Highly acclaimed director James Cameron (Titanic) is back with his passion project "Avatar". After vigorous years of non-stop work for this film, what did Cameron achieve? A masterpiece. Having not only directed this film but also writing it, this is simply Cameron's unbelievable vision. The world that he created, Pandora, is both beautiful and absolutely vulnerable. You immediately fall in love with this place, as your eyes completely take it in and absorb its aweness. Before I get too out of hand about how gorgeous this film is, let me describe the look of this movie with one word: Revolutionary. Has anyone gone this far with today's endless technology? Nope. But then again, Cameron spent $300 million to make this film. And fortunately for everyone, every bit of that money seemed to be worth it. Watch this movie and buy into the magic. You won't regret it. What you see will blow your mind.
A "retired" marine named Jake Sully is sent on a unique mission in the prementioned planet of Pandora after his brother dies. He becomes this creature referred to as an Avatar, a blue alien possessed by a human. He is to learn all he can about the people living over there, better known as the Na'vi. As time progresses, he seemingly finds himself more at home there than at his home planet, Earth. Obviously falling in love with Pandora, its people, and the beautiful Neytiri (played with precision by Zoe Saldana), Sully is stuck between two places. With the strict and ego-driven Colonel Miles Quaritch breathing down his neck, the decision becomes even tougher. See what happens. It's amazing.
The cast is brilliant, especially with the great performances by Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, and Stephen Lang. Worthington plays a struggling marine with bad legs who is under the stress of choosing between his world or their world. Stephen Lang plays a mean and not very likeable character at all. His performance leads to the audience hating his character. I hated him, that's for sure. And finally, the tremendously pretty Zoe Saldana. You might know her from "Star Trek", but her performance here is sublimal. She loses herself in the character and totally nails it. Very good performances all around.
This is a great movie. You watch this and you wonder if this film could've been made 5 years ago, or even last year. The answer is probably not. Thank GOD James Cameron had the patience to wait for this year. Cameron knew what he wanted, and there was simply nothing that could hold him back. James Cameron has created a movie of astonishing beauty that is easily regarded as revolutionary. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the view. Your eyes will thank you. You will thank James Cameron. He has made a great film that is impossible to forget. An amazing feat.
Rating: 4 out of 4
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
"Invictus" review
Clint Eastwood is almost 80 years old and yet he's one of the best directors working today. Why? Because he consistently makes quality movies like this one. "Invictus", based on a true story, is an uplifting and inspirational film about the tremendous Nelson Mandela and his plan to use Rugby as a tool to put an end to Apartheid and make peace with the Afrikaners. With a great cast and an emotionally strong script, Eastwood has crafted another great movie.
Morgan Freeman plays Nelson Mandela, the first president of South Africa, perfectly. He never misses a beat or ever overreacts. Instead he acts with a definite coolness. Freeman shows Mandlea as a somewhat gentle, sophisticated, and hugely couragous man. And who else in the world can play Nelson Mandela other than Morgan Freeman? No one. Everyone knows that this means only one thing. Oscars. And he will definitley recieve a nomination and be in serious contention for the award. Matt Damon, on the other hand, is not so bad either. In fact, he is very good as Farncois Pienaar, the captain of the South Africa Rugby team Springboks. Damon makes him a certified leader, playing him with the type of confidence that the best player on any team would have. With this said, Damon takes it down one notch when he meets with Mandela. He knows of Madnela's higher authority and gives him utmost respect. With these two giving tremendous, oscar-worthy performances, the supporting cast isn't so bad either.
The year is 1995 and the South Africa Springboks are a nearly hopeless team. They start off losing their first couple of games and are undoubtedly one of the worst teams. Mandela sees this but, being the type of man that he is, doesn't give up hope. Instead, he sees potential and the chance of being great. Though most realize that the chances are slim, the optimistic Nelson Mandela recognizes it as an opportunity. He decides to meet with the Springboks captain Francois Pienaar and challenges him to go beyond their highest expectations. Obviously not wanting to let the president down, Pienaar equips himself with a resilient type of focus. With the always inspiring Nelson Mandela and the 43 million people of South Africa, Pienaar lifts his team off the ground to accomplish what Mandela had told him to do. Go beyond expectations. The road to get there is both rigorous and rewarding.
Hugley entertaining from beginning to end, this isn't your typical sports movie. This is more about the srength of the human spirit and the seemingly insurmountable challenges one wouold undertake to achieve what is needed. Clint Eastwood seems to never forget his audience. And though this may not be his finest film, it is definitely one of his great ones. After watching this movie, I didn't quite get a grasp on the rules of Rugby. But what I did get a grasp on was the power of inspiration. It led to a unified country and an uplifted audience. You can't help but cheer.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Morgan Freeman plays Nelson Mandela, the first president of South Africa, perfectly. He never misses a beat or ever overreacts. Instead he acts with a definite coolness. Freeman shows Mandlea as a somewhat gentle, sophisticated, and hugely couragous man. And who else in the world can play Nelson Mandela other than Morgan Freeman? No one. Everyone knows that this means only one thing. Oscars. And he will definitley recieve a nomination and be in serious contention for the award. Matt Damon, on the other hand, is not so bad either. In fact, he is very good as Farncois Pienaar, the captain of the South Africa Rugby team Springboks. Damon makes him a certified leader, playing him with the type of confidence that the best player on any team would have. With this said, Damon takes it down one notch when he meets with Mandela. He knows of Madnela's higher authority and gives him utmost respect. With these two giving tremendous, oscar-worthy performances, the supporting cast isn't so bad either.
The year is 1995 and the South Africa Springboks are a nearly hopeless team. They start off losing their first couple of games and are undoubtedly one of the worst teams. Mandela sees this but, being the type of man that he is, doesn't give up hope. Instead, he sees potential and the chance of being great. Though most realize that the chances are slim, the optimistic Nelson Mandela recognizes it as an opportunity. He decides to meet with the Springboks captain Francois Pienaar and challenges him to go beyond their highest expectations. Obviously not wanting to let the president down, Pienaar equips himself with a resilient type of focus. With the always inspiring Nelson Mandela and the 43 million people of South Africa, Pienaar lifts his team off the ground to accomplish what Mandela had told him to do. Go beyond expectations. The road to get there is both rigorous and rewarding.
Hugley entertaining from beginning to end, this isn't your typical sports movie. This is more about the srength of the human spirit and the seemingly insurmountable challenges one wouold undertake to achieve what is needed. Clint Eastwood seems to never forget his audience. And though this may not be his finest film, it is definitely one of his great ones. After watching this movie, I didn't quite get a grasp on the rules of Rugby. But what I did get a grasp on was the power of inspiration. It led to a unified country and an uplifted audience. You can't help but cheer.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Saturday, December 5, 2009
"Precious" review
To call this film beautifully disturbing is a terrible understatement. Based on the novel "Push" by Sapphire, it's solidly dark and depressing, yet "Precious" gains its title as one of the most uplifting movies in years. When you see the life that Claireece "Precious" Jones has to endure every single day of her life, you start to empathize. Growing up against incorrigible odds in Harlem, you start to wonder if this girl can be successful in the world. Director Lee Daniels does a terrific job in making us somehow feel like we are always at her side, as if we"got her back". You will root and cheer for her, but probably most of all worry for her. I cannot truly express my admiration for this film. You simply have to see it to understand. Once this film grabs you, you are stuck. "Precious" super-glues your mind to the powerful emotions to the characters and it's impossible to escape. With Oscar-worthy performances across the board and an intense but touching script, this is easily one of the best films of the year.
Claireece "Precious" Jones is a rather large African-American who is pregnant for the second time with her father. She's only 16. Precious is also only in jr. high school. Her mother hates her with a passion because she feels as if she stole her boyfriend from her. It's not at all surprising that Precious doesn't feel loved, seemingly lost in the world. Not to mention all the scrutiny she is receiving because of her weight. What Precious finds out is spectacular. Love is out there somewhere. If it means searching far and wide into the depths of the city then so be it. But Precious finds love, and it lifts her up from the ground. Director Lee Daniels brings hope to a hopeless situation. It's astounding.
The cast of the film is certainly one of the best ensemble casts of the year. Gabourey Sidibe is the breakout performance of the year, no doubt. Simply a tour de force, as she gives Precious a relentless side but also gives her some powerful resistence. With solid performances by the supporting cast like Mariah Carey and Paula Patton, the most electrifying of them all is Mo'nique. She plays Mary, Precious's mother. I don't have a problem at all by calling her performance the best of the year. She is so real and authentic, it's frightening. Mo'nique makes the character so unpredictable, that at the times it's hard to even watch her. Expect Oscar-nominations coming this film's way not only in best picture, but a couple of performance nominations. While being led by the jobs done by Gabourey Sidibe and Mo'nique, the entire cast scores as well.
"Precious" is gritty, dark, depressing, mentally intense, and definitely remorseful. But look into the eyes of Claireece "Precious" Jones. You see pain, hardship, abuse, sadness, and hatred. But despite all of these, you see something more prominent. You see hope.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Claireece "Precious" Jones is a rather large African-American who is pregnant for the second time with her father. She's only 16. Precious is also only in jr. high school. Her mother hates her with a passion because she feels as if she stole her boyfriend from her. It's not at all surprising that Precious doesn't feel loved, seemingly lost in the world. Not to mention all the scrutiny she is receiving because of her weight. What Precious finds out is spectacular. Love is out there somewhere. If it means searching far and wide into the depths of the city then so be it. But Precious finds love, and it lifts her up from the ground. Director Lee Daniels brings hope to a hopeless situation. It's astounding.
The cast of the film is certainly one of the best ensemble casts of the year. Gabourey Sidibe is the breakout performance of the year, no doubt. Simply a tour de force, as she gives Precious a relentless side but also gives her some powerful resistence. With solid performances by the supporting cast like Mariah Carey and Paula Patton, the most electrifying of them all is Mo'nique. She plays Mary, Precious's mother. I don't have a problem at all by calling her performance the best of the year. She is so real and authentic, it's frightening. Mo'nique makes the character so unpredictable, that at the times it's hard to even watch her. Expect Oscar-nominations coming this film's way not only in best picture, but a couple of performance nominations. While being led by the jobs done by Gabourey Sidibe and Mo'nique, the entire cast scores as well.
"Precious" is gritty, dark, depressing, mentally intense, and definitely remorseful. But look into the eyes of Claireece "Precious" Jones. You see pain, hardship, abuse, sadness, and hatred. But despite all of these, you see something more prominent. You see hope.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Friday, November 27, 2009
"Disney's A Christmas Carol" review
This is a magical film. A visual feast of eye candy that is surely one of the most stunning animated films to look at. Acclaimed director Robert Zemeckis uses motion capture perfectly here as he did in his classic "The Polar Express". Based on the timeless book by Charles Dickens, the movie truly brings every moment to life. With a terrific cast highlighted by Jim Carey and Gary Oldman, the vivid characters that Dickens created seem to act and feel just the way he imagined. The story that Dickens wrote is heartfelt and definitely unique, and the script doesn't miss a beat. An unforgettable experience that keeps the magic coming from start to end.
To simply say that Jim Carey portrays Scrooge well is a total understatement. Carey is brilliant. If it wasn't for Zemeckis and his motion capture, he might be receiving an Oscar nod. It seems like Carey loses himself in the character, trying vigorously to act and feel the way Scrooge would. This is no easy task. Talk about a complex and difficult character to play. Then there is Gary Oldman, who plays Tiny Tim, Scrooge's co-worker and a loving father of a suffering child. And like Carey, if it wasn't for the animated features placed on top of him, he could have gotten a best supporting actor nod. When Oldman smiles, you can see the pain behind that smile. This is due to his tremendous acting ability and talent.
Dicken's story is a complex one, but one of a kind. The name is Scrooge, and he has seemingly lost touch with his family, friends, and most importantly himself. When Christmas eve comes along, he doesn't feel the spirit. In fact, he opposed Christmas and loathed it whenever people said "Merry Christmas" to him. He goes to the point of not caring for the dying population. But who can blame him? Scrooge is lonely, terrified, and insecure about himself. And to make it worse, he takes it out on everybody else. Everyone also seems to be aware of his personality, from his family, friends, to the Christmas singers on the side-walk. What is behind his attitude you may ask? You find out when Scrooge is told that he will be visited by three spirits. Each are assigned to show him the past, present, and future. What you see in Scrooge's past is telling, truly revealing why Scrooge has ended up the way that he is. The present and future, I will leave that up to you to see. The reason for the spirits' visit? To persuade Scrooge to change his ways and finally see that Christmas is still alive.
"A Christmas Carol" is a jolt of pure magic. It hits you and absorbs you. You get captured by not only its visual goodness, but the personalities and feelings of each character present in the film. It may be a little dark for smaller children, but I think that from a child to an adult, everyone will see this as a worthwhile film. Robert Zemeckis doesn't falter and gives us another classic.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
To simply say that Jim Carey portrays Scrooge well is a total understatement. Carey is brilliant. If it wasn't for Zemeckis and his motion capture, he might be receiving an Oscar nod. It seems like Carey loses himself in the character, trying vigorously to act and feel the way Scrooge would. This is no easy task. Talk about a complex and difficult character to play. Then there is Gary Oldman, who plays Tiny Tim, Scrooge's co-worker and a loving father of a suffering child. And like Carey, if it wasn't for the animated features placed on top of him, he could have gotten a best supporting actor nod. When Oldman smiles, you can see the pain behind that smile. This is due to his tremendous acting ability and talent.
Dicken's story is a complex one, but one of a kind. The name is Scrooge, and he has seemingly lost touch with his family, friends, and most importantly himself. When Christmas eve comes along, he doesn't feel the spirit. In fact, he opposed Christmas and loathed it whenever people said "Merry Christmas" to him. He goes to the point of not caring for the dying population. But who can blame him? Scrooge is lonely, terrified, and insecure about himself. And to make it worse, he takes it out on everybody else. Everyone also seems to be aware of his personality, from his family, friends, to the Christmas singers on the side-walk. What is behind his attitude you may ask? You find out when Scrooge is told that he will be visited by three spirits. Each are assigned to show him the past, present, and future. What you see in Scrooge's past is telling, truly revealing why Scrooge has ended up the way that he is. The present and future, I will leave that up to you to see. The reason for the spirits' visit? To persuade Scrooge to change his ways and finally see that Christmas is still alive.
"A Christmas Carol" is a jolt of pure magic. It hits you and absorbs you. You get captured by not only its visual goodness, but the personalities and feelings of each character present in the film. It may be a little dark for smaller children, but I think that from a child to an adult, everyone will see this as a worthwhile film. Robert Zemeckis doesn't falter and gives us another classic.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Saturday, November 21, 2009
"New Moon" review
A so-so but good-looking cast star in this average sequel to the highly popular "Twilight". Based on the book by the tremendous Stephanie Myer, this film (like its predecessor) doesn't do the book justice. The books in the series are widely acclaimed and read for a reason, and for the two films to come out thus far, I have to say that it shouldn't be in the same breath as the books they are based on. With this said, "New Moon" definitely has its strong points, but it simply wasn't enough. It felt dragged at times with several slow areas that could be done without. Despite this, the movie will make bank, and teens will fall in love with all of its glamour but none of its substance.
I smell trouble. Edward Cullen is leaving Bella Swan?! Oh lord! Why is this? According to Cullen, he feels as if he has to leave Swan to "protect her" after an unfortunate event at her birthday party where she unfortunatley gets a paper cut. And we all know what happens when vampires smell blood. They pounce on it. Edward's brother, Jasper Cullen, attacks her not on purpose, but rather by instinct. After witnessing this, Edward feels it will be best to leave her be so she could live a normal life. Bella predictably breaks down, as if she just lost her only friend. But not to worry. She knows there is some one else to turn to. Jacob Black, a werewolf and a hater of the blood-sucking Cullens, seeks to comfort Bella. Soon, they form a "deep" relationship. With this love triangle in mind and the knowledge of both men hating each other, we all know what's about to occur. A terrible and sometimes violent fight for Bella's love.
The cast is young and pretty looking, but talented? Hard to say, as no part played here is really challenging. Don't get me wrong, they all play their parts well and effectively, but I don't think anybody seemed to exert alot of effort. Robert Pattinson is solid as Edward Cullen, but is it really difficult to play a vampire who shows almost no emotion? Kristen Stewart, who I believe is the most talented actor of the young cast, is great as Bella Swan. And finally Taylor Lautner, the sexified and strikingly handsome actor who plays Jacob Black, plays his role well. His best moments are when he takes off his shirt and looks like an abercrombie model. That was sarcastic, by the way. Definitely great futures for all these actors with the Twilight series making them well-known. Now, is it going to get them any challenging roles and recognition by the highly acclaimed directors out there? I don't think so.
"New Moon" has its strengths, but the weaknesses and loopholes seem to overpower whatever is good about the film. Chris Weitz, the director, seems like the perfect pick for the look and feel of the Twilight series, but it's obvious that he can achieve more. Hardcore fans will love this film, but regular viewers won't think highly of it. I don't think anything will be missed by just reading the book. All in all, the series doesn't feel like it's making any progress. Instead, it feels stagnant.
Rating: 2 out of 4
I smell trouble. Edward Cullen is leaving Bella Swan?! Oh lord! Why is this? According to Cullen, he feels as if he has to leave Swan to "protect her" after an unfortunate event at her birthday party where she unfortunatley gets a paper cut. And we all know what happens when vampires smell blood. They pounce on it. Edward's brother, Jasper Cullen, attacks her not on purpose, but rather by instinct. After witnessing this, Edward feels it will be best to leave her be so she could live a normal life. Bella predictably breaks down, as if she just lost her only friend. But not to worry. She knows there is some one else to turn to. Jacob Black, a werewolf and a hater of the blood-sucking Cullens, seeks to comfort Bella. Soon, they form a "deep" relationship. With this love triangle in mind and the knowledge of both men hating each other, we all know what's about to occur. A terrible and sometimes violent fight for Bella's love.
The cast is young and pretty looking, but talented? Hard to say, as no part played here is really challenging. Don't get me wrong, they all play their parts well and effectively, but I don't think anybody seemed to exert alot of effort. Robert Pattinson is solid as Edward Cullen, but is it really difficult to play a vampire who shows almost no emotion? Kristen Stewart, who I believe is the most talented actor of the young cast, is great as Bella Swan. And finally Taylor Lautner, the sexified and strikingly handsome actor who plays Jacob Black, plays his role well. His best moments are when he takes off his shirt and looks like an abercrombie model. That was sarcastic, by the way. Definitely great futures for all these actors with the Twilight series making them well-known. Now, is it going to get them any challenging roles and recognition by the highly acclaimed directors out there? I don't think so.
"New Moon" has its strengths, but the weaknesses and loopholes seem to overpower whatever is good about the film. Chris Weitz, the director, seems like the perfect pick for the look and feel of the Twilight series, but it's obvious that he can achieve more. Hardcore fans will love this film, but regular viewers won't think highly of it. I don't think anything will be missed by just reading the book. All in all, the series doesn't feel like it's making any progress. Instead, it feels stagnant.
Rating: 2 out of 4
Thursday, November 5, 2009
"Michael Jackson's This Is It" review
Michael Jackson was something special all the way from his childhood to the days before his death. In this amazing and must-see documentary about the King of Pop's rehearsals for his London tour, you surprisingly see a different side of the man. You see him seemingly at home on stage, having fun doing what he does best. His strive for perfection is unbelievable. Despite going through what he went through off the stage, his love for his music and fans made him somehow forget everything. For Michael Jackson to be capable of moving his body like that at the age of 50 simply isn't fair. Like the King, the documentary itself is unmatched.
The film starts off by showing a series of short interviews with the dancers who were fortunately hand-picked from several thousands to dance with Michael Jackson in his London tour. Unfortunately they would never get the chance to do so, other than dancing with him in those small but tremendous rehearsals. After watching this film, I would kill just to rehearse with the man. Talk about working with greatness. Then finally, the film proceeds with Michael rehearsing his long list of classics. You can go and see this documentary just to listen to the great songs. But I believe what this documentary is trying to show is how great he still was just a few days before his death. There are times when he looks so good, that you think that it's "too bad that he's gone", while on the other hand there are times when you thank GOD for giving us such a talent. Either way, the documentary works mainly because it makes both the die hard fan and the regular viewer feel bittersweet about Jackson's death.
This is an unforgettable experience. To just feel close to the man is enough to see this film. His work ethic, ability to entertain, and his talent is ridiculous. He was simply something else. Whether you love him or hate him, you can't help but recognize why he had such a huge fan base. I don't think this film will change your view on the man, but then again, this documentary isn't made for that. Instead it should give people a true appreciation for not only his work, but his vision to take people to "places they have never been before".
Rating: 4 out of 4
The film starts off by showing a series of short interviews with the dancers who were fortunately hand-picked from several thousands to dance with Michael Jackson in his London tour. Unfortunately they would never get the chance to do so, other than dancing with him in those small but tremendous rehearsals. After watching this film, I would kill just to rehearse with the man. Talk about working with greatness. Then finally, the film proceeds with Michael rehearsing his long list of classics. You can go and see this documentary just to listen to the great songs. But I believe what this documentary is trying to show is how great he still was just a few days before his death. There are times when he looks so good, that you think that it's "too bad that he's gone", while on the other hand there are times when you thank GOD for giving us such a talent. Either way, the documentary works mainly because it makes both the die hard fan and the regular viewer feel bittersweet about Jackson's death.
This is an unforgettable experience. To just feel close to the man is enough to see this film. His work ethic, ability to entertain, and his talent is ridiculous. He was simply something else. Whether you love him or hate him, you can't help but recognize why he had such a huge fan base. I don't think this film will change your view on the man, but then again, this documentary isn't made for that. Instead it should give people a true appreciation for not only his work, but his vision to take people to "places they have never been before".
Rating: 4 out of 4
"Paranormal Activity" review
With all the hype surrounding this movie, I expected to see something extremely terrifying that would literally keep me up at night. Fortunately, this film did not disappoint. The simple thought of the film being real seems to flood your mind. That's a strength of the film. Its ability to be so real that its truly scary. We need these types of revolutionary movies. If you go along and buy into it, "Paranormal Activity" can be loads of fun.
The movie starts off by thanking Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat for giving their house. Right off the bat it seems genuinely true. With all this said, I, of course, looked the film up and found that there is in fact a director. The name is Oren Peli, who also wrote the movie. With this said, I believe that one of the flaws of this movie is the somewhat slow start. Maybe it was my expectation of sudden scares. But with how good the rest of the film is, this isn't a monumental problem. The freaky scares later on all but confiscates for the beginning. The cast is brilliant here especially Katie Featherson, who played her part perfectly. Her character is what I like to call a "demon-magnet", and you see the fear and anxiety in her eyes. Micah Sloat, who is surprisingly barely on camera, played his part almost as well. Don't get me wrong, though, these aren't the hardest roles to play.
Micah and Katie move into a strange house, known for its "paranormal" activity. Micah wants to get to the bottom of the situation, and gets a new camera. He absolutely loves this camera and seems to never want to leave it. Micah tells Katie that he's gonna film their bedroom as they are sleeping to find out what exactly is going on. Of course, the script makes Katie seem hesitant, but she eventually gives in. The only way to see what happens is to see the movie.
"Paranormal Activity" is one of the best horror films of the year. Even though the film frightened and scared me, I saw this movie as simply pure entertainment. Trust me, you will get scared, but I think when you look back at it, you will interpret it as a terrific, fun ride. Like it or not, this is a film or rather an experience that you have to see.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
The movie starts off by thanking Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat for giving their house. Right off the bat it seems genuinely true. With all this said, I, of course, looked the film up and found that there is in fact a director. The name is Oren Peli, who also wrote the movie. With this said, I believe that one of the flaws of this movie is the somewhat slow start. Maybe it was my expectation of sudden scares. But with how good the rest of the film is, this isn't a monumental problem. The freaky scares later on all but confiscates for the beginning. The cast is brilliant here especially Katie Featherson, who played her part perfectly. Her character is what I like to call a "demon-magnet", and you see the fear and anxiety in her eyes. Micah Sloat, who is surprisingly barely on camera, played his part almost as well. Don't get me wrong, though, these aren't the hardest roles to play.
Micah and Katie move into a strange house, known for its "paranormal" activity. Micah wants to get to the bottom of the situation, and gets a new camera. He absolutely loves this camera and seems to never want to leave it. Micah tells Katie that he's gonna film their bedroom as they are sleeping to find out what exactly is going on. Of course, the script makes Katie seem hesitant, but she eventually gives in. The only way to see what happens is to see the movie.
"Paranormal Activity" is one of the best horror films of the year. Even though the film frightened and scared me, I saw this movie as simply pure entertainment. Trust me, you will get scared, but I think when you look back at it, you will interpret it as a terrific, fun ride. Like it or not, this is a film or rather an experience that you have to see.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Saturday, October 24, 2009
"Where the Wild Things Are" review
Spike Jonze's take on the highly acclaimed and somewhat controversial children's book is a solid film. With terrific performances by not only Max Records, but also the tremendous cast of voices, this is a film with genuine darkness but also a real heart. The script was written beautifully, despite the book consisting of only 9 lines. Simply put; the script put the book and its illustrations to life. With all this said, the biggest strength of this film lies within its emotional power. The movie's feelings range from extreme happiness to the lowest of low. A kid is a little, innocent human being that's always happy and jittery about the world. Is this really true? Or do we just want to believe that this is true? According to "Where the Wild Things Are", this is not the case, as it undeniably shows the problems of a normal person's childhood. With all this said, the biggest though minimal flaw of the movie is its small amount of somewhat stagnant moments. All in all, this is a nicely made film. Really shows Spike Jonze's talents as a successful director. Can possibly be one of the top films of the year. See it.
Rating: 3 out of 4
Rating: 3 out of 4
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Tyson review
Very powerful documentary. Beautifully done by director James Toback as he makes you see the real Mike Tyson. This truly shows that money, fame, and success don't really define who a man is, but rather their actions and how they act. Fortune makes a man happy, fame makes a man feel power, and success brings confidence, right? Unfortunately, all those things were perhaps the key to "Iron" Mike Tyson's downfall not only as a champion boxer, but as a human being. From crying about his late trainer Cus D'Amato to describing in detail how he has sex with women, "Tyson" is explicit, disturbing, but altogether brilliant. James Toback let's us see how terrific this young, ferocious fighter was in the ring, but is also fearless in showing how he struggled for happiness outside the ring. You can't get any deeper into the man than this. You get a down-to-earth, practically tell-all Mike Tyson here. But probably why this documentary works well is because after seeing it, you don't like or dislike Mike Tyson any more or less. You simply get to know him better. This isn't for the lovers or the haters of Mike, but rather for those who just want to feel the heart of "Iron".
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Inglourious Basterds review
This isn't necessarily a war movie, or a movie about planning to end the war, but rather a movie about rewriting history. And it couldn't have been rewritten ever more gloriously than that of Quentin Tarantino, who both wrote and directed "Inglourious Basterds". Nothing in this film is possible, but who cares. You'll most likely have an amazing time watching this deliciously gory and unbelievably funny bloodbath. Let's put it this way: the Nazis finally got what they deserved. And trust me, I don't think they could've gotten it any better.
The whole cast is terrific. Everyone knows Brad Pitt, who plays the leader of the inglourious basterds, Lt. Aldo Rain. He plays him with a tough, Tennessee accent and a determined spirit to do "one thing and one thing only. Killin' Nazis". And though he's great once again, it's the supporting cast that shine. One in particular who is a definite lock to receive a supporting actor nomination is Christoph Waltz, who plays Col. Hans Landa, a Nazi, or how people refer to him, the "Jew-hunter". He's absolutely superb, and you feel his presence when he's on the screen and even when he isn't. Though not as good as Heath Ledger's Joker, their impacts are similar. Melanie Laurent as Shosanna and Eli Roth as Sgt. Donny Donowitz also give notably solid performances here.
Let's look at the story, which is simple but effective. 4 of the top dogs working for the Nazis are planning to attend a premier of the terrible Jew-killing film, "A Nation's Pride". And not to mention, one of the 4 includes Adolf Hitler himself. The amazing collectors of Nazi Scalps and the cruel Nazi Murderers, the Inglourious Basterds, are informed that if they kill all 4, the war ends, just like that. And there's also a great plus for the Basterds and the Jews: the premier was moved to a cinema owned by a Jew girl, Shosanna. The result? Well, a bloody delight is a terrible understatement.
Quentin Taratino has written and directed a truly great and fun-filled movie. And though I don't call many films the rare title of a masterpiece, I am not hesitant at all to call "Inglourious Basterds" one crazy and explicit masterpiece. And though it had a running time of 152 minutes, it actually felt too short. You know when that happens, you've seen something great. Don't be a "basterd" and go see it.
Rarting: 4 out of 4
The whole cast is terrific. Everyone knows Brad Pitt, who plays the leader of the inglourious basterds, Lt. Aldo Rain. He plays him with a tough, Tennessee accent and a determined spirit to do "one thing and one thing only. Killin' Nazis". And though he's great once again, it's the supporting cast that shine. One in particular who is a definite lock to receive a supporting actor nomination is Christoph Waltz, who plays Col. Hans Landa, a Nazi, or how people refer to him, the "Jew-hunter". He's absolutely superb, and you feel his presence when he's on the screen and even when he isn't. Though not as good as Heath Ledger's Joker, their impacts are similar. Melanie Laurent as Shosanna and Eli Roth as Sgt. Donny Donowitz also give notably solid performances here.
Let's look at the story, which is simple but effective. 4 of the top dogs working for the Nazis are planning to attend a premier of the terrible Jew-killing film, "A Nation's Pride". And not to mention, one of the 4 includes Adolf Hitler himself. The amazing collectors of Nazi Scalps and the cruel Nazi Murderers, the Inglourious Basterds, are informed that if they kill all 4, the war ends, just like that. And there's also a great plus for the Basterds and the Jews: the premier was moved to a cinema owned by a Jew girl, Shosanna. The result? Well, a bloody delight is a terrible understatement.
Quentin Taratino has written and directed a truly great and fun-filled movie. And though I don't call many films the rare title of a masterpiece, I am not hesitant at all to call "Inglourious Basterds" one crazy and explicit masterpiece. And though it had a running time of 152 minutes, it actually felt too short. You know when that happens, you've seen something great. Don't be a "basterd" and go see it.
Rarting: 4 out of 4
Monday, August 10, 2009
The Last House On The Left review
A somewhat unknown cast stars in a below average remake of the 1972 movie. Yes, "The Last House On The Left" does have its share of thrills, but it doesn't quite get the job done as a solid suspense thriller. Before the suspense finally arrived, I had already lost interest in the story. The cast here is undoubtedly talented, but the script has them playing unlikeable characters. With that said, "The Last House On The Left" has its moments, but becomes forgettable as soon as the credits start rolling.
The story revolves around young, swimming champion Mari Collingwood, executed well by the talented Sara Paxton. Her and her friend, Paige, get kidnapped by a gang of 4 wrongdoers, led by a prison escapee. After murdering Paige and hurting Mari, they go, amazingly, to the so-called last house on the left, where Mari's parents obviously live. At first, they show them good hospitality, but they soon find out that they had done something to their daughter. From that point on, the film turns into a bloody affair, fighting for their damaged daughter. There is one big problem, though.
Unfortunately, I didn't care much for Mari Collingwood. I don't know who would truly care for someone that hangs out with a stupid friend and does stupid things. Going to some stranger's house who looks absolutely untrustworthy in the first place, now that's pretty darn stupid. This film is bloody, violent, and cruel. That ingredient of a horror movie is here and made well. But it just didn't have enough thrills and really wasn't terrifying at any moment. There was even a point here where the movie felt like an action thriller other than something meant to be scary. With a bad script, a lack of scares, unlikeable characters, and an unnecessary prolonged rape scene, "The Last House On The Left" is mediocre at best. If you look hard enough, there is fun to be had here, but it isn't enough to save an already forgettable movie. You can SKIP this house.
rating: 2 out of 4
The story revolves around young, swimming champion Mari Collingwood, executed well by the talented Sara Paxton. Her and her friend, Paige, get kidnapped by a gang of 4 wrongdoers, led by a prison escapee. After murdering Paige and hurting Mari, they go, amazingly, to the so-called last house on the left, where Mari's parents obviously live. At first, they show them good hospitality, but they soon find out that they had done something to their daughter. From that point on, the film turns into a bloody affair, fighting for their damaged daughter. There is one big problem, though.
Unfortunately, I didn't care much for Mari Collingwood. I don't know who would truly care for someone that hangs out with a stupid friend and does stupid things. Going to some stranger's house who looks absolutely untrustworthy in the first place, now that's pretty darn stupid. This film is bloody, violent, and cruel. That ingredient of a horror movie is here and made well. But it just didn't have enough thrills and really wasn't terrifying at any moment. There was even a point here where the movie felt like an action thriller other than something meant to be scary. With a bad script, a lack of scares, unlikeable characters, and an unnecessary prolonged rape scene, "The Last House On The Left" is mediocre at best. If you look hard enough, there is fun to be had here, but it isn't enough to save an already forgettable movie. You can SKIP this house.
rating: 2 out of 4
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
The Hurt Locker review
This is what I am talking about. "The Hurt Locker" is easily one of the best movies of the year. You talk about a thrilling, bada$$, suspenseful, realistic war movie. This is exactly it. With great direction by Kathryn Bigelow (yes, a girl), a terrific screenplay, beautiful cinematography, and Oscar-worthy performances, "The Hurt Locker" is the very definition of a great film. My eyes were glued to the screen as I was genuinely thrilled by each classic, suspenseful moment. Truly an achievement in film that must receive some recognition by the Academy.
The performances here by the somewhat unknown cast is one of the many strengths of this movie. Jeremy Renner gives a performance that will give him a best actor nomination (in my book, at least). Renner plays Staff Sergeant William James amazingly natural, being the cocky and confident person that James is. In short, Renner's performance is simply a tour de force. Another performance here that should (but probably won't) get an Oscar nomination is Anthony Mackie, who plays Sergeant JT Sanborn, a tough soldier who isn't afraid to tell the truth, even to William James. Mackie's ability to be so authentic makes his performance admirable. From actors like Brain Geraghty to legends like Ralph Fiennes, nobody here misses a beat.
Let me give you the story, straight up. It is the war in Iraq, and anything and everything could possibly be a bomb. This includes some wire coming from the ground, to a bomb implanted inside a human's body. An elite bomb squad of three must come together and disarm all the bombs they can, stopping the potential death of many innocent people. Led by the fearless and seemingly overconfident William James (Renner), the two others in the group, Sanborn (Mackie) and Eldridge (Geraghty), are shocked and brought into a whirlwind of trouble by James' ego and mentality of no fear. In the beginning of the film, the saying "war is a drug" pops up. James' behavior on the battlefield disarming bombs explains this statement.
What more can I say about this terrific film that is so well-made and masterly crafted. Director Kathryn Bigelow knew what she wanted to accomplish here, and she did it. She wanted to make an extremely suspenseful thriller worthy of many Oscars , and she did it. This is a different war movie than most out there. But I am going to go and put this film in the same breadth as "Saving Private Ryan". What sets these two war movies apart from the others is that they are "scary real". Both feel so authentic and realistic, that it is scary. My eyes couldn't leave the screen. As a result, "The Hurt Locker" is a monumental accomplishment that is worthy of endless praise.
Rating: 4 out of 4
The performances here by the somewhat unknown cast is one of the many strengths of this movie. Jeremy Renner gives a performance that will give him a best actor nomination (in my book, at least). Renner plays Staff Sergeant William James amazingly natural, being the cocky and confident person that James is. In short, Renner's performance is simply a tour de force. Another performance here that should (but probably won't) get an Oscar nomination is Anthony Mackie, who plays Sergeant JT Sanborn, a tough soldier who isn't afraid to tell the truth, even to William James. Mackie's ability to be so authentic makes his performance admirable. From actors like Brain Geraghty to legends like Ralph Fiennes, nobody here misses a beat.
Let me give you the story, straight up. It is the war in Iraq, and anything and everything could possibly be a bomb. This includes some wire coming from the ground, to a bomb implanted inside a human's body. An elite bomb squad of three must come together and disarm all the bombs they can, stopping the potential death of many innocent people. Led by the fearless and seemingly overconfident William James (Renner), the two others in the group, Sanborn (Mackie) and Eldridge (Geraghty), are shocked and brought into a whirlwind of trouble by James' ego and mentality of no fear. In the beginning of the film, the saying "war is a drug" pops up. James' behavior on the battlefield disarming bombs explains this statement.
What more can I say about this terrific film that is so well-made and masterly crafted. Director Kathryn Bigelow knew what she wanted to accomplish here, and she did it. She wanted to make an extremely suspenseful thriller worthy of many Oscars , and she did it. This is a different war movie than most out there. But I am going to go and put this film in the same breadth as "Saving Private Ryan". What sets these two war movies apart from the others is that they are "scary real". Both feel so authentic and realistic, that it is scary. My eyes couldn't leave the screen. As a result, "The Hurt Locker" is a monumental accomplishment that is worthy of endless praise.
Rating: 4 out of 4
Friday, July 31, 2009
Funny People review
Judd Apatow's third film may very well be his best one. In fact, with "Funny People", he has written and directed a masterpiece. Great stuff from start to end. From the hilariously raunchy stand-up comedy shows to the harsh life of George Simmons (Sandler), this film pulls you in and never pushes you away. Apatow's screenplay truly shows his ability to mix comedy with drama. Unlike his other two films ("Knocked Up" and "40-year-old Virgin"), his new one is totally focused on being heartfelt. But what Apatow also shows here is that he is truly a comedic genius. The dirty jokes are there, of course. But he also has an amazing skill of using satire. One example that pops into my head is when rapper Eminem asks comedian Ray Romano if he wants to fight. Ira (Rogen) then asks Romano "what's wrong? I thought everybody loves you". Classic stuff. And trust me, there are a lot of classic laughs to be had.
What "Funny People" undoubtedly has is tremendous acting. You have Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, Leslie Mann, Eric Bana, Jonah Hill, and Jason Schwartzman. All are impressive, but Adam Sandler stands out from the rest. He is terrific here as George Simmons. Yes, you get the natural Sandler, out-of-control stuff. But what you also get here is the dramatic actor type. And when he is turns into that kind of actor, he is dynamite. Never misses a beat throughout the whole thing. He has turned in two other great performances like this before (in "Punch Drunk Love" and "Reign Over Me"), but this third effort is easily his best by a mile. May not be the best performance of the year, but c'mon now. Give credit where credit is due. One of the best performances of the year so far.
And now let's talk Seth Rogen, who plays Ira Wright. Let me tell you something that I've never said about him before. I really, REALLY admired his performance in this film. Like Sandler, he is still Rogen. That classic laugh and his dirty mind. But now that he has lost all that weight, he added some terrific acting skills that can get him some great roles in the future. In being funny, he goes along with Sandler, but when the going gets rough and he's in a serious scene with Sandler, he holds his ground brilliantly. And though he won't get the same credit as Sandler, this is by far his best performance that he has ever turned in. You saw the talent of Seth Rogen in Apatow's "Knocked Up", and now he is fully utilizing that talent.
The story is simple, but wonderful. George Simmons (Sandler), a famous comedian and actor, is told by the doctor that test results were bad. It's over. The sickness can't be repaired. Bottom line: he's dying. Simmons, who is lonely and sad, goes and hires Ira Wright (Rogen), who he liked very much in his stand-up set. Wright goes on to write jokes for Simmons when he performs. As time passes, there is a sign of a true friendship. Wright thinks so, anyway. Simmons practically has no friends, BTW, so this is good for him. Simmons then starts talking to his long lost love, Laura (Mann). The problem is that she's married and George wants her, bad. Can his friendship with Ira save him from his emptiness, dealing with the sickness? And can George get back with his "true love", Laura?
Judd Apatow's screenplay and direction is truly amazing. From top to bottom, "Funny People" is nearly flawless. Could've been a tad shorter, but it's not monumental. All in all, Judd Apatow has made a terrific film that is killer funny and genuinely dramatic. It is safe to say that he is the king of comedy of this generation.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
What "Funny People" undoubtedly has is tremendous acting. You have Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, Leslie Mann, Eric Bana, Jonah Hill, and Jason Schwartzman. All are impressive, but Adam Sandler stands out from the rest. He is terrific here as George Simmons. Yes, you get the natural Sandler, out-of-control stuff. But what you also get here is the dramatic actor type. And when he is turns into that kind of actor, he is dynamite. Never misses a beat throughout the whole thing. He has turned in two other great performances like this before (in "Punch Drunk Love" and "Reign Over Me"), but this third effort is easily his best by a mile. May not be the best performance of the year, but c'mon now. Give credit where credit is due. One of the best performances of the year so far.
And now let's talk Seth Rogen, who plays Ira Wright. Let me tell you something that I've never said about him before. I really, REALLY admired his performance in this film. Like Sandler, he is still Rogen. That classic laugh and his dirty mind. But now that he has lost all that weight, he added some terrific acting skills that can get him some great roles in the future. In being funny, he goes along with Sandler, but when the going gets rough and he's in a serious scene with Sandler, he holds his ground brilliantly. And though he won't get the same credit as Sandler, this is by far his best performance that he has ever turned in. You saw the talent of Seth Rogen in Apatow's "Knocked Up", and now he is fully utilizing that talent.
The story is simple, but wonderful. George Simmons (Sandler), a famous comedian and actor, is told by the doctor that test results were bad. It's over. The sickness can't be repaired. Bottom line: he's dying. Simmons, who is lonely and sad, goes and hires Ira Wright (Rogen), who he liked very much in his stand-up set. Wright goes on to write jokes for Simmons when he performs. As time passes, there is a sign of a true friendship. Wright thinks so, anyway. Simmons practically has no friends, BTW, so this is good for him. Simmons then starts talking to his long lost love, Laura (Mann). The problem is that she's married and George wants her, bad. Can his friendship with Ira save him from his emptiness, dealing with the sickness? And can George get back with his "true love", Laura?
Judd Apatow's screenplay and direction is truly amazing. From top to bottom, "Funny People" is nearly flawless. Could've been a tad shorter, but it's not monumental. All in all, Judd Apatow has made a terrific film that is killer funny and genuinely dramatic. It is safe to say that he is the king of comedy of this generation.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Watchmen review
When you think of a Zack Snyder film, you see a total feast of eye-candy. And like his previous film "300", this is another spectacular visual feast. But unlike "300", Snyder's new movie is a true masterpiece. "The Dark Knight" took superhero movies to a new level. And now with "Watchmen", the level was raised even higher. Both films are similar in being sophisticated but more importantly similar in its impact. Based on one of the most important graphic novels in American history, "Watchmen" is a movie experience that is hard to forget.
The Watchmen don't have superpowers, with the exception of one team member. Dr. Manhattan is a naked blue man who was once a human named Jon Osterman. When he turned into his new form accidentally, he was equipped with a whole set of powers. People even compared him to GOD with his ability to see the future and his own past. But other than him, the watchmen don't really have powers. They are still in normal superhero attire, though. Masks, capes, latex, boots, and gloves. You name it. But ultimately, they are actually in search of themselves in this so-called corrupt world that we live in. So are they really saving the world? Edward "The Comedian" Blake said it the best, "We're really saving the humans from themselves."
The year is 1985 and Nixon is elected for the fourth time. The Watchmen are simply a washed-up group of vigilantes who believe that they, as a whole, are over and done. Then all of sudden one of the Watchmen, "The Comedian", is found murdered, thrown out his apartment through a window. The remaining, believing member of the group Rorschach, who wears a mask that changes design, plans to find out who murdered his teammate. And to make it worse, there are rumors floating around that someone plans to start a nuclear war. Rorschach wonders if someone is out to kill all the remaining Watchmen so they won't keep the war from happening. Who is planning all this? Who killed Edward "The Comedian" Blake? Do the other Watchmen along with Dr. Manhattan think they can stop this war from ever launching? You will have to watch to find out these answers.
All in all, Zack Snyder's take on the hugely popular graphic novel is terrific. The art design, cinematography, and script are all unique and brilliant. The opening montage of credits is one of the best i have seen. The score is top-notch and really adds to the whole feel to the movie. If you think Zack Snyder went all-out in terms of graphic violence in "300", think again. "Watchmen" is right up there. Truly an experience that must be had more than once. One of the year's best.
Rating: 4 out of 4
The Watchmen don't have superpowers, with the exception of one team member. Dr. Manhattan is a naked blue man who was once a human named Jon Osterman. When he turned into his new form accidentally, he was equipped with a whole set of powers. People even compared him to GOD with his ability to see the future and his own past. But other than him, the watchmen don't really have powers. They are still in normal superhero attire, though. Masks, capes, latex, boots, and gloves. You name it. But ultimately, they are actually in search of themselves in this so-called corrupt world that we live in. So are they really saving the world? Edward "The Comedian" Blake said it the best, "We're really saving the humans from themselves."
The year is 1985 and Nixon is elected for the fourth time. The Watchmen are simply a washed-up group of vigilantes who believe that they, as a whole, are over and done. Then all of sudden one of the Watchmen, "The Comedian", is found murdered, thrown out his apartment through a window. The remaining, believing member of the group Rorschach, who wears a mask that changes design, plans to find out who murdered his teammate. And to make it worse, there are rumors floating around that someone plans to start a nuclear war. Rorschach wonders if someone is out to kill all the remaining Watchmen so they won't keep the war from happening. Who is planning all this? Who killed Edward "The Comedian" Blake? Do the other Watchmen along with Dr. Manhattan think they can stop this war from ever launching? You will have to watch to find out these answers.
All in all, Zack Snyder's take on the hugely popular graphic novel is terrific. The art design, cinematography, and script are all unique and brilliant. The opening montage of credits is one of the best i have seen. The score is top-notch and really adds to the whole feel to the movie. If you think Zack Snyder went all-out in terms of graphic violence in "300", think again. "Watchmen" is right up there. Truly an experience that must be had more than once. One of the year's best.
Rating: 4 out of 4
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Burn After Reading review
The Coen brothers have done it again. Simple as that. They did it with Academy-award winning "No Country For Old Men", and here they are again. Written and directed by the Coens, "Burn After Reading" is extremely "dark", which means that it is a comedy involving violence, blood, and death. This should already be expected from the brothers, as this is their style of work. But their ability to mix the times of intensity along with the comedy is masterful. Like what every actor says of them, "they know what they want."
Well, this film stars Brad Pitt, George Clooney, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, and Richard Jenkins. Heard of any of them? Let's hope so. For those that know them, you know that it is an A-list cast. And yes, they give A-list performances. Pitt and Clooney are effortless and Malkovich is big, bad, and mean with Jenikins as the gentler gym owner. The girls, Swinton, and McDormand, stand their ground with the men and monumentally help the film. Each and every character in this film is dysfunctional one way or the other. If its Clooney's inability to be faithful or McDormand's want for surgery and liposuction, all their flaws somehow relate to one another. And when they mix, everything is just dark but comedic.
Malkovich, a former CIA agent, has lost his files that contain information about this memoir that he plans to write. It falls into the hands of Pitt and McDormand, and they plan to sell it. Of course, when Malkovich finds out about this, he has different plans. The couple of scenes between Pitt and Malkovich are great, whether it is over the phone or the classic scene in the car, it is always hilarious. So how is Clooney in this? Well, he is dating Malkovich's wife (Swinton), who wants to divorce him. Then eh starts dating McDormand. Yes, it sounds confusing, but the Coens masterly bring these dysfunctional worlds together.
"Burn After Reading" is a hilarious adult comedy with some great acting. The script is excellent and the look and feel of the film fits terrifically well with the subject manner. The violence is surprisingly insane and cruel, but you somehow always find yourself laughing during this film. Altogether another fantastically made movie by the Coens. And yes, this is one of their best efforts.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Well, this film stars Brad Pitt, George Clooney, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, and Richard Jenkins. Heard of any of them? Let's hope so. For those that know them, you know that it is an A-list cast. And yes, they give A-list performances. Pitt and Clooney are effortless and Malkovich is big, bad, and mean with Jenikins as the gentler gym owner. The girls, Swinton, and McDormand, stand their ground with the men and monumentally help the film. Each and every character in this film is dysfunctional one way or the other. If its Clooney's inability to be faithful or McDormand's want for surgery and liposuction, all their flaws somehow relate to one another. And when they mix, everything is just dark but comedic.
Malkovich, a former CIA agent, has lost his files that contain information about this memoir that he plans to write. It falls into the hands of Pitt and McDormand, and they plan to sell it. Of course, when Malkovich finds out about this, he has different plans. The couple of scenes between Pitt and Malkovich are great, whether it is over the phone or the classic scene in the car, it is always hilarious. So how is Clooney in this? Well, he is dating Malkovich's wife (Swinton), who wants to divorce him. Then eh starts dating McDormand. Yes, it sounds confusing, but the Coens masterly bring these dysfunctional worlds together.
"Burn After Reading" is a hilarious adult comedy with some great acting. The script is excellent and the look and feel of the film fits terrifically well with the subject manner. The violence is surprisingly insane and cruel, but you somehow always find yourself laughing during this film. Altogether another fantastically made movie by the Coens. And yes, this is one of their best efforts.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Fast & Furious review
Paul Walker and Vin Diesel are back in the latest installment of the "Fast and the Furious" series of movies. They are back, but are they, along with the movie, better and upgraded? Well, the cars are. The new models and sleek designs will drive fanboys crazy. But other than that, I am afraid to say that this film isn't much of an upgrade over the other movies. Ok, this one is monumentally better than Tokyo Drift, but that film was terrible. It really isn't making much of a statement.
Let's start with the acting. Vin Diesel hasn't been in any "Fast and the Furious" film since the first one, and now that he has returned, he has added to the mediocre cast of actors. Paul Walker, though absent from Tokyo Drift, is back and hits one note. I can describe his performance as "a block of wood". Michelle Rodriguez is back, but gives a minimal and typical Michelle Rodriguez performance. That, of course, is trying to be tough with the guys. Jordana Brewster is ok in this, but surely gives a promising performance. She should obviously be casted in bigger, more serious roles. So all in all the acting in this film is bleh.
The story itself is simple. O'Conner (Walker) and Toretto (Diesel) are planning to take down a heroin importer. And yes, you guessed it, there is going to be a lot of cars used in this plan. The chases are nicely made and clever, but at times turns extremely implausible. The chases underground especially, as it doesn't even look real. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy some of the action and the cars, but the film so often prolongs each sequence and makes the movie altogether longer than it shouldv'e been.
All in all, "Fast & Furious" is below average. I was not a huge fan of Justin Lin's series, but liked it. This film didn't hurt or help my opinion on this series as a whole. If there is going to be another movie in this series, then hopefully the new one will improve on a lot of the loopholes. But until then, the latest one almost seems forced. Just ultimately pure mediocrity.
rating: 2 out of 4
Let's start with the acting. Vin Diesel hasn't been in any "Fast and the Furious" film since the first one, and now that he has returned, he has added to the mediocre cast of actors. Paul Walker, though absent from Tokyo Drift, is back and hits one note. I can describe his performance as "a block of wood". Michelle Rodriguez is back, but gives a minimal and typical Michelle Rodriguez performance. That, of course, is trying to be tough with the guys. Jordana Brewster is ok in this, but surely gives a promising performance. She should obviously be casted in bigger, more serious roles. So all in all the acting in this film is bleh.
The story itself is simple. O'Conner (Walker) and Toretto (Diesel) are planning to take down a heroin importer. And yes, you guessed it, there is going to be a lot of cars used in this plan. The chases are nicely made and clever, but at times turns extremely implausible. The chases underground especially, as it doesn't even look real. Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy some of the action and the cars, but the film so often prolongs each sequence and makes the movie altogether longer than it shouldv'e been.
All in all, "Fast & Furious" is below average. I was not a huge fan of Justin Lin's series, but liked it. This film didn't hurt or help my opinion on this series as a whole. If there is going to be another movie in this series, then hopefully the new one will improve on a lot of the loopholes. But until then, the latest one almost seems forced. Just ultimately pure mediocrity.
rating: 2 out of 4
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Public Enemies review
Johnny Depp stars in an excellent action flick directed by acclaimed director Michael Mann. John Dillinger, a bank robber and criminal, has escaped prison. Solution? Melvin Purvis and gang try to catch and ultimately kill him. With this as basically the summary of the film along with strong performances by both Depp and Christian Bale, you have a supreme thriller that is absolutely dynamite. A ticking bomb ready to explode. And when “Public Enemies” explodes, it is purely amazing.
Besides the two main performances, Marion Cotillard joins the mix and gives a solid performance as Dillinger’s worried girlfriend. The love story between the two characters is a roller coaster. It’s as if they almost have a forced love, while at the same time they show true love. The romance is a terrific addition to an already terrific action film.
The cinematography is absolutely original, as the film is shot with a digital HD camera. The handheld camera feel to it makes the audience feel like you are right there in the midst of the gunfire. And in each action sequence, I felt like I was dodging bullets. Mann has perfected the idea of the hunter vs. the hunted in “Public Enemies”. It transforms from an action film to a genuine suspense thriller.
With Purvis constantly searching for Dillinger, the film turns into a classic cat-and-mouse chase. And this constant chase couldn’t have been made any better by Michael Mann or performed any better by Depp and Bale. With a captivating story and masterly crafted action sequences, “Public Enemies” is simply a great movie and one of the best movies of the year.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Besides the two main performances, Marion Cotillard joins the mix and gives a solid performance as Dillinger’s worried girlfriend. The love story between the two characters is a roller coaster. It’s as if they almost have a forced love, while at the same time they show true love. The romance is a terrific addition to an already terrific action film.
The cinematography is absolutely original, as the film is shot with a digital HD camera. The handheld camera feel to it makes the audience feel like you are right there in the midst of the gunfire. And in each action sequence, I felt like I was dodging bullets. Mann has perfected the idea of the hunter vs. the hunted in “Public Enemies”. It transforms from an action film to a genuine suspense thriller.
With Purvis constantly searching for Dillinger, the film turns into a classic cat-and-mouse chase. And this constant chase couldn’t have been made any better by Michael Mann or performed any better by Depp and Bale. With a captivating story and masterly crafted action sequences, “Public Enemies” is simply a great movie and one of the best movies of the year.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Bruno review
Sacha Baron Cohen is back and at it again. After creating “Borat” and making it a hit, Cohen decided to create “Bruno”. And like “Borat”, Cohen once again doesn’t miss a beat. He’s a comedic genius. He’s outstanding and fabulous. But the best word to describe Cohen is absolutely fearless.
The film is about a gay Austrian model named Bruno, and he just got fired for wearing his unusual suit entirely made of velcro. He then wants to become a celebrity in Los Angeles, and would do anything to get this done. From adopting an African baby to, yes, attempting to become straight. There is no question here that this film may offend many people out there. Cohen not only takes some shots at gay America, but also pokes some fun at Mexicans, African-Americans, and even celebrities. But the bottom line is that all the satire in this film is amazingly funny. I don’t care what anyone says or feels about the content in “Bruno”, but it is undeniably hilarious.
Let us also get one more thing straight, this is not a film for children, immature teens, thin-skinned people, or weak stomachs. Ok, “Bruno” is not for many people out there. But if you aren’t in one of those categories, you will have extreme fun watching this film. But when the poster reads the “R” rating, it really means it. “Bruno” actually pushes the boundaries of the “R” rating. The only thing that may keep this film from being a porno may be the little black boxes covering everything.
But back to my review. This film definitely has some greatness in it. Yes, some situations may seem staged, but a lot of the pranks seem freakishly real. Because of this, “Bruno” is outright hilarious from start to end. You will undoubtedly cringe at some of the insane, shocking, and unbelievable moments. But when you combine cringing with huge laughter, you get a classic comedy that is just as funny as Sacha Baron Cohen’s other creation, “Borat”. I can sum up “Bruno” in simply two words: outrageously outrageous.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
The film is about a gay Austrian model named Bruno, and he just got fired for wearing his unusual suit entirely made of velcro. He then wants to become a celebrity in Los Angeles, and would do anything to get this done. From adopting an African baby to, yes, attempting to become straight. There is no question here that this film may offend many people out there. Cohen not only takes some shots at gay America, but also pokes some fun at Mexicans, African-Americans, and even celebrities. But the bottom line is that all the satire in this film is amazingly funny. I don’t care what anyone says or feels about the content in “Bruno”, but it is undeniably hilarious.
Let us also get one more thing straight, this is not a film for children, immature teens, thin-skinned people, or weak stomachs. Ok, “Bruno” is not for many people out there. But if you aren’t in one of those categories, you will have extreme fun watching this film. But when the poster reads the “R” rating, it really means it. “Bruno” actually pushes the boundaries of the “R” rating. The only thing that may keep this film from being a porno may be the little black boxes covering everything.
But back to my review. This film definitely has some greatness in it. Yes, some situations may seem staged, but a lot of the pranks seem freakishly real. Because of this, “Bruno” is outright hilarious from start to end. You will undoubtedly cringe at some of the insane, shocking, and unbelievable moments. But when you combine cringing with huge laughter, you get a classic comedy that is just as funny as Sacha Baron Cohen’s other creation, “Borat”. I can sum up “Bruno” in simply two words: outrageously outrageous.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen review
Michael Bay’s new film is similar to all his others. This means many explosions and fire. But what makes this film different from the rest is that Michael Bay has decided to make this one extra-explosive. You think Michael Bay has actually exploded stuff before? Think again. You ain’t seen nothing yet. But is this really a good thing for the film? I don’t think so.
Before we get into the negatives, though, let’s look at the few positives that save the film. Shia LaBeouf gives another promising performance as Sam. He is better here than the first and even his performance in the 4th Indiana Jones film. And Megan Fox is extremely hot. It is obvious that she is NOT in the movie for acting skills, but rather her sex appeal. And yes, she has amazing sex appeal. And though the film overall wasn’t that great, you can’t deny how masterly made and how beautiful the film really is. Truly looks and feels like a Michael Bay film.
But now let’s look at the negatives. Did the first one seem kinda dragged or a little too long? Well, a little, but it wasn’t long enough to be docked points for. It still ended up to be a enjoyable thrill ride. The new one, though, feels so much more dragged. Even though it may not be much longer than the first one in terms of running time, it offers up too much action and too much mayhem that you surprisingly urge all of it to end. And since there are just so many explosions with extremely loud sounds, it starts to get ridiculous and insane. You may actually start to get dizzy or even a headache. And though the first 30 minutes or so is enjoyable, it seemingly loses its way, spinning into a region known as “confused”.
This is certainly not Michael Bay’s best film, but it also isn’t his worst. What Bay needs to learn is that sometimes more doesn’t actually mean more. This isn’t close to “The Rock”, but it isn’t the terrible “Pearl Harbor”.
Rating: 2 out of 4
Before we get into the negatives, though, let’s look at the few positives that save the film. Shia LaBeouf gives another promising performance as Sam. He is better here than the first and even his performance in the 4th Indiana Jones film. And Megan Fox is extremely hot. It is obvious that she is NOT in the movie for acting skills, but rather her sex appeal. And yes, she has amazing sex appeal. And though the film overall wasn’t that great, you can’t deny how masterly made and how beautiful the film really is. Truly looks and feels like a Michael Bay film.
But now let’s look at the negatives. Did the first one seem kinda dragged or a little too long? Well, a little, but it wasn’t long enough to be docked points for. It still ended up to be a enjoyable thrill ride. The new one, though, feels so much more dragged. Even though it may not be much longer than the first one in terms of running time, it offers up too much action and too much mayhem that you surprisingly urge all of it to end. And since there are just so many explosions with extremely loud sounds, it starts to get ridiculous and insane. You may actually start to get dizzy or even a headache. And though the first 30 minutes or so is enjoyable, it seemingly loses its way, spinning into a region known as “confused”.
This is certainly not Michael Bay’s best film, but it also isn’t his worst. What Bay needs to learn is that sometimes more doesn’t actually mean more. This isn’t close to “The Rock”, but it isn’t the terrible “Pearl Harbor”.
Rating: 2 out of 4
The Hangover review
This is what an adult comedy should be. “The Hangover” is purely hilarious from the start all the way to the end. The story is simple enough. 3 friends wake up to find a tiger in the restroom, a baby in the closet, and most importantly, their 4th friend missing. The 3 can’t remember anything, and they go on a wild adventure to find clues and search for their lost friend. Oh, and to make it worse, the missing friend has to get married in a couple of days. Put all this together and you have a killer comedy that turns into a classic mystery film.
This is Todd Phillips’s last film since the acclaimed “Old School”, and this one probably surpasses it. The 3 who really make this film extremely funny is Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis. Their chemistry is amazingly intriguing and just outright outrageous when together on screen. Whether they are drunk or fighting, you can’t help but laugh at these three. Las Vegas is the setting and the saying of this film, “some guys just can’t handle Vegas”, is rectified by “The Hangover”.
The true magic of this Todd Phillips comedy is its ability to make you feel like you are with them every step of the way. You don’t know anything either, and you are as involved in the mystery as the characters are. A perfect Summer comedy that will keep you laughing until it hurts. I will go as far as to say that if you don’t laugh then there is something wrong with you.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
This is Todd Phillips’s last film since the acclaimed “Old School”, and this one probably surpasses it. The 3 who really make this film extremely funny is Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis. Their chemistry is amazingly intriguing and just outright outrageous when together on screen. Whether they are drunk or fighting, you can’t help but laugh at these three. Las Vegas is the setting and the saying of this film, “some guys just can’t handle Vegas”, is rectified by “The Hangover”.
The true magic of this Todd Phillips comedy is its ability to make you feel like you are with them every step of the way. You don’t know anything either, and you are as involved in the mystery as the characters are. A perfect Summer comedy that will keep you laughing until it hurts. I will go as far as to say that if you don’t laugh then there is something wrong with you.
Rating: 31/2 out of 4
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)