaining and engaging story, realistic characters who you tend to love, and some great creep out moments! It was really entertaining, and I know for a fact already it will be my favorite horror movie of 2009 and really one of my favorite horror movies ever.

If you can...please go and see this movie...NOW! Really good movie.

2009 Review #37: Sugar

2009-10-02T11:16:00.000-07:00

Sugar

Rated R
(Language, some sexuality and brief drug use)
2 hours

Storyline:
Dominican baseball star Miguel "Sugar" Santos is recruited to play in the U.S. minor-leagues.

Starring:
Algenis Perez Soto
Rayniel Rufino
Andre Holland
Michael Gaston

Critics Grade:
A

My Grade:
A-

I'm going to try to keep this review nice and simple. This crazy of schedule of mine has been eating away at my free time, so I can't go into great detail with any of these reviews...sadly.

Sugar is a fantastic movie. In terms of sports related films, this will rank as one of my top favorites. I honestly believe it is one of the best films so far in 2009, and it's a shame that virtually knows it even exists. It's primarily a foreign language film, and I know that usually turns most audiences off. But it is barely a distraction.

The film was well written and quite moving. This isn't JUST a baseball movie. This is a character study about how much pressure young kids trying to get into the majors really have to go through. The character of Sugar was a pretty true to life characterization I thought. His struggles on and off the field were heartbreaking to watch at times. You really root for this guy, and hope he succeeds in his baseball and life dreams.

The fimaking was super good too. I had no real problems with it. The performances were authentic and gritty and were the best parts of the film. The screenplay was brilliant just like this movie. I'm sorry I have to half ass this review, I just don't have much time anymore. If you see this movie at Blockbuster or on Netflix, see it. Especially if your into a good dramatic sports film. I don't think you will be dissapointed. I loved it!

2009 Review #36: Coraline

2009-09-21T06:03:00.001-07:00

Coraline

Rated PG
(thematic elements, scary images, some language and suggestive humor)
1 hour 40 minutes

Storyline:
An adventurous girl finds another world that is a strangely idealized version of her frustrating home, but it has sinister secrets.

Voice Cast:
Dakota Fanning
Teri Hatcher
Jenifer Saunders
Ian McShane

Critics Grade:
B+

My Grade:
C-

I'm not going to say much about this movie. Coraline is a very, very, very strange little film. I could not tell if this was claymation or regular animation...whatever it was...was very creepy and quite disturbing to look at. This is supposed to be a movie geared for kids, but I think it's to frightening for children. Also the movie has this slow pace and to me was boring as all hell. I didn't laugh once, and for a kids movie...you should expect at least a couple laughs. I really don't know if most kids would find this movie very enjoyable. There really is no appeal or charm to it, and it might lose the interests of many youngins very quickly. But I don't know...maybe they liked it, I watched this on DVD and not in a theater to see how the kiddies reacted.

Coraline is not a bad film, it's just averagely decent with no appeal and has no charisma or any inviting qualities. If you compare this to Nightmare Before Christmas...well there is no comparison. That movie was at least fun and I know people of all ages loved it and still love it to this day. I didn't really care for the movie, I had a hard time staying engaged in the film. I guess you could at least give it a try with your kids...but it is a pretty dark flick, so be warned. Eh, kinda wished I passed on this movie. Oh well....

2009 Review #35: The Informant

2009-09-20T10:28:00.005-07:00

The Informant

Rated R
(Language)
1 hour 48 minutes

Storyline:
The U.S. government decides to go after an agri-business giant with a price-fixing accusation, based on the evidence submitted by their star witness, vice president turned informant Mark Whitacre.

Starring:
Matt Damon
Scott Bakula
Joel Mchale

Critics Grade:
B

My Grade:
B-

OK I have to apologize in advance. This is going to be a short review and probably not one of my best. I have had a very busy, crazy week working two jobs and not getting a lot of sleep and I have the same kind of week for this coming week. So I won't be able to dedicate a lot of time to writing detailed reviews...because I'm just exhausted!

I was never really really wanting to see this movie, but I heard enough good things about it that finally I caved in and said...OK I'll go. If I'm being honest, I thought this was a good movie but I thought it was far from a great movie...in my eyes. Other people really enjoyed it, I heard a group of people in my theater saying how awesome it was to them after it was over. For me though, and maybe it was because I'm so tired, this movie sort of dragged a lot. There was a lot of moments that just went way to long or seemed redundant. I mean it had a well written screenplay, I just don't know if the direction blended well with it.

The cast was pretty decent, but it was led wonderfully by Oscar winner Matt Damon (Best Screenplay for Good Will Hunting). I'm not a huge fan of Damon and I think he's slightly over rated as an actor, but he finally did something in my eyes that was truly great. I thought this was easily his best performance that I have seen. It was unique and quirky. I thought he was definitely good at delivering an oddball comedic performance. This character was really annoying at times though, and got on my nerves, but Damon was quite effective at portraying him. Scott Bakula (Major League: Back to the Minors) was a bit strange and I don't know if his performance was just bad or if the character he was playing was just....weird. I didn't like him that much. Glad to see Joel Mchale (TV's The Soup and Community)in a big movie! He's quite hilarious, but not so much in this movie...he seemed out of place. There was a huge amount of cameos in this movie...most of them were great!

The movie had this odd 70's feel to it, even though the story took place in the 90's. To me that was a little strange, but at the same time I think the movie looked really good. You know this is by no means a bad movie. I don't think it should be nominated for Best Picture this year though. People are already predicting it. I don't think it has that Best Picture quality. It's a good movie that just isn't all that great or memorable. I would definitely recommend you see it though!

2009 Review #34: Look (Straight to DVD)

2009-09-17T06:00:00.006-07:00

Look

Rated R

(strong sexual content, nudity, pervasive language, some violence and brief drug use)

1 hour 38 minutes

Storyline:
Americans are captured on surveillance cameras at least 170 times a day mostly without their knowledge. This produces millions of hours of footage revealing the nature of those hidden secrets.

Critics Grade:

D+

My Grade:
C

A bit of a disclaimer: the events in this movie are NOT real. These are characters played by actors, there is not one single real aspect of this film. Technically speaking, you can't get audio through most surveillance cameras because from I understand...it's against the law (but yes I may very well be wrong on that). Also I highly doubt if these were real people, that they would ever consent to the film maker showing this video...considering all that happens. But they had to make a movie out of this, so in this movies world, you can get audio, and I'm not a picky person on a films believability anyway. But anyway, yes, this is a scripted film it has a film director putting it all together. What this movie is, is a film told only through various security cameras and it follows the lives of a handful of people having pretty a pretty cruddy week. Their lives intersect at times.

The concept is actually pretty cool, that's what got me to watch the movie in the first place. In the end, the movie comes off way to gimmicky and a lot of it does not feel very authentic. The actors at times tried way to hard to act "natural" and out of their acting element. What this did though, was make it obvious that they were acting...over acting at times actually. For me that took away from the realism this film was obviously trying to showcase. I get the point of the movie...that we are being watched everywhere we go by big brother. That our lives aren't as private or personal as we make ourselves believe. I thought that was a cool point. I just wish they used more skilled unknown actors who can play off authenticity better.

There isn't a real major storyline. Like I said, it just follows the week of several characters who are either cheating on their spouses; who are being tormented by co-workers; who are spying on their nanny, etc. Other than that, there isn't a whole of story or much character development. You can't really expect that from a movie like this though, so that's OK. The idea of this story was to show us that we are never alone even if we are literally by ourselves...make sense?

There seemed to be a lot of camera in bathroom and fitting rooms...again, illegal in our world, but OK in this films world. Ha, just thought it was kind of funny. The opening scene took place in a changing room and was really, really awkward...it was of two girls getting naked and chatting away as they tried on clothes and then started doing fake sexual things. Creepy and weird. This whole movie was creepy and weird. It definitely had a few tense moments, especially with the serial killer characters. It some cool moments, some entertaining moments, some sad moments, but overall this was just an alright movie for me. Not one I'd ever buy or watch again...but it wasn't terrible. Just a fairly average movie that could have been so much better and so much more effective.

...but that's just me folks.

2009 Review #33: Disney Earth (Documentary)

2009-09-16T06:30:00.002-07:00

Disney Earth

Rated G

1 hour 30 minutes

Subject Material:
Feature-length version of the documentary TV series "Planet Earth" (2006), following the migration paths of three animal families.

Narrated By:

James Earl Jones

Critics Grade:
B

My Grade:
A+

The documentary "Earth" is a must see film in my opinion! I don't think it was the most educational documentary, which is proably the only flaw the movie has. Not all documentaries have to teach though, some are there to just show. And there is a lot to show here...a lot of magnificant beauty. A lot of sadness. A lot of wonder. And a lot that we as humans take for grantite.

This movie is narrated by James Earl Jones (Star Wars trilogy, The Sandlot) and it brings to our eyes the migration journies of three families in the animal kingdom. We also get to see other various animals in their natural habitat. We see a family of polar bears, a family of elephants, a family of whales; plus some really cool exotic birds, some feisty and hungry lions, and other wonderous creatures. The movie footage (as well as the TV specials) was used from over 4,000 hours of filming and spanned over a year or so. That alone is an incredible acheivment.

Like I said this movie wasn't so much about education as it was about not only entertainment but also about exposing us to a world that most of us choose to forget even exists. A lot of people mistreat animals or consider animals these dumb creatures only good for food, beauty products, etc. This film shows how similar to the human race these animals truly are. I was amazed by how they protected their young; how they hunted for food; how they knew when danger was around; how playful they are; how frustrated the "parent" gets at their child going off the path. It's incredible to me that most of us humans don't appreciate this enough, I'm totally guilty of that myself. These animals have genuine feelings. They get scared and nervous, they get happy and playful, they get angry. I was blown away by how this Documentarian captured all of this for us to see...and it was stunning.

This movie almost brought this big guy to tears on a few occassions. The direction of the film was flawless, and they brought these animals stories to life in such a way that we could somehow relate to. There were a few scenes of these cute animals getting killed (although they cut away once the actual kill happens) or getting lost forever. They have scenes of animals running at top speed to get away from predators and you can hear the animals cry for help and it was just so unbelievably heartbreaking. Or there was a scene where a baby elephant got lost from his mother never to be seen again. Or the part where a mama elephant was attacked by a group of lions. Then there was the tale of the papa polar bear trying to get back to his family but the ice is melting and can't get to land and he begins to starve. Devistating tale that killed me inside! But this is the cirlce of life, this is what goes on every day in the animal kingdom and this is something we just don't appreciate or realize.

There was the really neat segment showing us some exotic birds. It was adorable because there is this bizzare bird whose wings flap out...and you just have to see the picture to completely understand (pictured to the left). This segment showed how intelligent and human like animals really can be. They showed this bird cleaning his living area. He got this piece of bark, and started to scrub down the branches he lives on. He even realized he "missed a spot" and went back to clean it up. He tidied up the floor by moving leaves around. Then a female bird came over and he actually did a dance for her. It was so sweet and so stinking cute! I wish I could visit someo of these places to see these guys for real.

Other aspects of this film like the musical score were great! The score was an orchestra I believe and it added tension when animals were being chased, it added to the dread when an animal lost it's battle with a predator, and it added to some of the uplifting stories. The cinematography was some of the most sensational I've ever seen in a film. This guy captured some of the most beautiful things I've ever layed eyes on. This movie wasn't scripted. There were no special effects. This was all reality and it is a beautiful reality. I loved every second of this movie, and I wish it was a longer film. It will move you, it will make you sad, it will definitely make you smile. This is an incredible, incredible, incredible documentary that EVERYONE should see as soon as possible. If not to slap some sense into you, then to just entertain you...because through it all...entertaining this movie certainly was!

DVD Update Reviews (09/15/2009)

2009-09-15T05:30:00.001-07:00

I apologize for the late weekly DVD Update blog. I now have two jobs and have to wake up at 4:30 in the AM for the next few weeks and don't get home from both jobs until about 6:30 at night. It's exhausting. So my DVD updates might be a bit smaller then new few weeks and if I have any 2009 reviews that will be pretty short. But they will be there! So without further ado, here are more reviews from all the DVD's I've seen in the past week or so. I also am sorry...there won't be any pictures with this one...have barely any energy right now.

The Devil's Backbone (AKA El Espinazo Del Diablo) (2001 - Rated R - 1 hour 46 minutes): Guillermo Del Toro made this Spanish language movie, and he is responsible for the brilliant Pan's Labrynth as well as the upcoming Hobbit films. After seeing this movie along with Labrnth, I have NOTHING but confidence that he will do justice to the Hobbit flicks. This guy is really a master director, and you can knock me all you want for saying that. This is advertised as a "ghost/horror" flick but it's not really a horror movie and it's not even remotely scary. It had this deeper dramatic story to it (much like Labrynth) that was so very well written. I was surprised by how much of a plot was here in this movie. The tension was excellent; the scenery was great; the performances were super; the direction was beautiful; this movie was downright fantastic! I loved it! Rent it! My Grade: A

----------

Were the World Mine (2008 - Rated PG-13 - 1 hour 35 minutes): OK, I'm sure no one I know has seen or even heard of this movie. I didn't even know it existed until about two weeks ago. It's about this gay high school kid who gets a part in the school play and somehow gets the power to turn everyone gay with this weird flower thing. Sounds weird huh? Well it is...and I don't suggest watching it. I assumed it was going to be a funny movie, but it wasn't. It was a half musical half dramatic movie and it was super lame. The acting was pretty bad. The writing, especially the dialog, was cheeseball to the max. The music scenes were overdone, to long, and just corny! This movie was not terrible, but I say it's not that watchable or enjoyable of a movie. My Grade: D+
(This movie is available to watch instantly on Netflix)

----------

Glick Doesn't Do Red Carpet (2007 - NR - 30 minutes): OK this isn't really a movie. This is a half hour interview special done by the GREAT Jiminy Glick (played hilariously by Martin Short). Glick had his own Comedy Central interview show a few years back that was so, so, so, funny! Go on Youtube.com or Hulu to check out some of his interviews and I dare you not to laugh!! Obviously he is not a real person, he is a character played by Short. But this fat, sweaty character is so clueless about the actors he interviews and he talks with this range of voice (from deep to real high) and it's something you just have to see to believe. This movie was from the Spirit Awards for the 2007 year and features Glick interviewing many big name stars. It was great! Not his best interviews, but still funny as all hell! Check it out! My Grade: A-
(This special is available to watch instantly on Netflix and clips are available on Youtube.com)

----------

Paranoia 1.0 (AKA One Point O) (2004 - Rated R - 1 hour 32 minutes): This is a very unique film. The story kicks off the second the movie starts. There is basically no character buildup, we don't get any real insight into the main guy before the craziness starts. That's OK though, sometimes that works out well. I thought this was a super bizzare film, that I didn't quite understand fully. When it ended I felt a bit cheated because I wasn't sure if anything was really resolved or what exactly happened in the end. Sometimes I'm a bit "movie stupid" though. I see so many movies, that sometimes a film's plotline just escapes my brain. But this movie looked really cool. And from what I got from the story, I enjoyed it for the most part. The performances were good, nothing really bad or really great but they were above decent. While I can't exactly explain this movie about a mysterious empty box that shows up on a man's doorstep...I can recommend this movie. Strange I know. The look and feel of the film is really cool. The story is different and fairly orginal. I don't know...check it out if you want! My Grade: B-
(This movie is available to watch instantly on Netflix)

----------

The Contract (2007 - Rated R - 1 hour 36 minutes): You know at first thought, I kind of liked this movie. But the more I think about it I wonder...why the hell was this movie made? I don't want to ruin anything...but this film doesn't have a point. It's about a father/son combo who run into a crazy group of contract killers in the woods. It stars Oscar winner Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar Baby, Shawshank Redemption) and John Cusack (Identitiy, 1408) in a STRAIGHT TO DVD movie...who would have though those two actors would ever headline one of those! Well this movie is very much one of those now that I think of it. This is the type of movie we have seen before. The bad guy who secretly has a heart and a soft spot for the truly good people in this world. But here...it doesn't make any sense. This whole movie kind of doesn't make sense. Not a lot about it is all that fresh or all that good. I forgot about this movie actually. The ending was dumb and didn't leave any closure for the film. The actions of the some of the characters were so random and out of whack that it made the whole movie pointless to even exist. I don't know...I don't honestly suggest this movie, but of course don't let me stop you from seeing it if you have interest. Some people might like it...me...not so much. My Grade: D+
(This movie is available to watch Instantly on Netflix)

--------------

I promise I will be back with more!! Until then...happy movie watching!

2009 Review #32: Shorts

2009-09-12T16:32:00.004-07:00

Shorts

Rated PG
(Mild action and some rude humor)
1 hr 29 minutes

Storyline:
A young boy's discovery of a colorful, wish-granting rock causes chaos in the suburban town of Black Falls when jealous kids and scheming adults alike set out to get their hands on it.

Starring:
Jimmy Bennett
Trevor Gagnon
Jolie Vanier
James Spader
Leslie Mann
Jon Cryer
William H. Macy

Critics Grade:
D+

My (adult mindset) Grade:
D+

My (kid at heart mindset) Grade:
C+

OK when you see a movie like Shorts, and your an adult you cannot possibly critique the film from your normal adult mindset. That is just plain silly. You have to understand going into the movie that this is a film meant for children. It is not meant to entertain adults. It is meant for adults to waste their money on so their kids can get out of the house and see a flick. But if you are an adult and going to see this movie without kids (like me and buddy Matt did today...I don't know why) you cannot, cannot, CANNOT be a snob when it comes to reviewing this movie unless you are going to it from the mindset of the target audience: children.

That being said, I will give you my quick adult mindset review of the film. This movie was stupid. It lacked any kind of charm or entertaining value. The dialog was so cheesy and horrendous and it was NOT funny in the least. I don't think I laughed from any of the jokes at all. The kids were OK, but the adults were much better. The only thing I really liked about the movie was Emmy winner James Spader (TV's Boston Legal). He was pretty similar to his Alan Shore character and I thought he was pretty good for the crap writing he had to deal with. But his sinister character didn't have many corny lines to deliver, his were alright.But in all honestly...disregard that last paragraph...it doesn't matter what I think from an adult mindset about this movie. Of course it's going to be dumb! Now from a child's standpoint...I think this movie would be pretty entertaining for any kid age 5-12 (12 may be pushing it). But there were at least 10 kids in the audience today (it was not a packed house) and I really didn't hear much laughter. There was never a moment where all the kids laughed at once. There was a chuckle here, a chuckle there but no kid in my theater genuinely laughed at any part of the movie. So I base my kid like review off of that.

I think it will be pretty fun in a kid's eyes, but I don't know if many kids will honestly love this movie. A lot of the humor seemed to whiz right by the children in this audience (as it did the adults too) but some funny parts snuck in for them. The movie has kid like special effects (nothing to scary), and it's pretty faced paced. There aren't many slow or boring parts that kids would be restless in. So I mean...yeah, take your kids to see it...I don't think they would be dissapointed, I just don't think they will want you to buy it for them when it's out on DVD.

Not really to much to say about this movie though. From my snobby adult mindset though...this movie sucks. Haha.

2009 Review #31: Whiteout

2009-09-12T15:00:00.002-07:00

Whiteout

Rated R

(Graphic violence and images, brief language and nudity)

1 hour 36 minutes

Storyline:

U.S. Marshal Carrie Stetko tracks a killer in Antarctica, as the sun is about to set for six months.

Starring:

My Grade:

D+

As of this review, this film is sitting at a 7% fresh rating on rotten tomatoes, making it one of the worst reviewed movies of the year by far. I honestly don't believe that Whiteout is worthy of a 7% rating...I'd say it's in the 45% realm. Meaning it's not an AWFUL movie like the mainstream critics suggest it's just not a good movie...whatsoever. It has virtually no redeeming qualities.

Whiteout suffers from extremely poor writing. For a crime mystery film, it is not very mysterious. It is not at all suspenseful and has not one moment of real tension. It is not scary in the least. There is never a point in the film where you feel any real danger is looming for our main character. The plot device of the murdered man in Antarctica sounds like it could be interesting...but it was major dullsville! This ranks up there with The Black Dahlia as being one of the biggest snoozefest crime mysteries in recent memory. I mean there is just no excitement. Not to mention the fact that this particular mystery is so bland and I could care a less. When the bad guy was revealed...it was like...yeah...OK...so what? Then another baddie was revealed and it was just so nonchalant and that whole thing just seemed to end abruptly. It was badly pieced together, and the whole screenplay was a sloppy piss poor mess. I mean the flasback scenes were sore corny and badly done. The dialog was lame for the most part. I don't know...they swung and missed bad on the writing aspect.The production value itself was pretty decent. You know...the movie looked pretty cool, not outstanding, but it was probably the best quality of the film. Although there were parts where the special effects snow was so obviously CGI it was almost laughable. The performances were just OK and I'm giving some leeway there too. Kate Beckinsale (Snow Angels, Nothing But the Truth) is usually pretty good, she has an incredible year in 2008. But here...she is just about average. I suspect that wasn't here fault though. I think she did the very best she could with the material she was given. The other actors were all very standard. There were some weak scenes performance wise, and there were never great scenes. But this isn't the type of movie that's about performances, it's mainly about story and execution and it failed pretty bad in that sense.

Listen, do I honestly think that this will be THE worst movie of 2009? No, not even bottom 5 probably. Like I said it's not an atrocious mess, but it's nothing even remotely good either. It teeters right in between and I don't suggest anyone I know waste money on this movie. I have a weird feeling about this movie...I can't honestly say it's terrible. Just don't see it....and I know that makes no sense.

2009 Review #30: Adventureland

2009-09-11T22:45:00.004-07:00

Adventureland

Rated R

(language, drug use, sexual references)

1 hour 47 minutes

Storyline:

A comedy set in the summer of 1987 and centered around a recent college grad (Eisenberg) who takes a nowhere job at his local amusement park, only to find it's the perfect course to get him prepared for the real world.

Starring:

A-

My Grade:
C+

OK so I have a few reviews to do today so I'm going to keep them all fairly short and simple. Adventureland is one of those rated R comedies that feels almost like one of the Judd Apatow flicks, but he had nothing to do with this one. But you know what I mean right? This is another film about a group of horny twenty-somethings trying to shack up and/or find love. This one is set in a summer carnival type place and it's employees are a bunch of young college bound kids.

I never really wanted to see this movie in theaters, but I did at least want to check it out on DVD. Honestly, I thought it was good but I didn't really love it. There wasn't a whole lot that was actually wrong with the movie, but I don't know...I just wasn't feeling it if that makes any sense. I think it had some definite funny moments, but this wasn't exactly a comedy in all sense of the word. Adventureland is a dramedy and most of the humor stems from sexual jokes. There are a couple slapstick, random jokes thrown in though. I appreciated the fact that the film maker actually tried to make a serious movie here, and his attempt was pretty good in the end. Some pretty decent writing as well.Performances were slightly above average for this type of film, but nothing truly stood out. I'm not a fan of Kristen Stewart (Twilight craze) by any means, but honestly she didn't really get on my nerves in this movie. She gave a fairly decent performance. Jesse Eisenberg (The Squid and the Whale, Zombieland) was average as well, he wasn't bad at all just not all that amazing or really all that funny. I guess the roles I liked the most were from Bill Hader (Superbad) and Kristen Wiig (SNL, Ghost Town) although even they weren't up to their usual hilarious antics.

All in all this is a "good" movie but for me it's not one I'd ever buy or really ever care to watch again. That's why it gets a C+ from me. It was good without being all that appealing in the end. I don't know. Don't take my word for it, if you like this kind of flick...I suggest you go out and rent it. Why not? It ain't all that bad!

DVD Update Reviews (09/06/2009)

2009-09-06T09:39:00.008-07:00

Well another week has gone by, and more and more "old timey" movies have blessed my eyes. Some of them were great, some were OK, and some were just plain yucky! So without further ado, here are more of my DVD update reviews. Keep in mind, I had not seen ANY of these movies before, that's why I review them on here.

American Beauty (Rated R, 2 hour 2 minutes): It's funny that I had never seen this movie until this week, because this is the type of film that's right up my alley. I love a good drama and especially one about crazy or dysfunctional families. This really is a brilliant movie, I think it did definitely deserve its win for Best Picture in 2000. It's a very well written script and masterfully directed. Beautiful cinematography. SUPER great performances from Kevin Spacey (who won the Oscar for this movie) and Annette Benning (who was nominated for her performance). Sam Mendes must like this genre, because he did almost the same thing in 2008 with Revolutionary Road with Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. That movie is not as quirky as this one, but it's the same concept. Both really great movies! My Grade: A

----------

Ferris Buellers Day Off (Rated PG-13, 1 hour 43 minutes): Katie and Julie have gotten me to watch another 80's classic that I had never seen. I did like this movie, it was funny and simple. I can see why it's considered a classic, but to me it's slightly overrated. I don't think it's as good as everyone makes it out to be, but don't get me wrong, it's still an entertaining, fun, and good flick. I liked it, and I'm glad I watched it. I think the fact that I didn't see this at a younger age tarnished my thoughts of it just a little. Matthew Broderick was great, even though he was a 24 year old playing a high school student. Alan Ruck was 29 playing a high school student!! That was common in 80's movie though. So I've finally seen it, and I liked it for the most part...just wasn't AS good as I was expecting. My Grade: B+

----------

Red Mist (AKA "Freakdog", Rated R, 1 hour 22 minutes): This movie is available to watch instantly on Netflix. There's one huge problem with the movie right off the bat: the sound does not match the mouths moving. It was like an old kung fu movie. That really gave this movie some bad marks for me right away. Other than that...it wasn't really a good movie. It had a bunch of random unknown actors who couldn't act to save their lives (yeah yeah, I know I should try acting right?? Well guess what, I'm NOT a paid actor, but THEY are...). It has a silly and unoriginal plot (it kind reminds me of Final Destination in a weird way as well as I Know What You Did Last Summer). It was an all around cornball movie and it wasn't scary in the least (to me...doesn't mean it won't scare others). I don't even know why it's called Red Mist...My Grade: D

----------

The Sasquatch Gang (Rated PG-13, 1 hour 26 minutes): This is essentially the same type of movie as Napolean Dynamite, it even has some of the same cast. It's one of those random indy comedies that doesn't have much to do and isn't about much of anything. The characters are totally off the wall weird (there is even a character who has that weird gay lisp like Kip from Napolean). But I actually found this movie to be quite amusing. I enjoy this kind of humor. There were a lot of Hilarious moments and some great lines. Justin Long (Accepted, Drag Me To Hell) was definitely the best here. His character was so strange! This movie is ridiculous, but it's a fun kind of ridiculous. I liked it, didn't love it, wouldn't buy it, but I liked it for the purpose of a one viewing experience. My Grade: B-

----------

Shiver (AKA "Eskalofrio", Rated R, 1 hour 31 minutes): This is a Spanish language film from a year or so ago. This movie is also available to watch instantly on Netflix. I've come to the conclusion that America does not make movies as good as other countries. I always find myself more engaged in a foreign language film because they're usually so original or at least make an unoriginal idea unique. This is a very interesting horror flick. Some may find the protagonist of the film a bit cheesy, but I thought it was different. It had some good creepy moments. The movie was shot beautifully and sounded awesome! Good performances too! This is "monster"-esque film, and it's one of the better ones that I've seen in quite some time. It wasn't silly or stupid as much as it could have easily been. I would definitely recommend this movie to any fan of horror...as long as you don't mind reading subtitles. My Grade: A-

----------

The Watcher in the Woods (Rated PG, 1 hour 24 minutes): My buddy Matt got this movie from the public library...so we watched it...for fun. You know...I think I am all 80's-d out! There's only so much synth music one can take in a months time!! This is one of those random attempts at a horror movie from 1980. To make it even better: it's a Walt Disney Presents film! This isn't exactly your typical Disney movie though. It attempted to be scary...and it failed. This movie is so dumb! I think it also has one of the worst actresses of all time...and she did not do much after this movie thankfully. Even billion time Oscar nominee Bette Davis was in this movie and she was awful!! This whole movie was atrocious. The ending was ridiculous and so pieced together very badly. That being said...it was a fun movie to watch. I was entertained by how bad it was. That's why I won't give this movie an F grade. I appreciate when a bad film can at least provide some enjoyment at it's expense. No I don't recommend you watch this movie alone for any artistic value...but watch it with some movie buddy films who will appreciate how bad this is, and find entertainment from that! My Grade: D

----------

Well that's all for this week folks! Again these are all on DVD for your viewing pleasure! Enjoy! See ya next week!

2009 Review #29: Watchmen

2009-09-02T23:03:00.002-07:00

Watchmen

Rated R

(Graphic violence, language, sexuality and some nudity)

2 hours 35 minutes

Storyline:

In an alternate 1985 where former superheroes exist, the murder of a colleague sends active vigilante Rorschach into his own sprawling investigation, uncovering something that could completely change the course of history as we know it.

Starring:

C+

My Grade:

OK it took me quite some time to watch this movie, I'll admit that. I honestly never had that much of an interest in seeing it when all the hype came around for this flick. Usually I enjoy a good action movie and I find superhero movies pretty darn entertaining, but there was something about this movie that never peaked my full interest. Well I finally caved in and rented it on Netflix to check it out. I have to say I really was a bit surprised by what I saw...I wasn't blown away or anything, but I found it to be entertaining enough.

The movie is visually stunning! I mean this is one of the coolest damn looking movies I've seen in a while. It used a lot of the same techniques that 300 tried to use, but I think Watchmen executed the visual stunt with more awesomeness. The slow down camera effect was actually pretty sweet in this movie whereas in 300 it seemed a little silly. That and the special effects were just amazing to look at. Everything from Dr. Manhattan to the numerous things going kaboom, I thought this special effects team did a freaking great job! This is by all means a visual effects movie, but it was never to distracting from the overall story. At times it did seem to much, but never long enough for me to really care. I liked the mask work for Rorschach...that was pretty interesting...even though they never explained how that actually works.

To go along with that, the camera work was phenomenal. I love it when a film uses brilliant cinematography, because it adds so much to how good a movie is (and a lot of people don't actually realize that). The camera work here truly captured this fictional 1985 world with such beauty and also some real grittiness. I feel like whenever a film noir type movie comes around, we usually get solid cinematography from it, and this movie is part noir. Zach Snyder has an excellent talent for directing a film to make it look the best it can be, and he definitely showcased it here. He also chose really cool music to tie into the film and a lot of it made it pretty exciting. I'm also a sucker for good use of music (soundtrack or scoring).

Watchmen had a fairly large cast, with a lot of recognizable faces (well...behind those masks of course). Honestly I was very surprised by how good the performances really were. Oscar nominee Jackie Earle Haley (Little Children, upcoming Nightmare on Elm Street remake) was my personal favorite. I kind of liked how his voice in the film was just about identical to Christian Bales Batman (in those films it was annoying) but Haley's version was great. It really brought this character to life and he did a brilliant job portraying him. Billy Crudup (Almost Famous) has always been a reliable actor in his so far short career. I don't know if he actually played Dr. Manhattan or just did his voice...but he did a solid job with it I thought. The rest of the cast were all very good in my opinion. Not Oscar worthy by any means, but they carried the film rather well.

I was able to follow the storyline for the most part, and I liked what I was able to get. I like these superhero movies that have these cool crime storylines and not just stopping burglars. There was a serious story to the film and I liked it for the most part. What I didn't like, and I knock this movie down a lot for this, was that you can tell it was more appealing to fans of the graphic novel. The story had a ton going on, and it started to get a tad confusing towards the middle. The ending also kind of lost me a little. I feel like we had a film made that was pretty damn loyal to the graphic novel. That's awesome for the fans of that, but for people like me...you tend to get lost in the mix. It got jumbled at parts and I didn't understand a good chunk of this movie. I don't like that. You have to make a movie that will appeal to everyone who goes to see it. The new Batman series has done an excellent job with this. But overall, the story was pretty easy to follow. There was definitely some good writing here.

There is something I'd like to clear up. There was a lot of talk and negatively surrounding Dr. Manhattan. People made comments like "Yeah if you like to look at a bunch of blue penis you will love this movie". There was a whole hooplah of people reacting to the fact that Dr. Manhattan was naked the whole movie. Yes, he certainly was, I'm not denying that. But the stuff about seeing his genitalia "the whole movie" is a HUGE over reaction! To be honest...I didn't even notice (get all your gay jokes out now). In order to really see his genitalia...you have to actually deliberately look down to see it. Most of the camera shots of this are far enough way that it's not even THAT noticeable. This is a rated R movie not NC-17. And he was all blue so everything faded in. The people who joked about it and complained about it...well...those are the people who purposely sought it out on screen. The character is maybe on screen for a total of 35 minutes of this movie and it's a 2 hour 35 minute film. Yeah...people totally over reacted to that aspect. You all looked for it when his character was there...you know you did. And you honestly complain about it because YOU deliberately looked for it.

But yeah, overall this is a pretty good film and that surprised me. It wasn't perfect, just because it had a lot of elements that appeal only to the fans of the graphic novel. There is some sweet action scenes, some pretty awesome fight sequences, GREAT visuals, solid performances. Prepare for a 2 1/2 hour chunk of your day to go missing though. This movie does drag at times, and it feels like a long movie. There are some super long movies that are so good and so well paced that it doesn't feel like its running time (Inglorious Basterds is a good example). This movie is also pretty violent and gets pretty bloody at times so don't let your kids see it. And yes, there is penis on screen...althought not that noticeable. So really don't let your kids see it. Ha!

Check out Watchmen if you have some free time and haven't seen it yet...it was an alright movie!

DVD Update Reviews (09/01/2009)

2009-09-01T11:20:00.001-07:00

So it's been a little over a week since my last random movie review blog. I'll try my best to do one of these every week or so, depending on how many older, pre-2009 movies I see during said week. Well since a week ago I've seen 5 more movies via Netflix or various other ways. So here are my reviews:

The Br eakfast Club (Rated R, 1 hour 37 minutes): Yes, this is another one of those movies that everyone has seen but me...the supposed film buff. Look I'm working on catching up OK?? That being said, I'm so mad at myself for not seeing this movie sooner! This was a fantastic movie, probably one of the best movies the 80's ever produced! It had such a realistic story of high school kids. THESE are real kids (even though they were all in at least their mid to late 20's at the time). Not like the crap attempt Hollywood makes these days to chronicle the life of high school kids that is NOTHING like high school. This movie had a very well written screenplay and actually some pretty solid performances. I just simply loved this movie. A lot. My Grade: A+

----------

Noises Off! (Rated PG-13, 1 hour 41 minutes): This was an early 90's movie with quite a big cast. Michael Caine, John Ritter, Carol Burnett, Christopher Reeve, Nicollete Sheridan, Julie Haggerty all headline this film. I think I have seen bits of this as a kid, but I really didn't remember much about it. This is one heck of a funny movie! I loved how it was put together as well: in 3 acts. The first act is all about their dress rehersal going completely wrong. One set, one long scene. The second act is my favorite. It is the matinee show. As the play is going on, a silent fight is going on backstage. It was so brilliantly done, and hilarious! The 3rd act is the play going terribly wrong! This movie was so good. The performances were very comical. My one problem is that it ended rather abrubtly. These characters had a lot of issues and it just sort of seemed to go away way to quickly. As if the ending was lazily put together. Oh well...still a fun movie! My Grade: B+

----------

P2 (Rated R, 1 hour 38 minutes): On occassion, I feel like watching a movie I know is going to be bad, sometimes it can be fun. And boy oh boy is this a bad movie. This is an AWFUL movie! No wonder it lasted only two weeks in theaters. The acting is atrocious (can't knock it to much for that though, this IS a horror movie). The plotline is dumb and so far from original its laughable. The characters make retarded decisions. It's overly gruesome for no apparent reason. They kill a dog (which is a big no no for me even thought it was evil). This was such a crap fest movie that it was almost fun to watch. I seriously would never suggest this movie to any living person on this earth. It isn't the worst I've ever seen though, so it has that going for it. My grade: F

----------

Primer (Rated PG-13, 1 hour 17 minutes): You know, I like to consider myself a fairly intelligent person. By no means am I a genious, but I know enough to get by in life. When I watched this movie, that all went out the window. I seriously felt like a moron while sitting through this movie. This movie was in some kind of nerd genious (no offense) language that I don't know if any common folk like myself could ever get. I don't know what the hell this movie was even about. I couldn't begin to explain to you. That's the main reason I didn't care for this movie. I just did not get it. If you're making a film, you should make it so that people can understand the premise. I guess maybe I am a little stupid, ha! The performances were pretty ameteur (but they were rookie actors, so that's not so bad) and very very very one note. These characters showed zero emotion. The direction was cool and the look was pretty neat. Other than that...I can't recommend this movie because I don't even know what the hell I watched. My Grade: D+

----------

Visioneers (Unknown rating, 1 hour 32 minutes): This is a weird, weird, weird movie to say the least. I appreciate the far out originality attempt this movie made. These characters live in a world where flipping each other off is a way of saying hello. They pronounce chaos like "chay-oss", and best of all...when they get to stressed out...they explode...literally. The movie was very well made and had a star performance from Zach Galifinakas (who was not funny in this movie) and I was surprised by his dramatic side. However, the storyline...another one I just didn't comprehend. Maybe I'm losing my brain cells or something, but I don't know exactly what this movie was supposed to be about. It was way to artsy and bizare (and I love that stuff, but this one was to much for me). I didn't feel anything from it, and I didn't get anything from it. I don't know, it looked cool, had very good performances...but lacked for me in story and all around purpose. My Grade: C

----------

Like usual, all of these films are now on DVD.

2009 Review #28: Sunshine Cleaning

2009-08-30T13:30:00.001-07:00

Sunshine Cleaning

Rated R

(Language, disturbing images, minor sexuality and drug use)

1 hour 31 minutes

Storyline:

In order to raise the tuition to send her young son to private school, a mom starts an unusual business -- a biohazard removal/crime scene clean-up service -- with her unreliable sister.

Starring:

B-

My Grade:

B-

You know I was expecting a dark comedy from this movie, along the lines of the Best Picture nominee, Little Miss Sunshine. However, comedy I did not get...at least not all that much. Sunshine Cleaning had only a few funny moments, but it was the standard amount you see in any dramatic film...which is what this movie categorically falls into. So on that level I was a bit disappointed, given the premise of the film...two sisters who start a crime scene clean up business to make ends meet. But this was much more of a serious film, that bordered on depressing.

That being said, I did like this movie very much. It was by no means the best movie of 2009...not even close really. But I though the storyline was quite moving and at times charming. There seems to be a lot going on in this movie, but the core story of this family struggling to get by financially and just in life in general was well told. I liked the dynamic of this family. The cooky old dad, the oddball, eccentric daughter and the other daughter who is not really like the rest of them. She has a son that's a bit of a hyper case, and is kind of annoying. Their story though was sweet and at times quite dark. The background story of their dead mother was pretty emotional and tugged at the heart strings a little.

I enjoyed the scenes of the sisters cleaning up after dead people. That is where a lot of the humor in the film came from. There were also some very touching scenes. There is a scene where Amy Adam's comforts an old woman who's husband just killed himself. It showed that these girls weren't just there to clean up blood, they were they to help and I thought that was a nice touch to the story.

The problem I had with this movie is that there was way to much going on at time. There is a side story with Steve Zahn's (Joy Ride, Strange Wilderness)character that really just ends up falling flat. Another side story involves one of the sisters trying to connect with the daughter with one of the dead victims they cleaned up after. That story was very odd and I felt like it was just a space filler. I know that it was an attempt to humanize Emily Blunt's character but something about it was weird. The girl she was trying to connect with is a lesbian, but Blunt's character is not and that whole thing just felt strange and way out of place. Then by the end of that story arch, nothing really happens...I just didn't get it.

Then we have the story of Oscar winner Alan Arkin (Little Miss Sunshine) trying to sell random things in grocery stores and restaurants. I guess I didn't see the importance of this aspect of his life. I guess he was trying to make time go by since he no longer had his wife...but they never really explained his odd behavior. Then we have the tale of Oscar nominee Amy Adam's (Junebug, Doubt)characters son who can't seem to fit in at school. He is a bit of a troublemaker and no one knows what to do with him. Again...this story falls flat in the end, there is no resolve. Finally there is character you think has a thing for Amy Adams and you never really know if she likes him back. Again...no real resolve there. Overall though, the story of the family as a whole was the most prominent one in the film, and was written very very well.

The performances were pretty good. I thought Emily Blunt was awesome in The Devil Wears Prada and I believe she was robbed of some award attention. Here she was dawning an American accent and did so fairly well. She was good in this movie, but there were times where her performance was a little too...fake, I guess would be the best way to describe it. Amy Adam's was definitely the best in the movie. She's always turned in solid performances and I think she will win herself an Oscar one day. There was a pretty powerful scene towards the end of the movie involving her talking on a CB radio that was her shining moment in the film. Arkin was good, but not as good as he was in Little Miss Sunshine. But I still thought he was entertaining.

All in all, this is a solid movie. It suffers from trying to do to much to make us feel sympathetic towards the characters, but it didn't need to do all that. We already feel for these characters once we learn of their past. I wish they would have focused more on that and eliminated some of the random side stories that led up to nothing. I would recommend this film though to anyone. I don't know if it's for everyone though. It's a bit of a "slow" movie, but I like those kind of flicks. It's on DVD now...check it out! What bad can it do??

2009 Review #27: I Love You, Man

2009-08-25T16:32:00.007-07:00

I Love You, Man

Rated R
(Language, some crude and sexual)
1 hour 45 minutes

Storyline:
Friendless Peter Klaven goes on a series of man-dates to find a Best Man for his wedding. But when his insta-bond with his new B.F.F. puts a strain on his relationship with his fiancée, can the trio learn to live happily ever after?

Starring:
Paul Rudd
Jason Segel
Rashida Jones

Critics Grade:
B

My Grade:
B+

This movie came out in theaters in March but I'm just now seeing it here in August on DVD thanks to good old Netflix! It's basically another one of those buddy comedies that's a bit on the raunchy side. I keep saying how much I don't care for these types of movies, yet I keep watching them. Mainly because these kinds of movies usually have pretty good stories and some funny performances making me look past the filth. This is by no means in line with movies like Knocked Up or 40 Year Old Virgin in terms of the raunch, but it's still there in parts.

I liked the story here. It's about a guy played by Paul Rudd (40 Year Old Virgin, Role Models) who's about to get married to Rashida Jone's (TV's The Office and Parks & Recreation) character, only to realize he has no close guy friends for his wedding party. He has no one as a best man. So the movie is his quest to find a male friend or two, and eventually finds a guy played by Jason Segel (Forgetting Sarah Marshall, TV's How I Met Your Mother) and they hit it off. The rest of the movie is them becoming good friends and their various hang out sessions.

I thought it was a pretty cool story, and it seemed pretty realistic to me. There are a lot of guys out there who are much better with the ladies and can never truly admit they have a "best guy friend". They exist all over the world. The writing was just great! They really gave these characters a lot of funny things to say and again it all had this feel of reality. Some of the writing was a little filthy of course, there were numerous sexual jokes and plenty of bad language but overall it wasn't that bad. There was a lot of well written humor that was pretty clean. In fact there was more "clean" humor than "filth" humor. Paul Rudd has always been a funny guy, but so far in his attempts at leading roles (for example, Over Her Dead Body) have been pretty feeble. But this time, he really found the perfect role for him. He was absolutely hilarious in this movie. Rudd really has some pitch perfect comedic timing and he was so awkward in this movie that it was just so funny! Jason Segel is basically the same way. He was great in the Sarah Marshall movie, probably a little better than he was here, but he was still very very funny. These two guys worked really well together, and were quite believable as best friends.

Rashida Jones also turned in a good performance, but she wasn't all that comedic, but she was still good. There were also a slew of good cameos. JK Simmons, Andy Samberg, Jon Favreau, Jamie Pressly, Jane Curtin all turned in solid borderline cameo performances. That's another thing I like about these movies. They always have a handful of hilarious supporting characters that circle in and out of the main characters lives. There was no change in that in this movie!

Sometimes I can say a lot about a movie, other times I don't have a whole heck of a lot to say. I thoroughly enjoyed I Love You, Man though. This is a really solid, really well made comedy and for me is probably one of the funniest movies of the year. I can't sit here and recommend this movie to ALL my friends because some of them don't care for this kind of movie, because it is still pretty inappropriate. However, I would suggest this film to all my other friends! It is a very enjoyable flick!

DVD Update Reviews (08/23/2009)

2009-08-23T21:40:00.010-07:00

So I've watched a few random movies recently via Netflix and I thought I'd give them a little bit of attention on my blog! I'll just give you a sum up of what I thought of them. Some are old movies, some are more recent.

Word Wars (Rated NR, 1 hour 20 minutes): This is a documentary about the world of Scrabble tournaments. It follows four of the "elite" scrabble players in their quest to win a $25,000 prize at a tourney in San Diego. This was actually a really interesting look into this world I never really knew existed. Hundreds of people take this very seriously, and are incredibly good at the game. I learned so many words that I can use on my next go at the game! I learned there are a handful of "Q" words without a "U" in them. Anyway, this movie also had a slight charm to it, and had some really likable people featured. Fun movie, interesting movie. My Grade: B-

----------

For the Bible Tells Me So (Rated NR, 1 hour 35 minutes): This is another documentary about homosexuality within Christianity. It follows a few Christian families (some of them pastors and church leaders) who learn they have homosexual children and how they deal with this. First they hate their children then grow to understand that maybe homosexuality is not a choice. The bible never says homosexuality is a choice, only that it is a "sin". This is a pro-gay movie, but also a pro-Christian movie. I happen to fall in both categories, so this movie meant a lot to me. I found it to be eye opening, as a gay Christian. It changed my perception of some Christians who I naturally assumed would look down on me for being gay. This film has a LOT of good points and I think any Christian, gay or straight, should check this movie out...you might learn a thing or two. My Grade: A-

----------

Planes, Tr ains, and Automobiles (Rated R, 1 hour 33 minutes): Yeah, yeah, yeah I know what your going to say: "Mike, you, a film buff, have not seen this classic movie??". Well no I had not seen it up until just a few days ago, so sue me! I have this weird thing against 80's movies. However, after it was all said and done, I really did enjoy this film. I thought it was a super well done "buddy" comedy, probably one of the better ones I've seen. It was very simple, and it started really quick. I thought it was sweet, and had moments of some great and classic comedy. I loved the scene of Steve Martin dropping like...15 "F bombs" in one speech. That was great! I regret not seeing this movie sooner, it was very enjoyable! My Grade: A-

----------

[*REC] (Rated R, 1 hour 20 minutes): This was the 2007 Spanish language film that inspired the 2008 horror movie, Quarantine. There is virtually no difference in storyline between both films. On that note, they are essentially identical minus one or two small tidbits. However, I have to say that this original version was much, much creepier. I don't know how it was able to do that to me seeing as how the American version didn't scare me that much. I think this film was better at pacing the story and the action therefore adding a lot of tension that the remake did not have. I liked Quarantine, and I was surprised that I did. But I liked this one just a smidgen more just because it was slightly more intense and scary. It is by no means a perfect movie, neither is Quarantine. But they are both entertaining and kind of different. My Grade: B-

----------

Them (Ils) (Rated R, 1 hour 17 minutes): This is a French film from 2006. I actually just got finished watching this movie on Netflix instant que. This is a film much like 2008's The Strangers but a whole hell of a lot better, and I liked The Strangers! This movie came out before, but Strangers is not a remake (at least it never was labeled as one). Both films claim to be based off a true story (both are not however). This one follows a couple somewhere in Romania and they are enjoying a quiet evening in their huge, isolated and creepy house in the middle of the woods. Their night is soon ruined by strange noises and someone or something has entered their home and begins to mentally torture them. It becomes this extremely intense cat and mouse game that really unnerved me as I watched it. This is one freaky, unsettling movie. There is almost no music playing during the scenes of people sneaking around and all we here are ambient sounds and man is it tense as I'll get out!! There isn't to much of a story, but this doesn't need one. Good, believable performances and these characters weren't dumb for the most part. I won't say how it ends, but I have to say that the reveal of the "stalkers" is quite disturbing. My Grade: A

----------

This Film is Not Yet Rated (Originally NC-17 but is now NR, 1 hour 37 minutes): This is another documentary about the corruptions and secrecy of the MPAA film rating system. It follows one man's quest to figure out exactly what the deal is with the MPAA and why they rate movies the way they do. It has interviews of film critics and film makers who are blown away by some of the choices the MPAA made about certain films. You really learn a lot about how and why film's get rated the way they do. They talk a lot about films that were rated NC-17 and should have been R. You also learn that the MPAA is the second most secret organization in the country next to...THE CIA!!! Up until 2007 (after this film's release) the members of the MPAA were top secret and only two people in the world knew who they were (the members consist of mainly American parents). These people get paid over $30,000 a year to watch movies and make odd decisions on how to rate them. The movie chronicles a private investigation that is trying to figure out who these people are. This is one of the most interesting and unique documentaries I've seen. I loved it, and thought it was so fascinating! I am a fan of film after all. I would suggest checking this movie out on Netflix. My Rating: A

----------
And that's it for now! Stay tuned for more in the near future! By the way, all of these films are now available on DVD!