Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is True Grit. Written and Directed by Ethan & Joel Coen. Based on the novel True Grit. Written by Charles Portis
100th review countdown....#98
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for some intense sequences of western violence including disturbing images.
Runtime: 110 min
Cast
Jeff Bridges - Rooster Cogburn
Hailee Steinfeld - Mattie Ross
Matt Damon - LaBoeuf
Josh Brolin - Tom Chaney
Barry Pepper - Lucky Ned Pepper
It's that time of year. We all know what that means. Another Coen Bros film to take in. This seems more like a ritual than coincidence. No matter what you call it. It works for them. And if it takes this long for the dynamic duo to come out with their latest and greatest then it's well worth the wait.
Following the death of her father. 14 year old Mattie Ross sets out to find the killer and bring him to justice. To do this she employs the service of U.S. Marshal Rooster Cogburn. A man that carries a reputation of always finding his man....dead but found. Against his wishes, Mattie accompanies him on the hunt for her father's murderer. Along the way they are met by Texas Ranger LaBeouf who's in pursuit of the same man for a different crime. Together the trio set out on the same singular goal but with three very different final outcomes in mind.
The Coen Brothers strike again. There's no other way I can put it. These two masters of film making have once again reminded us what a movie's basic and most important function is.
Storytelling.
Their writing ability is no secret to anyone who pays attention. It's their ability to take you back to a time where people said and did things that we only experienced from books is what continues to amaze me. They showcase a vision that can't be contained. The subtle and not so subtle use of "language" is superbly on display here. When I say language, I don't mean profanity.
I'm speaking specifically to the vernacular used in this period of history that the film takes place. Since we are in the wild west, every character comes well equipped with an accent and speaking style just as visible as their guns. The jargon tossed out is on point with what we are expected to see and it's delivered with the right amount of inflection needed to get the point across.
The brothers wizardry doesn't stop with the pen. They complete the task by detailing every other aspect of this film with the exact elements that ensures it's success.
Cast
Cinematography
Editing
The cast is STELLAR! Which should come as no surprise to a Coen Bros film. Jeff Bridges as Cogburn just comes at you with a teeth cutting performance. He slogs around in a drunken stupor spewing his dialogue with one of the strongest Arkansas twangs I have ever heard. His presence commands your attention in spite of his physical deficiencies. As flawed as he may appear, he leaves no doubt in your mind that at any point he can and will kick your ass.
Matt Damon is well Matt Damon. Need I say more? He can play any role and do it with his eyes closed. His plays LaBeouf with the toughness of a Texas Ranger but with a hint of education that implies a higher sense of status among Cogburn and Mattie. This makes him a tad on the annoying side but it works because he gives you a welcome imbalance of stupid tough guys that litter the wild west.
Finally we have the film's breakout performance from 14 year old Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie. This girl was amazing. Mattie showcases her superior intellect among the savvy businessmen in town while maintaining an insatiable desire for vengeance. Her dialogue is razor sharp and Hailee cuts through it sharper. There's no doubt that the brothers guided her well but her acting chops shine through in her performance. This young lad has a bright future in this business.
Expect all 3 to get Oscar nominations.
The Coen Bros do their best to keep the same crew around them when they make their film and this holds no truer than their Director of Photography Roger Deakins. He's shot 14 of the brothers films and has been nominated for 8 Academy Awards and sadly has come away empty handed. Some call it unfortunate. I call it CRIMINAL! You want proof of how great a shooter this man is?
Look no further than the first shot of the film. I say no more about it. You must see it.
Finally we come to the cutting of the film by world renowned Film Editor Roderick Jaynes. What is it that makes Roderick Jaynes so world renowned you ask? He is Ethan and Joel Coen. They have been cutting their films on their own since their very first film. What is more impressive is that they've had final cut control of all their films. That's unbelievable. I can't remember a director having final cut control of their films at the outset of their film careers. In any case it's paid off on both sides of the coin. The brothers get to make the film they want in the edit room and the audience enjoys the fruits of their labor.
You put all of this together and you got yourself another Coen classic worthy of it's place among the many classics that came before it.
This ones a Best Picture contender and possible winner. No question.
On the 5 star scale. True Grit gets the full house 5 stars with a big time "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
These guys continue to crank out films that challenge themselves to top it's predecessor. Not only is the challenge met. It's exceeded. It's curious how they seem display their expertise right around the time the calendar turns toward awards season. Take that for what you will. We as an audience are the true winners in the end.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is The King's Speech and if you've been following along that will make film #99.
Just one more to go.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Tron: Legacy
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Tron: Legacy. Directed by Joseph Kosinski. Written by Edward Kitsis & Adam Horowitz. Screen Story by Edward Kitsis, Adam Horowitz, Brian Klugman & Lee Sternthal. Based on characters created by Steven Lisberger & Bonnie MacBird
100th review countdown....#97
MPAA Rating: PG for sequences of sci-fi action violence and brief mild language.
Runtime: 127 min
Cast
Jeff Bridges - Kevin Flynn / Clu
Garrett Hedlund - Sam Flynn
Olivia Wilde - Quorra
Bruce Boxleitner - Alan Bradley / Tron
James Frain - Jarvis
Beau Garrett - Gem
Michael Sheen - Castor / Zuse
28 years ago, the movie going public was treated to a very cheesy yet revolutionary sci fi film. The concept of Tron was very clever and ambitious. The execution however did not meet the expectations that the visuals placed in front of it. Fast forward almost 3 decades and we are given another ambitious visit to the Tron universe. Was it successful?
That depends on your opinion of the first film.
Set twenty plus years after the first film. Tron designer Kevin Flynn is missing and presumed dead. His son Sam now 27 is rejecting his destiny to take control of his father's company. Instead he plays games with the greedy board of directors by releasing the company's newest software for free on the Internet seconds before it goes on sale to the public. After some convincing from Kevin's partner Alan, Sam heads to his father's arcade to investigate a mysterious page sent by Flynn. Sam discovers a secret room that transports him into the grid (the computer world from the original Tron). Sam reunites with his father. He explains that he was held captive by the program he created (Clu) to facilitate and improve the grid world. Sam and Flynn spend the rest of the film reconnecting while trying to get home and dodge Clu's army of loyal program followers
Having virtually no memory of the original Tron. I went into this one with a blank slate. I have to say I was entertained. The special effects in this film are outrageous. The vibrancy of the colors blow you away. The action is highlighted by very detailed and precise movements. Since you are dealing with a computer generated world you aren't bound by the laws of reality. Tron: Legacy like it's predecessor takes full advantage of that fact and we as an audience are the beneficiaries of it.
Of course with a film loaded with effects and action sends up a red flag that the story suffers as a result. That's slightly the case here. The premise of the film is very very simple yet they try to make it complex and brainy. Not a good idea. Just give us guys flying around, riding their light cycles and fighting with their discs. That's what the movie is supposed to showcase. Don't complicate things by trying to make a film something it's not. Once I got past that little faux pas I enjoyed the film. One word of warning. Don;t expect to be blown away by the digital 3D a la Avatar. This was a major disappointment on that end. That went double for me since I sprung to see it in IMAX 3D.
On the 5 star scale. Tron; Legacy gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
You're not going to learn anything here. It's just mindless fun that was pretty slick to see.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is True Grit.
Hope everyone had a great Christmas and wish you all a very Happy New Year.
I'm going to dig my car out of 18 feet of snow now.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Tron: Legacy. Directed by Joseph Kosinski. Written by Edward Kitsis & Adam Horowitz. Screen Story by Edward Kitsis, Adam Horowitz, Brian Klugman & Lee Sternthal. Based on characters created by Steven Lisberger & Bonnie MacBird
100th review countdown....#97
MPAA Rating: PG for sequences of sci-fi action violence and brief mild language.
Runtime: 127 min
Cast
Jeff Bridges - Kevin Flynn / Clu
Garrett Hedlund - Sam Flynn
Olivia Wilde - Quorra
Bruce Boxleitner - Alan Bradley / Tron
James Frain - Jarvis
Beau Garrett - Gem
Michael Sheen - Castor / Zuse
28 years ago, the movie going public was treated to a very cheesy yet revolutionary sci fi film. The concept of Tron was very clever and ambitious. The execution however did not meet the expectations that the visuals placed in front of it. Fast forward almost 3 decades and we are given another ambitious visit to the Tron universe. Was it successful?
That depends on your opinion of the first film.
Set twenty plus years after the first film. Tron designer Kevin Flynn is missing and presumed dead. His son Sam now 27 is rejecting his destiny to take control of his father's company. Instead he plays games with the greedy board of directors by releasing the company's newest software for free on the Internet seconds before it goes on sale to the public. After some convincing from Kevin's partner Alan, Sam heads to his father's arcade to investigate a mysterious page sent by Flynn. Sam discovers a secret room that transports him into the grid (the computer world from the original Tron). Sam reunites with his father. He explains that he was held captive by the program he created (Clu) to facilitate and improve the grid world. Sam and Flynn spend the rest of the film reconnecting while trying to get home and dodge Clu's army of loyal program followers
Having virtually no memory of the original Tron. I went into this one with a blank slate. I have to say I was entertained. The special effects in this film are outrageous. The vibrancy of the colors blow you away. The action is highlighted by very detailed and precise movements. Since you are dealing with a computer generated world you aren't bound by the laws of reality. Tron: Legacy like it's predecessor takes full advantage of that fact and we as an audience are the beneficiaries of it.
Of course with a film loaded with effects and action sends up a red flag that the story suffers as a result. That's slightly the case here. The premise of the film is very very simple yet they try to make it complex and brainy. Not a good idea. Just give us guys flying around, riding their light cycles and fighting with their discs. That's what the movie is supposed to showcase. Don't complicate things by trying to make a film something it's not. Once I got past that little faux pas I enjoyed the film. One word of warning. Don;t expect to be blown away by the digital 3D a la Avatar. This was a major disappointment on that end. That went double for me since I sprung to see it in IMAX 3D.
On the 5 star scale. Tron; Legacy gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
You're not going to learn anything here. It's just mindless fun that was pretty slick to see.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is True Grit.
Hope everyone had a great Christmas and wish you all a very Happy New Year.
I'm going to dig my car out of 18 feet of snow now.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
The Fighter
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is The Fighter. Directed by David O. Russell. Written by Scott Silver, Paul Tamsay & Eric Johnson. Screen Story by Paul Tamsay, Eric Johnson & Keith Dorrington.
100th review countdown....#96
MPAA Rating: R for language throughout, drug content, some violence and sexuality.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Mark Wahlberg - Mickey Ward
Christian Bale - Dicky Eklund
Amy Adams - Charlene Fleming
Melissa Leo - Alice Ward
Mickey O'Keefe - Himself
Jack McGee - George Ward
Hollywood is certainly no stranger to the "Based on a true story" genre. Most of the time they get it wrong. That's right I said wrong. The powers that be insist on making our minds for us when they make these pictures. Mostly by sensationalizing the actual story rather than telling the actual story that inspired it's cinematic creation in the first place. They don't believe that we can embrace the journey that this real life individual took to get where he or she ended up.
The alternative is to "bend" the truth a little to serve the needs of pure entertainment. A lot of the time it accomplishes it's goal and an entertaining picture is made. I however, find it a bit troubling that producers and studios go this route at all. The defense would be to make a great film that people will love. I see it more as a lack of faith with the true elements that gave you the inspiration to tell the story at the outset.
There are occasions where a film that's based on a true story or events is so good that you don't care if certain aspects are overblown, exaggerated or even fabricated for the sake of the project. The Social Network immediately comes to mind as a perfect example. The Fighter is another example with a very big difference. The main story of The Fighter is very cardboard and predictable at the roots. What makes this film an instant winner is hands down is the performance of one man.
That man is Christian Bale.
The Fighter follows the events of journeyman boxer Mickey Ward and his very large and dysfunctional family in Lowell Massachusetts. Mickey's a talented fighter who's under the thumb of his manager mother Alice and crackhead trainer brother Dicky. His undying loyalty to his family clouds his vision of a possible bright future in the sport that he loves so much. You are taken through Mickey's struggles in and out of the ring as he tries to pick up the pieces of his broken family while attempting to make a name for himself in the boxing world.
This movie is filled with tremendous performances by a group of amazing actors but the spotlight shines brightest on Bale. His portrayal as Dicky is indescribably powerful. He's got everything down to the slightest detail. From the Boston accent to the physical mannerisms that crack heads are known for. I know that we are mostly familiar with Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne but this man is an actor's actor. He gets down and dirty with the roles he takes. Need proof? I have several examples of memorable characters he's played in the past.
Patrick Bateman in American Psycho.
Trevor Reznick in The Machinist.
Alfred Borden in The Prestige.
Melvin Purvis in Public Enemies.
If these don't convince you of his ability then just like Flavor Flav says...."I can't do nothin for ya man!"
He tops all of those performances in this movie. Which is both a good and bad thing. It's great for him because he continues to showcase how great he is on screen. It's bad because he steals the show from three other great performances.
Mark Wahlberg looks nothing like the real Mickey Ward but you have no problem believing that he's a struggling fighter trying to get out of his ring rut. You see early on that his biggest opponent in the film is his family. They're not intentionally doing wrong by him, they just refuse to see the world from outside their island. By doing that they hold Mickey back and his loyalty keeps him from making his own mind. Which segues nicely to the head of the control factor.
Alice Ward.
Melissa Leo has been on a roll since her Best Actress nomination for Frozen River back in 2008. Since then she's had a starring role on HBO's Katrina drama Treme. Among several other projects. She's an extremely talented woman with unlimited range which is on full display here. Leo plays Alice with a gritty toughness that a white trash mom with 9 kids needs in order to survive. Her life is devoted to the success of her two fighter sons and she doesn't let anyone step in the way of that. Just like Dicky, her intentions with Mickey are meant with his best interests at heart but she's so blinded by outside influence that it stunts Mikey's potential. With characters like this you would get the feeling that Alice is intentionally bringing his son down but Leo is able to separate that from her performance.
Expect another Best Actress nomination for this one.
Finally you have the stunning Amy Adams as Mickey's future and current wife Charlene. Just like everyone else in this film, Charlene is one tough cookie. Adams still finds away to keep her sexuality while maintaining her raging bull spirit. She sees the folly in Mickey's family and is more than willing to play the voice of reason. She's not afraid of telling it like it is and throwing down if that's what it takes.
These performances make up for what is a very cut and dry and rather lack luster come from behind story. Don't get me wrong. It's extremely uplifting to see Mickey get his rewards in the end. I just didn't see the dynamics that other heroics stories have produced in the past. Despite of the lack of "character" so to speak, the story that is told is told exquisitely. It moves swiftly and still keeps it's emotion. The boxing scenes are fast, furious and well displayed. Of course there are all after thoughts once you see Bale on screen when the first frame appears. From that point on you won't care what film you're seeing.
You'll just want to see more of Dicky.
He's got a Best Supporting Oscar coming his way. Take this one to the bank. The only regret is that since he's not the top name on the marquee of this film he can't be considered for Best Actor. This is a shame but who knows.
Stranger stuff has happened come Oscar time.
On the 5 star scale. The Fighter gets 4.5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation. This is another film that has potential for Best Picture. I'm sure it will get nominated but it has no chance to win. Not with some big time flicks yet to debut like True Grit and The King's Speech. We'll just have to wait and see if this movie has a "fighting" chance.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Tron Legacy.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The Fighter. Directed by David O. Russell. Written by Scott Silver, Paul Tamsay & Eric Johnson. Screen Story by Paul Tamsay, Eric Johnson & Keith Dorrington.
100th review countdown....#96
MPAA Rating: R for language throughout, drug content, some violence and sexuality.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Mark Wahlberg - Mickey Ward
Christian Bale - Dicky Eklund
Amy Adams - Charlene Fleming
Melissa Leo - Alice Ward
Mickey O'Keefe - Himself
Jack McGee - George Ward
Hollywood is certainly no stranger to the "Based on a true story" genre. Most of the time they get it wrong. That's right I said wrong. The powers that be insist on making our minds for us when they make these pictures. Mostly by sensationalizing the actual story rather than telling the actual story that inspired it's cinematic creation in the first place. They don't believe that we can embrace the journey that this real life individual took to get where he or she ended up.
The alternative is to "bend" the truth a little to serve the needs of pure entertainment. A lot of the time it accomplishes it's goal and an entertaining picture is made. I however, find it a bit troubling that producers and studios go this route at all. The defense would be to make a great film that people will love. I see it more as a lack of faith with the true elements that gave you the inspiration to tell the story at the outset.
There are occasions where a film that's based on a true story or events is so good that you don't care if certain aspects are overblown, exaggerated or even fabricated for the sake of the project. The Social Network immediately comes to mind as a perfect example. The Fighter is another example with a very big difference. The main story of The Fighter is very cardboard and predictable at the roots. What makes this film an instant winner is hands down is the performance of one man.
That man is Christian Bale.
The Fighter follows the events of journeyman boxer Mickey Ward and his very large and dysfunctional family in Lowell Massachusetts. Mickey's a talented fighter who's under the thumb of his manager mother Alice and crackhead trainer brother Dicky. His undying loyalty to his family clouds his vision of a possible bright future in the sport that he loves so much. You are taken through Mickey's struggles in and out of the ring as he tries to pick up the pieces of his broken family while attempting to make a name for himself in the boxing world.
This movie is filled with tremendous performances by a group of amazing actors but the spotlight shines brightest on Bale. His portrayal as Dicky is indescribably powerful. He's got everything down to the slightest detail. From the Boston accent to the physical mannerisms that crack heads are known for. I know that we are mostly familiar with Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne but this man is an actor's actor. He gets down and dirty with the roles he takes. Need proof? I have several examples of memorable characters he's played in the past.
Patrick Bateman in American Psycho.
Trevor Reznick in The Machinist.
Alfred Borden in The Prestige.
Melvin Purvis in Public Enemies.
If these don't convince you of his ability then just like Flavor Flav says...."I can't do nothin for ya man!"
He tops all of those performances in this movie. Which is both a good and bad thing. It's great for him because he continues to showcase how great he is on screen. It's bad because he steals the show from three other great performances.
Mark Wahlberg looks nothing like the real Mickey Ward but you have no problem believing that he's a struggling fighter trying to get out of his ring rut. You see early on that his biggest opponent in the film is his family. They're not intentionally doing wrong by him, they just refuse to see the world from outside their island. By doing that they hold Mickey back and his loyalty keeps him from making his own mind. Which segues nicely to the head of the control factor.
Alice Ward.
Melissa Leo has been on a roll since her Best Actress nomination for Frozen River back in 2008. Since then she's had a starring role on HBO's Katrina drama Treme. Among several other projects. She's an extremely talented woman with unlimited range which is on full display here. Leo plays Alice with a gritty toughness that a white trash mom with 9 kids needs in order to survive. Her life is devoted to the success of her two fighter sons and she doesn't let anyone step in the way of that. Just like Dicky, her intentions with Mickey are meant with his best interests at heart but she's so blinded by outside influence that it stunts Mikey's potential. With characters like this you would get the feeling that Alice is intentionally bringing his son down but Leo is able to separate that from her performance.
Expect another Best Actress nomination for this one.
Finally you have the stunning Amy Adams as Mickey's future and current wife Charlene. Just like everyone else in this film, Charlene is one tough cookie. Adams still finds away to keep her sexuality while maintaining her raging bull spirit. She sees the folly in Mickey's family and is more than willing to play the voice of reason. She's not afraid of telling it like it is and throwing down if that's what it takes.
These performances make up for what is a very cut and dry and rather lack luster come from behind story. Don't get me wrong. It's extremely uplifting to see Mickey get his rewards in the end. I just didn't see the dynamics that other heroics stories have produced in the past. Despite of the lack of "character" so to speak, the story that is told is told exquisitely. It moves swiftly and still keeps it's emotion. The boxing scenes are fast, furious and well displayed. Of course there are all after thoughts once you see Bale on screen when the first frame appears. From that point on you won't care what film you're seeing.
You'll just want to see more of Dicky.
He's got a Best Supporting Oscar coming his way. Take this one to the bank. The only regret is that since he's not the top name on the marquee of this film he can't be considered for Best Actor. This is a shame but who knows.
Stranger stuff has happened come Oscar time.
On the 5 star scale. The Fighter gets 4.5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation. This is another film that has potential for Best Picture. I'm sure it will get nominated but it has no chance to win. Not with some big time flicks yet to debut like True Grit and The King's Speech. We'll just have to wait and see if this movie has a "fighting" chance.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Tron Legacy.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Black Swan
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Black Swan. Directed by Darren Aronofsky. Written by Mark Heyman & Andres Heinz & John J. McLaughlin. Screen Story by Andres Heinz.
100th review countdown....#95
MPAA Rating: R for strong sexual content, disturbing violent images, language and some drug use.
Runtime: 108 min
Cast
Natalie Portman - Nina Sayers / The Swan Queen
Mila Kunis - Lily / The Black Swan
Vincent Cassel - Thomas Leroy / The Gentleman
Barbara Hershey - Erica Sayers / The Queen
Winona Ryder - Beth Macintyre / The Dying Swan
There's no doubt that ballet is not just a form of dance. It's a form of moving art. I myself am not a fan of ballet but I have always respected the intricacy and beauty that it presents to it's audience. Darren Aronofsky has found a way to turn this work of art and pervert it in ways only he can.
And ladies and gentlemen....that's a very good thing.
Nina is an accomplished, technically sound dancer who's main focus is to be perfect on the stage. This is manifested mostly by her very controlling mother who is trying to recapture her lost dancing career by living it through her daughter. Very early on you see the sacrifice that's required for Nina to maintain her physical appearance and ballet skills. It's a very demanding lifestyle that is accompanied by unforgivable amounts of pressure and competition.
When Thomas decides to open his season with a radical interpretation of Swan Lake, he selects Nina for the role. The catch is she must play both the white and black swan which proves to be challenging for Nina because she doesn't possess the natural raw seductive presence that's necessary to distinct the two very different characters. As Nina works on her inner black swan she's struggles with a recharged sexual attitude and severe competition with a rival dancer. These factors send Nina down a very dark road that changes her life forever.
Just like in The Wrestler, Aronofsky takes a well known form of entertainment and strips it down to it's soul. He exposes every aspect of it's success and failure. He does this by showing you the journey of the main character. The common denominator of these people is that for one reason or another, they are broken. In The Wrestler, The Ram was a beaten down former superstar trying to hold on to the glory days of the past. In Black Swan, Nina is in the prime of her ballet career headed for stardom but her outside influences coupled with her restrained outlook on life have held her back to becoming what she desires most. It's those struggles that give Aronofsky the freedom to take these characters down to the depths of hell.
The best part about that is that he keeps them there.
The process seems a bit more deliberate in Black Swan. The ways that Nina falls into the darkness range from the very subtle to the balls out, in your face reveal. It's those moments that Aronofsky handles with both care and razor sharp precision. It's those moments make the film as good as it is. As Nina's mind plays tricks on her, the film plays tricks with yours. You will have a hard time coming to a clear conclusion about what's going on in Nina's head until the end. That's brilliant storytelling and directing.
I think that this might be Aronofsky's finest directorial work because of what he was able to accomplish considering he was working with a paper thin plot. The script is very basic at it's core and it was transformed into a spectacle.
That's what this guy can bring to the table.
His trademark hand held camera use and tracking shots employ their own power to the story adding another ingredient to an already well made dish. Of course, he can't do it alone. He has some help in the form of four terrific actors. Natalie Portman leading off owns Nina's character. When you see her fail to unleash the passion in her portrayal of the black swan you feel the same frustration as Thomas during rehearsals. When Thomas strolls around eyeballing the dancers he commands the respect from the company that he's earned. He also displays his very famous reputation with the girls. Mila Kunis just oozes sexuality and animal instinct. She plays Lily with a care free vibrancy that is the perfect Yin to Nina's Yang. Finally Babara Hershey's performance can give you chills. I was almost reminded of Joan Crawford in Mommie Dearest. Hershey wasn't nearly as cruel but the controlling feel is present.
Another great detail that shouldn't be ignored is the music. Normally I don't comment too much on music but in this case it's a very strong supporting character. The orchestral moods blasted throughout this film were overwhelmingly powerful. It triggers the right amount of emotion at just the right time then POW! you're taken somewhere else emotionally.
There is however, one itty bitty thing to pick at with Black Swan. The film does such a great job with misdirection that when it's time to come back to reality you're not as invested in the end. The final scene felt tacked on and rushed. That's a big time shame because up until that point I was all in. As a result the score will suffer. So what is my score you ask? Well here we go.
On the 5 star scale. Black Swan gets 4 stars. With a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
The ending cost it the full house 5 stars. This doesn't change the fact that this is still a tremendous film that deserves all the attention it's getting now and hopefully in March if you catch my drift. Aronofsky is inching closer and closer to my top 5 favorite directors list. If he can do this with ballet, I can't wait to see what he does with the Wolverine sequel. Get ready for some fun true believers.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is The Fighter.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Black Swan. Directed by Darren Aronofsky. Written by Mark Heyman & Andres Heinz & John J. McLaughlin. Screen Story by Andres Heinz.
100th review countdown....#95
MPAA Rating: R for strong sexual content, disturbing violent images, language and some drug use.
Runtime: 108 min
Cast
Natalie Portman - Nina Sayers / The Swan Queen
Mila Kunis - Lily / The Black Swan
Vincent Cassel - Thomas Leroy / The Gentleman
Barbara Hershey - Erica Sayers / The Queen
Winona Ryder - Beth Macintyre / The Dying Swan
There's no doubt that ballet is not just a form of dance. It's a form of moving art. I myself am not a fan of ballet but I have always respected the intricacy and beauty that it presents to it's audience. Darren Aronofsky has found a way to turn this work of art and pervert it in ways only he can.
And ladies and gentlemen....that's a very good thing.
Nina is an accomplished, technically sound dancer who's main focus is to be perfect on the stage. This is manifested mostly by her very controlling mother who is trying to recapture her lost dancing career by living it through her daughter. Very early on you see the sacrifice that's required for Nina to maintain her physical appearance and ballet skills. It's a very demanding lifestyle that is accompanied by unforgivable amounts of pressure and competition.
When Thomas decides to open his season with a radical interpretation of Swan Lake, he selects Nina for the role. The catch is she must play both the white and black swan which proves to be challenging for Nina because she doesn't possess the natural raw seductive presence that's necessary to distinct the two very different characters. As Nina works on her inner black swan she's struggles with a recharged sexual attitude and severe competition with a rival dancer. These factors send Nina down a very dark road that changes her life forever.
Just like in The Wrestler, Aronofsky takes a well known form of entertainment and strips it down to it's soul. He exposes every aspect of it's success and failure. He does this by showing you the journey of the main character. The common denominator of these people is that for one reason or another, they are broken. In The Wrestler, The Ram was a beaten down former superstar trying to hold on to the glory days of the past. In Black Swan, Nina is in the prime of her ballet career headed for stardom but her outside influences coupled with her restrained outlook on life have held her back to becoming what she desires most. It's those struggles that give Aronofsky the freedom to take these characters down to the depths of hell.
The best part about that is that he keeps them there.
The process seems a bit more deliberate in Black Swan. The ways that Nina falls into the darkness range from the very subtle to the balls out, in your face reveal. It's those moments that Aronofsky handles with both care and razor sharp precision. It's those moments make the film as good as it is. As Nina's mind plays tricks on her, the film plays tricks with yours. You will have a hard time coming to a clear conclusion about what's going on in Nina's head until the end. That's brilliant storytelling and directing.
I think that this might be Aronofsky's finest directorial work because of what he was able to accomplish considering he was working with a paper thin plot. The script is very basic at it's core and it was transformed into a spectacle.
That's what this guy can bring to the table.
His trademark hand held camera use and tracking shots employ their own power to the story adding another ingredient to an already well made dish. Of course, he can't do it alone. He has some help in the form of four terrific actors. Natalie Portman leading off owns Nina's character. When you see her fail to unleash the passion in her portrayal of the black swan you feel the same frustration as Thomas during rehearsals. When Thomas strolls around eyeballing the dancers he commands the respect from the company that he's earned. He also displays his very famous reputation with the girls. Mila Kunis just oozes sexuality and animal instinct. She plays Lily with a care free vibrancy that is the perfect Yin to Nina's Yang. Finally Babara Hershey's performance can give you chills. I was almost reminded of Joan Crawford in Mommie Dearest. Hershey wasn't nearly as cruel but the controlling feel is present.
Another great detail that shouldn't be ignored is the music. Normally I don't comment too much on music but in this case it's a very strong supporting character. The orchestral moods blasted throughout this film were overwhelmingly powerful. It triggers the right amount of emotion at just the right time then POW! you're taken somewhere else emotionally.
There is however, one itty bitty thing to pick at with Black Swan. The film does such a great job with misdirection that when it's time to come back to reality you're not as invested in the end. The final scene felt tacked on and rushed. That's a big time shame because up until that point I was all in. As a result the score will suffer. So what is my score you ask? Well here we go.
On the 5 star scale. Black Swan gets 4 stars. With a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
The ending cost it the full house 5 stars. This doesn't change the fact that this is still a tremendous film that deserves all the attention it's getting now and hopefully in March if you catch my drift. Aronofsky is inching closer and closer to my top 5 favorite directors list. If he can do this with ballet, I can't wait to see what he does with the Wolverine sequel. Get ready for some fun true believers.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is The Fighter.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
127 Hours
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is 127 Hours. Directed by Danny Boyle. Written by Danny Boyle & Simon Beaufoy. Based on the book "Between a Rock and a Hard Place" Written by Aron Ralston.
100th review countdown....#94
MPAA Rating: R for language and some disturbing violent content/bloody images.
Runtime: 94 min
Cast
James Franco - Aron Ralston
Kate Mara - Kristi
Amber Tamblyn - Megan
Sean Bott - Aron's Friend
Treat Williams - Aron's Dad
Kate Burton - Aron's Mom
Clémence Poésy - Rana
Lizzy Caplan - Sonja Ralston
How far would you go to save your own life? How far could you go to save your own life? How much could you sacrifice? Those questions are answered in very explicit detail as Danny Boyle brings us the remarkable true story of Aron Raltson's week long quest to defy the Grim Reaper.
The film chronicles the recklessly arrogant mountain climber whose arm gets crushed under a boulder during a trip through Utah canyon country. With no one coming to save him, he must decide whether he will die or fight for survival.
At first glance this movie could draw comparisons to Cast Away. In theory it makes sense just by looking at the bare essential plot points.
1) The film's main character suffers a tragic accident that leaves him stranded in an isolated environment.
2) The main character struggles to acclimate himself to his new surroundings while trying to maintain his sanity.
3) The min character takes extreme measures to ensure rescue.
That's where the comparisons end. There's really only 1 major difference between the two. This film is BETTER!
Danny Boyle once again continues to challenge himself with very interesting projects and story matter. He doesn't hide from stories that many other directors would turn the other cheek at. It's very easy to fail with a movie that has such a simple concept. You have to find ways to avoid the boredom factor which is what Cast Away failed to do while 127 Hours avoided it.
In order to achieve this you have to start with the amazing performance of James Franco as Aron. It was reported that both Boyle and Franco watched the actual video tape that Ralston made while trapped in the canyon. This gave Franco the ability to channel the mindset Aron was in as the hours ticked by. It did the trick. Franco portrays Ralston with reckless abandon yet maintaining his skill as an extreme sports athlete. As the days go by when he's trapped, you really feel his mind starting to wander as his sanity slowly starts to leave him. He's got a Best Actor nomination in his immediate future.
This segues perfectly to Boyle's subtle and no to subtle tricks that help pass the time away. He takes you inside Ralston's mind during those trying times. That experience is aided masterfully by the camera work. The area that Ralston is caught in is so limited. You truly feel the claustrophobia. Boyle employs standard hand held with a camera rigged to Franco's waist mixed in with the home video look. Those different shots blended very well in the editing room giving the film a mixture of emotions. You add a very stirring score that sneaks up on you at just the right time you have yourself a Danny Boyle film. He's a complete filmmaker. He doesn't take one aspect for granted and gives every element the respect it deserves.
These points aren't more evident than in the "scene."
For those of you that have already seen this film then you know what I'm talking about. The scene in a word is BRUTAL to watch but necessary and mandatory viewing. You really can't appreciate what this man really went through unless you see first hand the steps he took to solidify his only realistic chance at survival. It's at this point where you will be asking yourself if you could do what Aron did if it meant that you would make it out survive.
This is what makes 127 Hours so powerful. You're not just watching a story of an extraordinary man's survival. You're watching a story that connects you to an event that can shape and change your life from the inside out. That's not a movie.
It's an experience.
On the 5 star scale. 127 Hours gets the full house, 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" Recommendation.
Can this film crack the top 10 for Best Picture? Hell Yeah! Can it win? I don't see how with all the heavy hitters yet to display their talents but nobody saw Slumdog Millionaire coming two years ago. And that film ran through everyone in it's path.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Black Swan.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is 127 Hours. Directed by Danny Boyle. Written by Danny Boyle & Simon Beaufoy. Based on the book "Between a Rock and a Hard Place" Written by Aron Ralston.
100th review countdown....#94
MPAA Rating: R for language and some disturbing violent content/bloody images.
Runtime: 94 min
Cast
James Franco - Aron Ralston
Kate Mara - Kristi
Amber Tamblyn - Megan
Sean Bott - Aron's Friend
Treat Williams - Aron's Dad
Kate Burton - Aron's Mom
Clémence Poésy - Rana
Lizzy Caplan - Sonja Ralston
How far would you go to save your own life? How far could you go to save your own life? How much could you sacrifice? Those questions are answered in very explicit detail as Danny Boyle brings us the remarkable true story of Aron Raltson's week long quest to defy the Grim Reaper.
The film chronicles the recklessly arrogant mountain climber whose arm gets crushed under a boulder during a trip through Utah canyon country. With no one coming to save him, he must decide whether he will die or fight for survival.
At first glance this movie could draw comparisons to Cast Away. In theory it makes sense just by looking at the bare essential plot points.
1) The film's main character suffers a tragic accident that leaves him stranded in an isolated environment.
2) The main character struggles to acclimate himself to his new surroundings while trying to maintain his sanity.
3) The min character takes extreme measures to ensure rescue.
That's where the comparisons end. There's really only 1 major difference between the two. This film is BETTER!
Danny Boyle once again continues to challenge himself with very interesting projects and story matter. He doesn't hide from stories that many other directors would turn the other cheek at. It's very easy to fail with a movie that has such a simple concept. You have to find ways to avoid the boredom factor which is what Cast Away failed to do while 127 Hours avoided it.
In order to achieve this you have to start with the amazing performance of James Franco as Aron. It was reported that both Boyle and Franco watched the actual video tape that Ralston made while trapped in the canyon. This gave Franco the ability to channel the mindset Aron was in as the hours ticked by. It did the trick. Franco portrays Ralston with reckless abandon yet maintaining his skill as an extreme sports athlete. As the days go by when he's trapped, you really feel his mind starting to wander as his sanity slowly starts to leave him. He's got a Best Actor nomination in his immediate future.
This segues perfectly to Boyle's subtle and no to subtle tricks that help pass the time away. He takes you inside Ralston's mind during those trying times. That experience is aided masterfully by the camera work. The area that Ralston is caught in is so limited. You truly feel the claustrophobia. Boyle employs standard hand held with a camera rigged to Franco's waist mixed in with the home video look. Those different shots blended very well in the editing room giving the film a mixture of emotions. You add a very stirring score that sneaks up on you at just the right time you have yourself a Danny Boyle film. He's a complete filmmaker. He doesn't take one aspect for granted and gives every element the respect it deserves.
These points aren't more evident than in the "scene."
For those of you that have already seen this film then you know what I'm talking about. The scene in a word is BRUTAL to watch but necessary and mandatory viewing. You really can't appreciate what this man really went through unless you see first hand the steps he took to solidify his only realistic chance at survival. It's at this point where you will be asking yourself if you could do what Aron did if it meant that you would make it out survive.
This is what makes 127 Hours so powerful. You're not just watching a story of an extraordinary man's survival. You're watching a story that connects you to an event that can shape and change your life from the inside out. That's not a movie.
It's an experience.
On the 5 star scale. 127 Hours gets the full house, 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" Recommendation.
Can this film crack the top 10 for Best Picture? Hell Yeah! Can it win? I don't see how with all the heavy hitters yet to display their talents but nobody saw Slumdog Millionaire coming two years ago. And that film ran through everyone in it's path.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Black Swan.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
The Warrior's Way
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is The Warrior's Way. Written and Directed by Sngmoo Lee
100th review countdown....#93
MPAA Rating: R for strong bloody violence.
Runtime: 100 min
Cast
Dong-gun Jang - Yang
Kate Bosworth - Lynne
Geoffrey Rush - Ron
Danny Huston - Colonel
Tony Cox - Eight-Ball
Lung Ti - Saddest Flute
Analin Rudd - Baby April
Ladies and Gentleman. After holding it's post for almost a full calendar year. Legion has now been
supplanted by this for WORST FILM OF 2010. Great Scott was this film AWFUL!
What do you get when you combine a master swordsman on the run. With his clan hunting him down as the master swordsman adjusts to life in his new surroundings in the wild west.
You get the plot for this dreadful excuse for a movie.
There is so much wrong with this film that I don't know where to start. So I'll begin with what was the film's biggest failure.
It's rather obvious that this is supposed to be a martial arts film so the first thing that is established is Yang's superior fighting abilities against his rival clan warrior's. It's at this moment not 2 minuets into the film that it goes right into the toilet. The fight that takes place is on par with some of the genre's worst executed choreography (if you can even call it choreography). All Yang does is swing his blade one time at his opponents and they drop like flies while he poses for dramatic effect. The lack of intricacy in the fight is also masked by super slo mo and CGI. Immediately I got that nervous felling that this was what I was in store for the rest of the film. I still held out hope that maybe this was just a quick throwaway fight just to intro our hero and showcase his bad ass-ery.
NOPE!
It was just more of the same and it was less impressive later on. Look I get it. You want to show us that this guy is not to be messed with but that doesn't mean he has to be invincible. The film contradicts itself by making him so formidable. If he's the best warrior of a clan of warrior's, shouldn't the other warriors possess some skill as well? Apparently not in this movie. They are just there to provide a body count. As an authority of Martial Arts Cinema, this display or lack of weapons combat was not only offensive but and insult to me as a member of the audience. I can best describe how unbelievably simple the fights were in this film this way.
Back in 2000. My friends and I made a Kung Fu film. It was as low budget as you could get but the one thing this movie had was detailed fight scenes. I spent 4 months studying up several different disciplines ranging from Tae Kwon Do to Wing Chun and figured out a way to blend the best ones that would make an interesting fight while making the moves easy enough for everyone to learn at the same time. Needless to say the film was an absolute joke but to this day I continue to receive complements on the fight choreography. Especially since I was the only one who had any formal training or knowledge in the 1st place while having no idea what I was doing. A bunch of college kids with a video camera and a mall loading dock were able to showcase developed fight moves that pale in comparison to a Hollywood feature in the year 2010.
The rest of the film follows the action's lead when it came to the absurd and overall underachievement. The dialogue was lazy and poorly structured. The cast was equally lazy and poorly structured headlined by Kate Bosworth's portrayal of a tough western chick who has fighting ability. Just god awful.
The story as paper thin as it is seems to find a way to make no sense between acts 2 and 3. That is quite an accomplishment when you know from the opening credits what this movie about. How the narrative gets lost between it's start and finish is beyond me but it executes that masterfully.
That's it. I'm done.
On the 5 star scale. The Warrior's Way gets the whopping goose egg 0 stars with a resounding "For The Love of God Stay Home!" recommendation.
There is absolutely nothing of value here. Please avoid this one at all costs. You have been warned.
That's a wrap for today. Not sure what's next but I'm pretty confident that it will be 1,000,000% better than this.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The Warrior's Way. Written and Directed by Sngmoo Lee
100th review countdown....#93
MPAA Rating: R for strong bloody violence.
Runtime: 100 min
Cast
Dong-gun Jang - Yang
Kate Bosworth - Lynne
Geoffrey Rush - Ron
Danny Huston - Colonel
Tony Cox - Eight-Ball
Lung Ti - Saddest Flute
Analin Rudd - Baby April
Ladies and Gentleman. After holding it's post for almost a full calendar year. Legion has now been
supplanted by this for WORST FILM OF 2010. Great Scott was this film AWFUL!
What do you get when you combine a master swordsman on the run. With his clan hunting him down as the master swordsman adjusts to life in his new surroundings in the wild west.
You get the plot for this dreadful excuse for a movie.
There is so much wrong with this film that I don't know where to start. So I'll begin with what was the film's biggest failure.
It's rather obvious that this is supposed to be a martial arts film so the first thing that is established is Yang's superior fighting abilities against his rival clan warrior's. It's at this moment not 2 minuets into the film that it goes right into the toilet. The fight that takes place is on par with some of the genre's worst executed choreography (if you can even call it choreography). All Yang does is swing his blade one time at his opponents and they drop like flies while he poses for dramatic effect. The lack of intricacy in the fight is also masked by super slo mo and CGI. Immediately I got that nervous felling that this was what I was in store for the rest of the film. I still held out hope that maybe this was just a quick throwaway fight just to intro our hero and showcase his bad ass-ery.
NOPE!
It was just more of the same and it was less impressive later on. Look I get it. You want to show us that this guy is not to be messed with but that doesn't mean he has to be invincible. The film contradicts itself by making him so formidable. If he's the best warrior of a clan of warrior's, shouldn't the other warriors possess some skill as well? Apparently not in this movie. They are just there to provide a body count. As an authority of Martial Arts Cinema, this display or lack of weapons combat was not only offensive but and insult to me as a member of the audience. I can best describe how unbelievably simple the fights were in this film this way.
Back in 2000. My friends and I made a Kung Fu film. It was as low budget as you could get but the one thing this movie had was detailed fight scenes. I spent 4 months studying up several different disciplines ranging from Tae Kwon Do to Wing Chun and figured out a way to blend the best ones that would make an interesting fight while making the moves easy enough for everyone to learn at the same time. Needless to say the film was an absolute joke but to this day I continue to receive complements on the fight choreography. Especially since I was the only one who had any formal training or knowledge in the 1st place while having no idea what I was doing. A bunch of college kids with a video camera and a mall loading dock were able to showcase developed fight moves that pale in comparison to a Hollywood feature in the year 2010.
The rest of the film follows the action's lead when it came to the absurd and overall underachievement. The dialogue was lazy and poorly structured. The cast was equally lazy and poorly structured headlined by Kate Bosworth's portrayal of a tough western chick who has fighting ability. Just god awful.
The story as paper thin as it is seems to find a way to make no sense between acts 2 and 3. That is quite an accomplishment when you know from the opening credits what this movie about. How the narrative gets lost between it's start and finish is beyond me but it executes that masterfully.
That's it. I'm done.
On the 5 star scale. The Warrior's Way gets the whopping goose egg 0 stars with a resounding "For The Love of God Stay Home!" recommendation.
There is absolutely nothing of value here. Please avoid this one at all costs. You have been warned.
That's a wrap for today. Not sure what's next but I'm pretty confident that it will be 1,000,000% better than this.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Unstoppable
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Unstoppable. Directed by Tony Scott. Written by Mark Bomback.
100th review countdown....#92
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sequences of action and peril, and some language.
Runtime: 98 min
Cast
Denzel Washington - Frank
Chris Pine - Will
Rosario Dawson - Connie
Ethan Suplee - Dewey
Kevin Dunn - Galvin
Kevin Corrigan - Inspector Werner
Kevin Chapman - Bunny
Lew Temple - Ned
T.J. Miller - Gilleece
Tony Scott re-teams with Denzel for his 5th film and this time it's another train movie. After The Taking of Pelham 123 I figured why go this route again, but just like Pelham, this one works for what it's worth.
Based on true events that took place in 2001. On May 15, 2001, a 47-car CSX locomotive left a Toledo, Ohio rail yard without an engineer and wasn't stopped until it had run 66 miles through three counties. No one was injured in the incident. This of course isn't good enough for Tinseltown so the story was punched up a bit.
In this version, the train is carrying several cars filled with a toxic chemical that if exploded would create catastrophic damage to neighboring Pennsylvania towns. Frank is a 28 year veteran train man and on this day he's breaking in Will, a rookie conductor who catches some immediate heat because he's got very influential friends that many believe is the reason he got the job in the first place. The relationship between Frank and Will gets off to a very rocky start but all of that changes when they hear about the runaway train. Realizing that the company's efforts to stop the train will fail, Frank and Will go after it and try to stop it themselves.
This movie is about as cut and dry as you can make it. This is actually a very good thing. A lot of times with movies like this where the story is very simple, the creative brain trust just takes it to a whole other level and strip away what makes the project worth doing and replacing it with a lot of pomp and circumstance. That doesn't happen here. The screenwriter here uses the K.I.S.S method and it works.
There are of course some filler scenes that moves the story along like the predictable failed attempt to stop the train that the greedy company executives employ in order to avoid property damage and lawsuits. Those scenes don't take anything away. They actually help because they were executed properly. The corporate scenes are not filled with evil villain, mad scientist type characters. Instead they are played like very greedy, lazy suits that just want to solve the problem in the most cost effective way. Those scenes inspire disdain toward those characters which is exactly the point but it's not overblown.
The most fun part of this movie is the speed. Tony Scott once again employs his hyper kinetic camera work and lightning quick editing style and it looks very cool here. You really get a feel for how fast the train is going and how fast everyone is going while in pursuit. The destruction the train leaves in it's wake as well was impressive and again not over stated. This movie was probably one of the most understated, high powered action movie that's been made in a while and it works. I wish I could explain why that is....it just is.
On the 5 star scale. Unstoppable gets 3 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
You're not going to be overly floored by this one but for what you're getting into here it's a very entertaining 90 minutes of fast, simple and impressive action with 1,000 tons of steel as the star.
That's a wrap for today. Got a few ones lined up in the upcoming days/weeks. Here they are in no particular order.
Fair Game
The Next Three Days
Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows
127 Hours
The King's Speech
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Unstoppable. Directed by Tony Scott. Written by Mark Bomback.
100th review countdown....#92
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sequences of action and peril, and some language.
Runtime: 98 min
Cast
Denzel Washington - Frank
Chris Pine - Will
Rosario Dawson - Connie
Ethan Suplee - Dewey
Kevin Dunn - Galvin
Kevin Corrigan - Inspector Werner
Kevin Chapman - Bunny
Lew Temple - Ned
T.J. Miller - Gilleece
Tony Scott re-teams with Denzel for his 5th film and this time it's another train movie. After The Taking of Pelham 123 I figured why go this route again, but just like Pelham, this one works for what it's worth.
Based on true events that took place in 2001. On May 15, 2001, a 47-car CSX locomotive left a Toledo, Ohio rail yard without an engineer and wasn't stopped until it had run 66 miles through three counties. No one was injured in the incident. This of course isn't good enough for Tinseltown so the story was punched up a bit.
In this version, the train is carrying several cars filled with a toxic chemical that if exploded would create catastrophic damage to neighboring Pennsylvania towns. Frank is a 28 year veteran train man and on this day he's breaking in Will, a rookie conductor who catches some immediate heat because he's got very influential friends that many believe is the reason he got the job in the first place. The relationship between Frank and Will gets off to a very rocky start but all of that changes when they hear about the runaway train. Realizing that the company's efforts to stop the train will fail, Frank and Will go after it and try to stop it themselves.
This movie is about as cut and dry as you can make it. This is actually a very good thing. A lot of times with movies like this where the story is very simple, the creative brain trust just takes it to a whole other level and strip away what makes the project worth doing and replacing it with a lot of pomp and circumstance. That doesn't happen here. The screenwriter here uses the K.I.S.S method and it works.
There are of course some filler scenes that moves the story along like the predictable failed attempt to stop the train that the greedy company executives employ in order to avoid property damage and lawsuits. Those scenes don't take anything away. They actually help because they were executed properly. The corporate scenes are not filled with evil villain, mad scientist type characters. Instead they are played like very greedy, lazy suits that just want to solve the problem in the most cost effective way. Those scenes inspire disdain toward those characters which is exactly the point but it's not overblown.
The most fun part of this movie is the speed. Tony Scott once again employs his hyper kinetic camera work and lightning quick editing style and it looks very cool here. You really get a feel for how fast the train is going and how fast everyone is going while in pursuit. The destruction the train leaves in it's wake as well was impressive and again not over stated. This movie was probably one of the most understated, high powered action movie that's been made in a while and it works. I wish I could explain why that is....it just is.
On the 5 star scale. Unstoppable gets 3 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
You're not going to be overly floored by this one but for what you're getting into here it's a very entertaining 90 minutes of fast, simple and impressive action with 1,000 tons of steel as the star.
That's a wrap for today. Got a few ones lined up in the upcoming days/weeks. Here they are in no particular order.
Fair Game
The Next Three Days
Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows
127 Hours
The King's Speech
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Skyline
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Skyline. Directed by Colin Strause & Greg Strause A.K.A The Brothers Struase. Written by Joshua Cordes & Liam O'Donnell.
100th review countdown....#91
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence, some language, and brief sexual content.
Runtime: 92 min
Cast
Eric Balfour - Jarrod
Scottie Thompson - Elaine
Brittany Daniel - Candice
Crystal Reed - Denise
David Zayas - Oliver
Donald Faison - Terry
I mentioned after my Megamind review that I had some fears about this one. I figured that since I had a free movie ticket to use that if this movie sucked that at least it didn't cost me anything but my time.
I WANT MY TIME BACK!!!!
And the real frustrating thing about this is that I can't tell you why.
Jarrod brings Elaine to LA to visit his movie star best friend Terry for his birthday. Aliens invade and basically swoop up all the people. The rest of film is spent with the "main" cast members trying to figure out what their next move is. Whether to flee or stay indoors and wait out the attack.
2010 has been the year of the vampire when it comes to most over saturated genre. Now we are about to be invaded (pun intended) by another wave of alien invasion films. Skyline being the first with Cowboys & Aliens and Battle: Los Angeles to follow this summer. The premise of these films are always the same. Who knows what from who knows where comes to earth and destroys everything until the little people fight back and win the day. For the most part these films are more of a spectacle than a story. You are just treated to cool looking creatures and special effects with very little character or story development from a human standpoint. Then on the off chance that an alien film gives you some sense of character depth like Spielberg's War of The Worlds. The humans are so tumor inducing annoying that you actually root for the aliens to vaporize them. I know I was when I watching that piece of S#&T.
I wonder why writers insist on giving movie goers the option of cool aliens and crappy humans or cool humans and crappy aliens. I don't see why we can't have both. The closest you can come to that is probably Alien and it's sequel but technically they don't count because they don't fit the criteria of an alien invasion film. But those films make my initial point. They had characters you cared about, a compelling story and they were surrounded by cool looking and scary as hell creatures.
Does Skyline accomplish this? Nope but they came close.
The characters are a bunch of C or D listers so you are not invested enough in their survival or demise. Despite that though, the story does do one thing well. They keep the alien invasion a mystery. Way too often in films like this, the creative team struggle to explain why the aliens came and why they are attacking the planet. You don't need to know why when they arrive and start blowing up buildings and killing everyone in sight. That doesn't matter anymore. Skylight doesn't address it. In fact they treat the invasion as realistic as a real invasion would be like. The people try to see if the news has any info and all they see is an empty TV studio still on the air. There's also no scene with the president ordering a full military strike. It just happens. The planes come and fight.
The interaction between the survivors is thought provoking believe it or not. Some want to stay inside. Some want to take the chance and get as far away from the attack as possible. It creates a very interesting debate because both points are valid and understandable. It makes you think what would you do in this situation. If you knew you were under attack by other worldly beings and you had a chance to escape. Would you take the risk knowing that you could very easily be killed if you were seen or would you play it safe hoping that at some point eventually someone will come to your rescue. If there's anyone left that is.
The rest of the film plays this scenario out to it's conclusion and it's here where I left the theater....
FURIOUS!!!!
I really want to tell you why the ending made me so mad but it will spoil it for you if you plan to see it. You might be thinking that I already revealed too much and maybe I did but let's be real here. You're watching an alien invasion movie. What did you expect to see. If you do see this and are still curious why I HATED the ending so much then ask me and I'll be more than happy to tell you.
On the 5 star scale. Skyline gets the goose egg 0 stars. With a split "Save The Loot" "Netflix It" recommendation.
You're probably wondering why I gave it a Netflix rec if I gave it a 0 score. It's because for me the film had some decent stuff here with an ending that had the potential to be GROUND BREAKING in this genre but they played it safe instead.
Such a cowardly and nonsensical move.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Unstoppable followed by Fair Game.
Until Next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Skyline. Directed by Colin Strause & Greg Strause A.K.A The Brothers Struase. Written by Joshua Cordes & Liam O'Donnell.
100th review countdown....#91
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence, some language, and brief sexual content.
Runtime: 92 min
Cast
Eric Balfour - Jarrod
Scottie Thompson - Elaine
Brittany Daniel - Candice
Crystal Reed - Denise
David Zayas - Oliver
Donald Faison - Terry
I mentioned after my Megamind review that I had some fears about this one. I figured that since I had a free movie ticket to use that if this movie sucked that at least it didn't cost me anything but my time.
I WANT MY TIME BACK!!!!
And the real frustrating thing about this is that I can't tell you why.
Jarrod brings Elaine to LA to visit his movie star best friend Terry for his birthday. Aliens invade and basically swoop up all the people. The rest of film is spent with the "main" cast members trying to figure out what their next move is. Whether to flee or stay indoors and wait out the attack.
2010 has been the year of the vampire when it comes to most over saturated genre. Now we are about to be invaded (pun intended) by another wave of alien invasion films. Skyline being the first with Cowboys & Aliens and Battle: Los Angeles to follow this summer. The premise of these films are always the same. Who knows what from who knows where comes to earth and destroys everything until the little people fight back and win the day. For the most part these films are more of a spectacle than a story. You are just treated to cool looking creatures and special effects with very little character or story development from a human standpoint. Then on the off chance that an alien film gives you some sense of character depth like Spielberg's War of The Worlds. The humans are so tumor inducing annoying that you actually root for the aliens to vaporize them. I know I was when I watching that piece of S#&T.
I wonder why writers insist on giving movie goers the option of cool aliens and crappy humans or cool humans and crappy aliens. I don't see why we can't have both. The closest you can come to that is probably Alien and it's sequel but technically they don't count because they don't fit the criteria of an alien invasion film. But those films make my initial point. They had characters you cared about, a compelling story and they were surrounded by cool looking and scary as hell creatures.
Does Skyline accomplish this? Nope but they came close.
The characters are a bunch of C or D listers so you are not invested enough in their survival or demise. Despite that though, the story does do one thing well. They keep the alien invasion a mystery. Way too often in films like this, the creative team struggle to explain why the aliens came and why they are attacking the planet. You don't need to know why when they arrive and start blowing up buildings and killing everyone in sight. That doesn't matter anymore. Skylight doesn't address it. In fact they treat the invasion as realistic as a real invasion would be like. The people try to see if the news has any info and all they see is an empty TV studio still on the air. There's also no scene with the president ordering a full military strike. It just happens. The planes come and fight.
The interaction between the survivors is thought provoking believe it or not. Some want to stay inside. Some want to take the chance and get as far away from the attack as possible. It creates a very interesting debate because both points are valid and understandable. It makes you think what would you do in this situation. If you knew you were under attack by other worldly beings and you had a chance to escape. Would you take the risk knowing that you could very easily be killed if you were seen or would you play it safe hoping that at some point eventually someone will come to your rescue. If there's anyone left that is.
The rest of the film plays this scenario out to it's conclusion and it's here where I left the theater....
FURIOUS!!!!
I really want to tell you why the ending made me so mad but it will spoil it for you if you plan to see it. You might be thinking that I already revealed too much and maybe I did but let's be real here. You're watching an alien invasion movie. What did you expect to see. If you do see this and are still curious why I HATED the ending so much then ask me and I'll be more than happy to tell you.
On the 5 star scale. Skyline gets the goose egg 0 stars. With a split "Save The Loot" "Netflix It" recommendation.
You're probably wondering why I gave it a Netflix rec if I gave it a 0 score. It's because for me the film had some decent stuff here with an ending that had the potential to be GROUND BREAKING in this genre but they played it safe instead.
Such a cowardly and nonsensical move.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Unstoppable followed by Fair Game.
Until Next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Megamind
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Megamind.Directed by Tom McGrath. Written by Alan J. Schoolcraft & Brent Simons.
100th review countdown....#90
MPAA Rating: PG for action and some language.
Runtime: 96 min
Cast
Will Ferrell - Megamind
Brad Pitt - Metro Man
Tina Fey - Roxanne Ritchi
Jonah Hill - Tighten
David Cross - Minion
Ben Stiller - Bernard
J.K. Simmons - Warden
Before I give you my take on this movie I need to give you non comic book geeks a quick lesson. Back in the late 80's, Marvel comics came out with a storyline called "What If." It was a pretty creative series of stories that dealt with the exact meaning of it's title. The premise was a character called The Watcher would present stories of the Marvel universe through the eyes of an alternate reality. So you would get scenarios like this....
What if Spiderman was a woman?
What if The Hulk joined the X-Men?
What if Captain America ran for president?
Megamind takes that concept here and tells a pretty cool story while doing it.
The premise of the film is taken directly from Superman. Megamind's planet is about to be destroyed so his parents send him off to earth. In his travels he runs into his mortal enemy Metroman. Metroman lives a life of luxury and acceptance while Megamind is raised in a prison and is taught that being good sucks. This begins the rivalry between hero and villain. Megamind who's a cross between Lex Luthor and The Leader (one of The Incredible Hulk's major enemies) never beats Metroman. Until one fateful day when he actually does defeat Metroman. Having finally succeeded in his quest to take out his foe and control Metro City what happens to Megamind? He gets bored. So he comes up with a plan to get things back on track but they go horribly wrong.
This was a very clever concept for a superhero film. Though clearly made for kids, as a kid myself it brought back those "What If" moments for me. It made me think what would happen if Lex Luthor ever killed Superman. How would the world survive? This move gives you one possible scenario. The voice acting is pretty good. Will Ferrell just basically plays himself as Megamind. Brad Pitt brings out Metroman's strength. But the highlight for me was David Cross as Minion. Maybe it was because the character was basically a goldfish with a robot monkey suit body but he was hysterical to watch.
The animation is top notch and when you add the spectacle of 3D (I couldn't avoid it) it brings out the action to a nice exciting level. There are only two things I would say against this movie is that somewhere between acts 2 and 3 the story goes a little off track. I won't say where but you will catch it when you see it. I think this had to do with the fact that Megamind's character though evil wasn't truly ruthless. The identity crisis of this villain hurts the flow of the story after he defeats Metroman.
Secondly I have a huge issue with some of the commercial music choices. In an attempt to drive home the point that Megamind was bad they played the songs "Bad to The Bone," "A/C DC's "Back in Black" and Guns N Roses "Welcome to the Jungle" These were bad choices in my opinion for the simple fact that playing those tracks dates the film tremendously. It's 2010 and you're playing songs that go back several decades. Not years, decades. The powers that be were trying to be too cute with the music and the lyrics not realizing that the kids seeing this movie won't know and won't care what songs these are. I was twice, sometimes three times the age of the kids in the theater (good grief am I old) and I didn't care about the songs.
It just didn't fit.
On the 5 star scale. Megamind gets 3.5 stars. With a "Go See It" recommendation.
This one was a very entertaining and different look with a very overdone genre. A couple of speedbumps along the way kept this one from being a classic.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Skyline. I have some serious fears about this one. Mostly because of the cast or lack there of. Thankfully I have a free movie ticket to burn on this one so if it sucks I didn't throw my $$$ at it.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Megamind.Directed by Tom McGrath. Written by Alan J. Schoolcraft & Brent Simons.
100th review countdown....#90
MPAA Rating: PG for action and some language.
Runtime: 96 min
Cast
Will Ferrell - Megamind
Brad Pitt - Metro Man
Tina Fey - Roxanne Ritchi
Jonah Hill - Tighten
David Cross - Minion
Ben Stiller - Bernard
J.K. Simmons - Warden
Before I give you my take on this movie I need to give you non comic book geeks a quick lesson. Back in the late 80's, Marvel comics came out with a storyline called "What If." It was a pretty creative series of stories that dealt with the exact meaning of it's title. The premise was a character called The Watcher would present stories of the Marvel universe through the eyes of an alternate reality. So you would get scenarios like this....
What if Spiderman was a woman?
What if The Hulk joined the X-Men?
What if Captain America ran for president?
Megamind takes that concept here and tells a pretty cool story while doing it.
The premise of the film is taken directly from Superman. Megamind's planet is about to be destroyed so his parents send him off to earth. In his travels he runs into his mortal enemy Metroman. Metroman lives a life of luxury and acceptance while Megamind is raised in a prison and is taught that being good sucks. This begins the rivalry between hero and villain. Megamind who's a cross between Lex Luthor and The Leader (one of The Incredible Hulk's major enemies) never beats Metroman. Until one fateful day when he actually does defeat Metroman. Having finally succeeded in his quest to take out his foe and control Metro City what happens to Megamind? He gets bored. So he comes up with a plan to get things back on track but they go horribly wrong.
This was a very clever concept for a superhero film. Though clearly made for kids, as a kid myself it brought back those "What If" moments for me. It made me think what would happen if Lex Luthor ever killed Superman. How would the world survive? This move gives you one possible scenario. The voice acting is pretty good. Will Ferrell just basically plays himself as Megamind. Brad Pitt brings out Metroman's strength. But the highlight for me was David Cross as Minion. Maybe it was because the character was basically a goldfish with a robot monkey suit body but he was hysterical to watch.
The animation is top notch and when you add the spectacle of 3D (I couldn't avoid it) it brings out the action to a nice exciting level. There are only two things I would say against this movie is that somewhere between acts 2 and 3 the story goes a little off track. I won't say where but you will catch it when you see it. I think this had to do with the fact that Megamind's character though evil wasn't truly ruthless. The identity crisis of this villain hurts the flow of the story after he defeats Metroman.
Secondly I have a huge issue with some of the commercial music choices. In an attempt to drive home the point that Megamind was bad they played the songs "Bad to The Bone," "A/C DC's "Back in Black" and Guns N Roses "Welcome to the Jungle" These were bad choices in my opinion for the simple fact that playing those tracks dates the film tremendously. It's 2010 and you're playing songs that go back several decades. Not years, decades. The powers that be were trying to be too cute with the music and the lyrics not realizing that the kids seeing this movie won't know and won't care what songs these are. I was twice, sometimes three times the age of the kids in the theater (good grief am I old) and I didn't care about the songs.
It just didn't fit.
On the 5 star scale. Megamind gets 3.5 stars. With a "Go See It" recommendation.
This one was a very entertaining and different look with a very overdone genre. A couple of speedbumps along the way kept this one from being a classic.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Skyline. I have some serious fears about this one. Mostly because of the cast or lack there of. Thankfully I have a free movie ticket to burn on this one so if it sucks I didn't throw my $$$ at it.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Due Date
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Due Date. Directed by Todd Phillips. Written by Alan R. Cohen, Alan Freedland, Adam Sztykiel & Todd Phillips. Screen story by Alan R. Cohen & Alan Freedland
100th review countdown....#89
MPAA Rating: R for language, drug use and sexual content.
Runtime: 100 min
Cast
Robert Downey Jr. - Peter Highman
Zach Galifianakis - Ethan Tremblay
Michelle Monaghan - Sarah Highman
Jamie Foxx - Darryl
Juliette Lewis - Heidi
Danny McBride - Lonnie
RZA - Airport Screener
Coming off the huge success of The Hangover. The world was ready to see what Todd Phillips could come up with before he takes on The Hangover 2. This was his attempt to continue the momentum.
He failed.
Peter Highman is a self indulgent, prissy and very angry jerk who's trying to get home in time to witness the birth of his 1st child. After an incident on the plane gets him on the no fly list, he's forced to drive to LA with the guy that got him off the plane in the first place.
This film is supposed to be The Odd Couple meets Road Trip. Instead it a mess meets another mess. The story is so all over the place that you have no idea what it's supposed to be. The characters are also transparent. Galifianakis is just playing a watered down version of his character in The Hangover and Downey jr is such a jerk that you root for him to miss the birth of his child. There are some funny moments but not enough to fill the whole film.
This is a direct result of the poorly constructed script. It is clear here that re-writes have been done here and they were not good ones. This is a common problem when you have more than 2 writers credited with writing the screenplay. It's a simple matter of too many cooks in the kitchen. Particularly when half or more of the chef's are not familiar with the original recipe.
I would elaborate further but this film doesn't deserve any more of my time.
On the 5 star scale. Due Date gets 1 star. With a split "Save the Loot" and "Netflix It" recommendation.
For a movie about a road trip it really goes nowhere and goes nowhere fast.
I know it sounds like I'm being harsh but after The Hangover's well executed presentation, I expected more from Phillips. This now gives me pause about the Hangover sequel. The positive here is that the original cast is back so that should soften the blow because this one was a straight up dud.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Megamind to be followed by Skyline.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Due Date. Directed by Todd Phillips. Written by Alan R. Cohen, Alan Freedland, Adam Sztykiel & Todd Phillips. Screen story by Alan R. Cohen & Alan Freedland
100th review countdown....#89
MPAA Rating: R for language, drug use and sexual content.
Runtime: 100 min
Cast
Robert Downey Jr. - Peter Highman
Zach Galifianakis - Ethan Tremblay
Michelle Monaghan - Sarah Highman
Jamie Foxx - Darryl
Juliette Lewis - Heidi
Danny McBride - Lonnie
RZA - Airport Screener
Coming off the huge success of The Hangover. The world was ready to see what Todd Phillips could come up with before he takes on The Hangover 2. This was his attempt to continue the momentum.
He failed.
Peter Highman is a self indulgent, prissy and very angry jerk who's trying to get home in time to witness the birth of his 1st child. After an incident on the plane gets him on the no fly list, he's forced to drive to LA with the guy that got him off the plane in the first place.
This film is supposed to be The Odd Couple meets Road Trip. Instead it a mess meets another mess. The story is so all over the place that you have no idea what it's supposed to be. The characters are also transparent. Galifianakis is just playing a watered down version of his character in The Hangover and Downey jr is such a jerk that you root for him to miss the birth of his child. There are some funny moments but not enough to fill the whole film.
This is a direct result of the poorly constructed script. It is clear here that re-writes have been done here and they were not good ones. This is a common problem when you have more than 2 writers credited with writing the screenplay. It's a simple matter of too many cooks in the kitchen. Particularly when half or more of the chef's are not familiar with the original recipe.
I would elaborate further but this film doesn't deserve any more of my time.
On the 5 star scale. Due Date gets 1 star. With a split "Save the Loot" and "Netflix It" recommendation.
For a movie about a road trip it really goes nowhere and goes nowhere fast.
I know it sounds like I'm being harsh but after The Hangover's well executed presentation, I expected more from Phillips. This now gives me pause about the Hangover sequel. The positive here is that the original cast is back so that should soften the blow because this one was a straight up dud.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Megamind to be followed by Skyline.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Hereafter
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Hereafter. Directed by Clint Eastwood. Written by Peter Morgan.
100th review countdown....#88
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for mature thematic elements including disturbing disaster and accident images, and for brief strong language.
Runtime: 129 min
Cast
Cécile De France - Marie LeLay
Thierry Neuvic - Didier
Jay Mohr - Billy
Richard Kind - Christos
Matt Damon - George Lonegan
Frankie McLaren - Marcus / Jason
George McLaren - Marcus / Jason
Lyndsey Marshal - Jackie
Bryce Dallas Howard - Melanie
As a movie reviewer, it's tough not reading other critics take on a film that I see as well. My friend Jeff who's the real inspiration for my review column leaves other reviews from newspapers from time to time. Most of the time they are films that I either have seen already or will not go see anyway like Piranha 3D.
Inside joke. Sorry Jeff I had to do it. =)
Occasionally I will get a review for a film that I haven't seen yet and I try to resist reading until I see it. Mostly for fear of the review influencing my opinion prior to my viewing. Sadly I am not strong enough to withstand the unknown so I delve in and read the reviews. By my count only 2 reviews have opinions that differ from mine. Robin Hood and The American.
I can add Hereafter to the list. And that's a good thing.
The story for Hereafter centers around the events of 3 people. Marie, Marcus and George. Marie while on vacation is caught in a massive Tsunami while shopping. She appears to have died after attempts to revive her fail when miraculously she comes to and survives. Marcus and his twin brother Jason look after each other and their drug addicted mother. After an accident takes Jason away, Marcus is left alone trying to adjust living with a foster family while mourning the loss of his brother and best friend. Finally, George has the ability to talk to the dead. He at one time used his ability to make money but the constant attention and stresses of carrying other people's grief forced him to quit and go into solitude. The rest of the movie establishes each characters ability to function in their everyday lives after their experiences. Marie begins to question if there is an after life. Marcus tries to reconnect with Jason and George struggles to have a "normal" life.
You really feel the pain of each person. They are trying their best to cope with their struggles and it's not easy. You spend a lot of time caring for these people. You want them all to get better and live on as best as they can. I saw this movie with my mother and I asked her after it was over who she felt sorry for the most. She said that Marcus got her attention the most. It isn't hard to choose him because of how young he is and the unbreakable bond that he had with big brother. He wanders around the rest of the picture in a lost state of mind that is heartbreaking.
I however felt a deeper sadness for George. Simply because he spent his time rejecting his ability. He was conflicted by his desire for a regular life with never ending plea's of people wanting him to do readings. It was that conflict that made me sad for him. He's mourning loved ones that were part of a life he never had yet desperately craves. That to me was crushing. The one chance he had of getting away from his past was taken away the second he was outed as a psychic. Every scene I saw of him eating alone in his kitchen was heartbreaking to me. The man did nothing wrong and he's being sentenced to a life of solitude due in part to his other worldly friends on the other side.
Now I'm sure some of you may argue that if George really wanted a normal life he could if he just worked at it. Just see this movie and you will see how much harder it actually was to make that happen. Eastwood does a fine job making sure that you can't be put in his shoes unless you actually have the same psychic powers as he does.
This leads to another good and bad thing that Eastwood does with this film. The good is he balances the screen time with all 3 characters nicely and equally. The film is billed as a Matt Damon picture but in reality he's sharing the spotlight with Marcus and Marie. This was done well. You are never spending too much time with just 1 character. The bad is because Eastwood needed to give each character it's due, the film drags a bit. At 2 hours and 9 minutes, there was a little too much dead time (no pun intended) before the point of the film is reached. I would guess that a good 10-15 min could have been shaved and you would have a much tighter story that still has it's flow.
The most important thing Hereafter provides the viewer is it's message.
This movie has absolutely NOTHING to do with death. It's about life. Your life and what you should be doing with it. The film reminds you that some of the most important things we have in our lives are the relationships we create, build, share and lose. You are told 2 very important life lessons that are intertwined with each other. You must cherish the important people in your life because you'll never realize what you have until it's gone.
I know I'm not telling you all something that you don't already know but every once in a while a reminder is necessary. Hereafter does that quite nicely and subtly.
On the 5 star scale. Hereafter gets 4 stars. With a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
I had to take a star away for the draggy feel towards the end of Act 2 into Act 3. Sorry Lynne (another inside joke). Aside from that, Eastwood did it again. He continues to make films that touch both your heart and your mind while guiding some of Hollywood's best and brightest.
Does this one have Oscar potential? I can honestly say I don't know. The best picture race is looking very weak right now but as the winter months roll around we will start to see some contenders. The 10 Best Picture nominees will certainly help it's cause.
That's a wrap for today. Not sure what's next. You can rest assured that it will not be Saw 3D.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Hereafter. Directed by Clint Eastwood. Written by Peter Morgan.
100th review countdown....#88
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for mature thematic elements including disturbing disaster and accident images, and for brief strong language.
Runtime: 129 min
Cast
Cécile De France - Marie LeLay
Thierry Neuvic - Didier
Jay Mohr - Billy
Richard Kind - Christos
Matt Damon - George Lonegan
Frankie McLaren - Marcus / Jason
George McLaren - Marcus / Jason
Lyndsey Marshal - Jackie
Bryce Dallas Howard - Melanie
As a movie reviewer, it's tough not reading other critics take on a film that I see as well. My friend Jeff who's the real inspiration for my review column leaves other reviews from newspapers from time to time. Most of the time they are films that I either have seen already or will not go see anyway like Piranha 3D.
Inside joke. Sorry Jeff I had to do it. =)
Occasionally I will get a review for a film that I haven't seen yet and I try to resist reading until I see it. Mostly for fear of the review influencing my opinion prior to my viewing. Sadly I am not strong enough to withstand the unknown so I delve in and read the reviews. By my count only 2 reviews have opinions that differ from mine. Robin Hood and The American.
I can add Hereafter to the list. And that's a good thing.
The story for Hereafter centers around the events of 3 people. Marie, Marcus and George. Marie while on vacation is caught in a massive Tsunami while shopping. She appears to have died after attempts to revive her fail when miraculously she comes to and survives. Marcus and his twin brother Jason look after each other and their drug addicted mother. After an accident takes Jason away, Marcus is left alone trying to adjust living with a foster family while mourning the loss of his brother and best friend. Finally, George has the ability to talk to the dead. He at one time used his ability to make money but the constant attention and stresses of carrying other people's grief forced him to quit and go into solitude. The rest of the movie establishes each characters ability to function in their everyday lives after their experiences. Marie begins to question if there is an after life. Marcus tries to reconnect with Jason and George struggles to have a "normal" life.
You really feel the pain of each person. They are trying their best to cope with their struggles and it's not easy. You spend a lot of time caring for these people. You want them all to get better and live on as best as they can. I saw this movie with my mother and I asked her after it was over who she felt sorry for the most. She said that Marcus got her attention the most. It isn't hard to choose him because of how young he is and the unbreakable bond that he had with big brother. He wanders around the rest of the picture in a lost state of mind that is heartbreaking.
I however felt a deeper sadness for George. Simply because he spent his time rejecting his ability. He was conflicted by his desire for a regular life with never ending plea's of people wanting him to do readings. It was that conflict that made me sad for him. He's mourning loved ones that were part of a life he never had yet desperately craves. That to me was crushing. The one chance he had of getting away from his past was taken away the second he was outed as a psychic. Every scene I saw of him eating alone in his kitchen was heartbreaking to me. The man did nothing wrong and he's being sentenced to a life of solitude due in part to his other worldly friends on the other side.
Now I'm sure some of you may argue that if George really wanted a normal life he could if he just worked at it. Just see this movie and you will see how much harder it actually was to make that happen. Eastwood does a fine job making sure that you can't be put in his shoes unless you actually have the same psychic powers as he does.
This leads to another good and bad thing that Eastwood does with this film. The good is he balances the screen time with all 3 characters nicely and equally. The film is billed as a Matt Damon picture but in reality he's sharing the spotlight with Marcus and Marie. This was done well. You are never spending too much time with just 1 character. The bad is because Eastwood needed to give each character it's due, the film drags a bit. At 2 hours and 9 minutes, there was a little too much dead time (no pun intended) before the point of the film is reached. I would guess that a good 10-15 min could have been shaved and you would have a much tighter story that still has it's flow.
The most important thing Hereafter provides the viewer is it's message.
This movie has absolutely NOTHING to do with death. It's about life. Your life and what you should be doing with it. The film reminds you that some of the most important things we have in our lives are the relationships we create, build, share and lose. You are told 2 very important life lessons that are intertwined with each other. You must cherish the important people in your life because you'll never realize what you have until it's gone.
I know I'm not telling you all something that you don't already know but every once in a while a reminder is necessary. Hereafter does that quite nicely and subtly.
On the 5 star scale. Hereafter gets 4 stars. With a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
I had to take a star away for the draggy feel towards the end of Act 2 into Act 3. Sorry Lynne (another inside joke). Aside from that, Eastwood did it again. He continues to make films that touch both your heart and your mind while guiding some of Hollywood's best and brightest.
Does this one have Oscar potential? I can honestly say I don't know. The best picture race is looking very weak right now but as the winter months roll around we will start to see some contenders. The 10 Best Picture nominees will certainly help it's cause.
That's a wrap for today. Not sure what's next. You can rest assured that it will not be Saw 3D.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Red
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is RED. Directed by Robert Schwentke. Written by Jon Hoeber and Erich Hoeber. Based on the graphic novel RED created by Warren Ellis and Cullen Hamner.
100th review countdown....#87
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence and brief strong language.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Bruce Willis - Frank Moses
Mary-Louise Parker - Sarah Ross
Karl Urban - William Cooper
Rebecca Pidgeon - Cynthia Wilkes
Morgan Freeman - Joe Matheson
Ernest Borgnine - Henry, The Records Keeper
John Malkovich - Marvin Boggs
James Remar - Gabriel Singer
Brian Cox - Ivan Simanov
Helen Mirren - Victoria
Richard Dreyfuss - Alexander Dunning
At first glance, this movie has startling similarities to another film I reviewed this year.
The Losers.
Both films were adapted from graphic novels that present a very parallel plot. An elite team of super soldiers are betrayed by the people who they trusted when they were at the top of their profession. So is there any differences between them. The answer is yes and there are 2 main ones.
1) The cast is FAR SUPERIOR. The Losers gave you names like Jeffery Dean Morgan, Idris Elba, Zoe Saldana and Jason Patrick. Not a bad group of actors but RED gives you Willis, Freeman, Malkovich and Mirren. There's just no contest here. We're talking about 2 Oscar winners and a 2 time Oscar nominee sandwiched around Hollywood's highest grossing action star in HISTORY.
Nuff said.
2) The other reason is simply this. The film is just plain better.
The Losers took a been there done that concept and played their campy style in ways that tried to convince you that everything was straight up. It was just silly. RED takes the same been there done that story and puts a different slant on it but treats the material the way it was meant to. Instead of the tongue in cheek feel of The Losers, RED puts a fist across the cheek.
Frank Moses is a retired black ops agent who's living out his days filled with routine and an insane amount of boredom. That is until an assassination team attempt to take him out one night. Needless to say he dispatches his would be killers and sets out to find out who's after him and why. During his travels he seeks the help of some of his former colleagues and together they uncover the reason for their planned termination.
As expected, there's nothing earth shattering new here to digest. What makes this retreaded plot work so well is the idea of these retired mega warriors are actually retirement age. It was a fresh way to present that type of character instead of going with the 40 something dude that left the "company" due to stress or was burned out.
The story doesn't make fun of itself but it take liberties with real time events. This is something that I usually can't and don't ignore but there was something about this movie that made made me give it a pass. This probably had a lot to do with the cast. This is a real powerhouse group that all lend their unique talents to the narrative.
Willis handles his heroic performance of Moses in a stoic yet menacing way that works very well. Freeman's take on Joe is very slick and poignant. Malkovich as Marvin is just simply perfect. He's always been great at playing the controlled psycho and here he does it with a nice balance of cunning and comedic timing. Finally, Helen Mirren's Victoria was just cool. I mean it's not everyday you see Queen Elizabeth using a sniper's rifle or firing off round after round with a machine gun. Just way too cool.
The only character that I didn't care for was Paker's character Sarah. Her involvement was important to the story but it was hard to figure out her role. Was she supposed to be the bubbly idiot or the girl that ends up at the wrong place at the wrong time but knows what she's doing. There was a little bit of both with her character and neither of them worked.
The plot was pretty believable as well. Well as believable as plot can be for a movie of this sort. The reasons for the attacks on these retired agents and who's pulling the strings are solid. The CIA tricks that are employed to gather information were not too over the top that you can accept it as part of the game and just roll with it. There's also some believability when it comes to what happens to all of the characters. There was a scene involving 1 member of the team that had me thinking they would go one way and went the other. The action also was explosive yet understated enough that it doesn't over power the entire scene.
Bottom line, RED is a simple movie using a very simple plot that never tries to be complex. It knows what it is and just shows you that and that's why it worked. Plus it has Helen Mirren with a gun. I can't get over that.
Just too cool.
On the 5 star scale. RED gets 3 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Eastwood's latest Hereafter. This one has not been received well by some critics. I'm banking on the reviews I read being wrong. That seems to be the case since I'm always right anyway. =)
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is RED. Directed by Robert Schwentke. Written by Jon Hoeber and Erich Hoeber. Based on the graphic novel RED created by Warren Ellis and Cullen Hamner.
100th review countdown....#87
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for intense sequences of action violence and brief strong language.
Runtime: 115 min
Cast
Bruce Willis - Frank Moses
Mary-Louise Parker - Sarah Ross
Karl Urban - William Cooper
Rebecca Pidgeon - Cynthia Wilkes
Morgan Freeman - Joe Matheson
Ernest Borgnine - Henry, The Records Keeper
John Malkovich - Marvin Boggs
James Remar - Gabriel Singer
Brian Cox - Ivan Simanov
Helen Mirren - Victoria
Richard Dreyfuss - Alexander Dunning
At first glance, this movie has startling similarities to another film I reviewed this year.
The Losers.
Both films were adapted from graphic novels that present a very parallel plot. An elite team of super soldiers are betrayed by the people who they trusted when they were at the top of their profession. So is there any differences between them. The answer is yes and there are 2 main ones.
1) The cast is FAR SUPERIOR. The Losers gave you names like Jeffery Dean Morgan, Idris Elba, Zoe Saldana and Jason Patrick. Not a bad group of actors but RED gives you Willis, Freeman, Malkovich and Mirren. There's just no contest here. We're talking about 2 Oscar winners and a 2 time Oscar nominee sandwiched around Hollywood's highest grossing action star in HISTORY.
Nuff said.
2) The other reason is simply this. The film is just plain better.
The Losers took a been there done that concept and played their campy style in ways that tried to convince you that everything was straight up. It was just silly. RED takes the same been there done that story and puts a different slant on it but treats the material the way it was meant to. Instead of the tongue in cheek feel of The Losers, RED puts a fist across the cheek.
Frank Moses is a retired black ops agent who's living out his days filled with routine and an insane amount of boredom. That is until an assassination team attempt to take him out one night. Needless to say he dispatches his would be killers and sets out to find out who's after him and why. During his travels he seeks the help of some of his former colleagues and together they uncover the reason for their planned termination.
As expected, there's nothing earth shattering new here to digest. What makes this retreaded plot work so well is the idea of these retired mega warriors are actually retirement age. It was a fresh way to present that type of character instead of going with the 40 something dude that left the "company" due to stress or was burned out.
The story doesn't make fun of itself but it take liberties with real time events. This is something that I usually can't and don't ignore but there was something about this movie that made made me give it a pass. This probably had a lot to do with the cast. This is a real powerhouse group that all lend their unique talents to the narrative.
Willis handles his heroic performance of Moses in a stoic yet menacing way that works very well. Freeman's take on Joe is very slick and poignant. Malkovich as Marvin is just simply perfect. He's always been great at playing the controlled psycho and here he does it with a nice balance of cunning and comedic timing. Finally, Helen Mirren's Victoria was just cool. I mean it's not everyday you see Queen Elizabeth using a sniper's rifle or firing off round after round with a machine gun. Just way too cool.
The only character that I didn't care for was Paker's character Sarah. Her involvement was important to the story but it was hard to figure out her role. Was she supposed to be the bubbly idiot or the girl that ends up at the wrong place at the wrong time but knows what she's doing. There was a little bit of both with her character and neither of them worked.
The plot was pretty believable as well. Well as believable as plot can be for a movie of this sort. The reasons for the attacks on these retired agents and who's pulling the strings are solid. The CIA tricks that are employed to gather information were not too over the top that you can accept it as part of the game and just roll with it. There's also some believability when it comes to what happens to all of the characters. There was a scene involving 1 member of the team that had me thinking they would go one way and went the other. The action also was explosive yet understated enough that it doesn't over power the entire scene.
Bottom line, RED is a simple movie using a very simple plot that never tries to be complex. It knows what it is and just shows you that and that's why it worked. Plus it has Helen Mirren with a gun. I can't get over that.
Just too cool.
On the 5 star scale. RED gets 3 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Eastwood's latest Hereafter. This one has not been received well by some critics. I'm banking on the reviews I read being wrong. That seems to be the case since I'm always right anyway. =)
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Waiting For 'Superman'
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Waiting For 'Superman.' Directed by Davis Guggenheim. Written by Davis Guggenheim & Billy Kimball.
100th review countdown....#86
MPAA Rating: PG for some thematic material, mild language and incidental smoking.
Runtime: 102 min
This review is dedicated to the following people.
Christina Molina
James Rodriguez
Iris Federico
Brenda Davidson Frost
Kathleen Vela
Deborah Montes
Lynne Morgan
Gordon Marcus Morgan 9/18/1935 - 4/8/2005 R.I.P Coach.
What do all of these people have in common besides being members of The "D" List? Which is a commendable achievement on it's own by the way. =)
They are currently or at some time were members of one of the world's most HONORABLE, RESPECTED, VALUABLE and most importantly UNAPPRECIATED professions.
They are all teachers.
As a product of a family filled with professional educators, there was NO WAY my schooling was going to suffer. It was that constant effort and discipline that helped forge the man I am today. I was a very lucky kid. I went to go to school twice a day. Officially in the big building with the bells and hairnet wearing lunch ladies serving cardboard food on cardboard trays. Then I would go to school at home doing assignments given to me by my grandmother who taught for over 10 years.
This documentary tackles the continuing problem of this countries failing school system and it starts with the teachers.
Guggenheim takes you into the world of 5 different kids. Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily. They are all good kids with a high aptitude and yearning to learn. One of the best examples of that is when Guggenheim asks 8 year old Daisy what she would tell him if he was one of her classmates complaining about how much he hated school....that it was too boring. What would she say to him? She said without missing a beat...."Next time try paying attention in class so you won't be bored." When a kid that young gives you an answer like that you know from the get go that this is a mind that has a passion for school and sees the value of what an education can provide. All of these kids exhibit very similar behavior and feelings toward school. Sadly that's not the only thing they have in common. With Emily being the only exception, the rest of the kids come from lower income neighborhoods that can't or don't provide better public learning environments. It's these same areas that employ unqualified teachers who specialize more in apathy than educating.
You are given factual examples of how schools are failing these kids and how nothing is being done to root out the problem that is staring everyone in the face. You are also seen how many of today's educators are taking matters into their own hands and developing alternative methods to provide these kids with a learning environment that not only promotes proper education, it executes it masterfully with little cost to John Q Taxpayer.
These "new" schools are so effective that there isn't enough space to take in all the applying students so lotteries are held to select the next year's student body. The mere thought that the fate of a child's proper education can fall in the hands of chance is a frightening thought. Unfortunately it's the world we live in today and what makes this so frustrating is that it doesn't have to be. Guggenheim explores why the established order continues to be defiant when the subject of education reform comes to the table.
I really don't want to say anymore about this film except that it's really a MUST SEE!
For anyone with children, expecting children or planning to have children, this documentary is a homework assignment that you can't afford to have your dog eat. I know I have given my endorsement for films in the past but this one touches me at the heart. Mainly because of the people in my life that are part of an education system that arbitrarily chooses to undervalue their efforts. While they passionately continue to guide tomorrow's brightest young minds.
I humbly urge, recommend, no I BEG YOU to seek this film out and see it. The story being told is about real life and it doesn't get any more real than the growth of a child as they go to school.
On the 5 star scale. 'Waiting For Superman' gets the full house 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
Instead of participating in a bullshit online campaign to demand Paranormal Activity 2 to come to a theater near you. Sorry for the foul language but it is bullshit. DEMAND that this movie comes to your area. It DESERVES and NEEDS your support. Please forward this review to everyone on your email lists so they can be aware of the film's existence and hopefully the word of mouth will spawn the masses to go out and buy a ticket.
Or you can go to the film's website. Waitingforsuperman.com.
Finally, I would like to take this chance to once again thank each and every one of the people I dedicated this review to. ALL of you either had a hand in my growth from a snot nosed kid with a bad attitude to an Emmy Award winning editor. Or you are shaping the next Emmy award winner. All of you have my respect and adoration FOR LIFE.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is RED.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Waiting For 'Superman.' Directed by Davis Guggenheim. Written by Davis Guggenheim & Billy Kimball.
100th review countdown....#86
MPAA Rating: PG for some thematic material, mild language and incidental smoking.
Runtime: 102 min
This review is dedicated to the following people.
Christina Molina
James Rodriguez
Iris Federico
Brenda Davidson Frost
Kathleen Vela
Deborah Montes
Lynne Morgan
Gordon Marcus Morgan 9/18/1935 - 4/8/2005 R.I.P Coach.
What do all of these people have in common besides being members of The "D" List? Which is a commendable achievement on it's own by the way. =)
They are currently or at some time were members of one of the world's most HONORABLE, RESPECTED, VALUABLE and most importantly UNAPPRECIATED professions.
They are all teachers.
As a product of a family filled with professional educators, there was NO WAY my schooling was going to suffer. It was that constant effort and discipline that helped forge the man I am today. I was a very lucky kid. I went to go to school twice a day. Officially in the big building with the bells and hairnet wearing lunch ladies serving cardboard food on cardboard trays. Then I would go to school at home doing assignments given to me by my grandmother who taught for over 10 years.
This documentary tackles the continuing problem of this countries failing school system and it starts with the teachers.
Guggenheim takes you into the world of 5 different kids. Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily. They are all good kids with a high aptitude and yearning to learn. One of the best examples of that is when Guggenheim asks 8 year old Daisy what she would tell him if he was one of her classmates complaining about how much he hated school....that it was too boring. What would she say to him? She said without missing a beat...."Next time try paying attention in class so you won't be bored." When a kid that young gives you an answer like that you know from the get go that this is a mind that has a passion for school and sees the value of what an education can provide. All of these kids exhibit very similar behavior and feelings toward school. Sadly that's not the only thing they have in common. With Emily being the only exception, the rest of the kids come from lower income neighborhoods that can't or don't provide better public learning environments. It's these same areas that employ unqualified teachers who specialize more in apathy than educating.
You are given factual examples of how schools are failing these kids and how nothing is being done to root out the problem that is staring everyone in the face. You are also seen how many of today's educators are taking matters into their own hands and developing alternative methods to provide these kids with a learning environment that not only promotes proper education, it executes it masterfully with little cost to John Q Taxpayer.
These "new" schools are so effective that there isn't enough space to take in all the applying students so lotteries are held to select the next year's student body. The mere thought that the fate of a child's proper education can fall in the hands of chance is a frightening thought. Unfortunately it's the world we live in today and what makes this so frustrating is that it doesn't have to be. Guggenheim explores why the established order continues to be defiant when the subject of education reform comes to the table.
I really don't want to say anymore about this film except that it's really a MUST SEE!
For anyone with children, expecting children or planning to have children, this documentary is a homework assignment that you can't afford to have your dog eat. I know I have given my endorsement for films in the past but this one touches me at the heart. Mainly because of the people in my life that are part of an education system that arbitrarily chooses to undervalue their efforts. While they passionately continue to guide tomorrow's brightest young minds.
I humbly urge, recommend, no I BEG YOU to seek this film out and see it. The story being told is about real life and it doesn't get any more real than the growth of a child as they go to school.
On the 5 star scale. 'Waiting For Superman' gets the full house 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
Instead of participating in a bullshit online campaign to demand Paranormal Activity 2 to come to a theater near you. Sorry for the foul language but it is bullshit. DEMAND that this movie comes to your area. It DESERVES and NEEDS your support. Please forward this review to everyone on your email lists so they can be aware of the film's existence and hopefully the word of mouth will spawn the masses to go out and buy a ticket.
Or you can go to the film's website. Waitingforsuperman.com.
Finally, I would like to take this chance to once again thank each and every one of the people I dedicated this review to. ALL of you either had a hand in my growth from a snot nosed kid with a bad attitude to an Emmy Award winning editor. Or you are shaping the next Emmy award winner. All of you have my respect and adoration FOR LIFE.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is RED.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
The Social Network
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is The Social Network. Directed by David Fincher. Written by Aaron Sorkin. Based on the book "The Accidental Millionaires." Written by Ben Mezrich.
100th review countdown....#85
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sexual content, drug and alcohol use and language.
Runtime: 121 min
Cast
Jesse Eisenberg - Mark Zuckerberg
Rooney Mara - Erica Albright
Armie Hammer - Cameron Winklevoss
Josh Pence - Tyler Winklevoss
Joseph Mazzello - Dustin Moskovitz
Max Minghella - Divya Narendra
Andrew Garfield - Eduardo Saverin
Rashida Jones - Marylin Delpy
Justin Timberlake - Sean Parker
"You don't get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies."
This the clever tag line to what is hands down THE BEST FILM OF 2010!!!!
I historically don't write my reviews the same day I see the movie but I felt duty bound as your favorite film critic to get this one out as soon as possible because all of you MUST SEE THIS FILM!!!! If you already beat me to the punch then I say congratulations and SEE IT AGAIN!!!!
For anyone who hasn't been living on Mars knows what this movie is about. It chronicles the college life of Facebook co-creator Mark Zuckerberg and the several twists and turns that follow him as he developed the world's biggest social networking website. Including the various law suits that followed him on the road to fame and fortune via the internet super highway.
There's so much amazing stuff in this film that I don't know where to begin my commentary. Normally I would lead off with the incredible performances of the cast. That would seem like a good place to start because every one in this film was exceptional. I could go another way and talk about David Fincher's continued impressive directing. Again another great way to kick off this review but I think I will begin by by giving the film's biggest star the spotlight.
The Social Networks biggest star is 100% undeniably Aaron Sorkin's remarkable script. I can't remember seeing a film with such razor sharp dialogue in quite a while. Sorkin choreographs every word that's uttered so intricately that he dares you to not give his work the attention and respect it demands. I'm telling you now that you have no choice but to respect the craftsmanship that is presented before you. As sharp and witty the dialouge may be, it's not pretentious. You're able to follow everything that's said with relative ease. The accounts of Zuckerberg's journey are not told chronologically. The film cuts between his endeavor's at Harvard and the two different depositions he endures in the present. This is another clever way Sorkin weaves the story along. It's very reminiscent of Frost/Nixon where you are shown the events of the interviews mixed in with the reaction from all parties involved many years later. The wordplay in the deposition scenes were just as captivating if not more so. The only thing that I'm curious about was whether or not Fincher and Sorkin were able to see the deposition transcripts. Either way, those scenes popped and really established Zuckerberg's ability to manipulate the opposing council while he dragged himself through the process of his own defense.
The script was so tight that it didn't take much else to get this picture off the ground. Then comes David Fincher who not only takes the picture off the ground. He sends it to a level that goes beyond anyone's imagination. He applies a visual style to a film that you wouldn't expect to see considering the subject matter and genre. This helps the flow of the story and keeps you interested. Fincher finds ways to ratchet up the anxiety with scenes that under any other director would play off as lame and forced. He also did a terrific job with the editing of the film. He follows Sorkin's blueprint as it was intended while adding some spice to it. Everytime he cuts from a deposition scene to a moment back in the character's past it all feels connected and seamless. You never get the sense that you are jumping back and forth through time. Another important note. Fincher paces the film beautifully. This movie moves at the speed of light despite it's 2 hour runtime. Finally, he allows the actors to tear trough their lines and give them the freedom to take the words off the page and apply their own twist.
David Fincher is very quietly becoming one of tinseltown's elite film makers. Maybe not so quietly.
This segues perfectly to the cast as a whole. Every single one of the actors here takes the stage and owns the moments they are a part of. Very similar to The Town, the cast outshines each other when they are interacting. This wasn't hard to achieve when the script is guiding you down the right path but you still have to find the right way to speak the words off the page and give them life. This comes across superbly with Eisenberg. He fires his dialougue with a purpose and speed that implies a superior intelligence and manitpulative tone. He does an amazing job making you fall in love with him in one scene then falling in hate with him in the same scene. Garfield holds his own playing off Eisenberg as Eduardo. He commands just as much respect if not more. I know I said that everyone is awesome but if I had to rank the performances of the cast then you have the ranking of the top 2.
Having said all of this, I have to say that prior to the films release that the real Mark Zuckerberg had made some comments challenging the validity of some of the moments in the film. That they were sensationalized or even fabricated for the sake of entertainment. This may get you to question if what you just saw was all true. I can say undoubtedly that I DON'T CARE! Regardless of whether or not this film is fact or fiction, it doesn't change the fact that this movie is one hell of an entertaining 2 hours.
Sorkin and Fincher knocked this one out of the park.
On the 5 star scale. The Social Network gets the full house 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
This one is a no brainer. Expect to see this one getting some MAJOR hardware come awards season. I can't see any other film challenging this one. Though I would love to see who is willing to step up and try.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is RED.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The Social Network. Directed by David Fincher. Written by Aaron Sorkin. Based on the book "The Accidental Millionaires." Written by Ben Mezrich.
100th review countdown....#85
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for sexual content, drug and alcohol use and language.
Runtime: 121 min
Cast
Jesse Eisenberg - Mark Zuckerberg
Rooney Mara - Erica Albright
Armie Hammer - Cameron Winklevoss
Josh Pence - Tyler Winklevoss
Joseph Mazzello - Dustin Moskovitz
Max Minghella - Divya Narendra
Andrew Garfield - Eduardo Saverin
Rashida Jones - Marylin Delpy
Justin Timberlake - Sean Parker
"You don't get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies."
This the clever tag line to what is hands down THE BEST FILM OF 2010!!!!
I historically don't write my reviews the same day I see the movie but I felt duty bound as your favorite film critic to get this one out as soon as possible because all of you MUST SEE THIS FILM!!!! If you already beat me to the punch then I say congratulations and SEE IT AGAIN!!!!
For anyone who hasn't been living on Mars knows what this movie is about. It chronicles the college life of Facebook co-creator Mark Zuckerberg and the several twists and turns that follow him as he developed the world's biggest social networking website. Including the various law suits that followed him on the road to fame and fortune via the internet super highway.
There's so much amazing stuff in this film that I don't know where to begin my commentary. Normally I would lead off with the incredible performances of the cast. That would seem like a good place to start because every one in this film was exceptional. I could go another way and talk about David Fincher's continued impressive directing. Again another great way to kick off this review but I think I will begin by by giving the film's biggest star the spotlight.
The Social Networks biggest star is 100% undeniably Aaron Sorkin's remarkable script. I can't remember seeing a film with such razor sharp dialogue in quite a while. Sorkin choreographs every word that's uttered so intricately that he dares you to not give his work the attention and respect it demands. I'm telling you now that you have no choice but to respect the craftsmanship that is presented before you. As sharp and witty the dialouge may be, it's not pretentious. You're able to follow everything that's said with relative ease. The accounts of Zuckerberg's journey are not told chronologically. The film cuts between his endeavor's at Harvard and the two different depositions he endures in the present. This is another clever way Sorkin weaves the story along. It's very reminiscent of Frost/Nixon where you are shown the events of the interviews mixed in with the reaction from all parties involved many years later. The wordplay in the deposition scenes were just as captivating if not more so. The only thing that I'm curious about was whether or not Fincher and Sorkin were able to see the deposition transcripts. Either way, those scenes popped and really established Zuckerberg's ability to manipulate the opposing council while he dragged himself through the process of his own defense.
The script was so tight that it didn't take much else to get this picture off the ground. Then comes David Fincher who not only takes the picture off the ground. He sends it to a level that goes beyond anyone's imagination. He applies a visual style to a film that you wouldn't expect to see considering the subject matter and genre. This helps the flow of the story and keeps you interested. Fincher finds ways to ratchet up the anxiety with scenes that under any other director would play off as lame and forced. He also did a terrific job with the editing of the film. He follows Sorkin's blueprint as it was intended while adding some spice to it. Everytime he cuts from a deposition scene to a moment back in the character's past it all feels connected and seamless. You never get the sense that you are jumping back and forth through time. Another important note. Fincher paces the film beautifully. This movie moves at the speed of light despite it's 2 hour runtime. Finally, he allows the actors to tear trough their lines and give them the freedom to take the words off the page and apply their own twist.
David Fincher is very quietly becoming one of tinseltown's elite film makers. Maybe not so quietly.
This segues perfectly to the cast as a whole. Every single one of the actors here takes the stage and owns the moments they are a part of. Very similar to The Town, the cast outshines each other when they are interacting. This wasn't hard to achieve when the script is guiding you down the right path but you still have to find the right way to speak the words off the page and give them life. This comes across superbly with Eisenberg. He fires his dialougue with a purpose and speed that implies a superior intelligence and manitpulative tone. He does an amazing job making you fall in love with him in one scene then falling in hate with him in the same scene. Garfield holds his own playing off Eisenberg as Eduardo. He commands just as much respect if not more. I know I said that everyone is awesome but if I had to rank the performances of the cast then you have the ranking of the top 2.
Having said all of this, I have to say that prior to the films release that the real Mark Zuckerberg had made some comments challenging the validity of some of the moments in the film. That they were sensationalized or even fabricated for the sake of entertainment. This may get you to question if what you just saw was all true. I can say undoubtedly that I DON'T CARE! Regardless of whether or not this film is fact or fiction, it doesn't change the fact that this movie is one hell of an entertaining 2 hours.
Sorkin and Fincher knocked this one out of the park.
On the 5 star scale. The Social Network gets the full house 5 stars with a "Worth Every Penny!" recommendation.
This one is a no brainer. Expect to see this one getting some MAJOR hardware come awards season. I can't see any other film challenging this one. Though I would love to see who is willing to step up and try.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is RED.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole. Directed by Zack Snyder. Written by John Orloff and Emil Stern. Based on novels Guardians of Ga'Hoole written by Kathryn Lasky.
100th review countdown....#84
MPAA Rating : PG for some sequences of scary action.
Runtime : 90 min
Cast
Emily Barclay - Gylfie (voice)
Abbie Cornish - Otulissa (voice)
Essie Davis - Marella (voice)
Adrienne DeFaria - Eglantine (voice)
Joel Edgerton - Metalbeak (voice)
Deborra-Lee Furness - Barran (voice)
Sacha Horler - Strix Struma (voice)
Bill Hunter - Bubo (voice)
Ryan Kwanten - Kludd (voice)
Anthony LaPaglia - Twilight (voice)
Miriam Margolyes - Mrs. Plithiver (voice)
Helen Mirren - Nyra (voice)
Sam Neill - Allomere (voice)
Barry Otto - Echidna (voice)
Richard Roxburgh - Boron (voice)
From the same studio that created Happy Feet, comes a tale of fantasy, action, family and wonder. Placed in the hands of Hollywood's most gifted director when it comes to visuals and more importantly adapting another published work.
Soren is a young barn owl who is fascinated with a legendary group of protectors called the Guardians of Ga'Hoole. They are in charge of maintaining a truce between their world against the Pure Ones, an evil race of owls led by Metalbeak. His goal is to capture and brainwash orphaned owls for his army in an attempt to destroy the Guardians and take hold of the world. Soren and his brother Kludd are abducted by the Pure Ones and are taken away to join the resistance. Soren meets Gylfie and manages to escape and search for the Guardians. Kludd stays behind and choses to join the Pure Ones. Soren during his travel befriends Twilight and Digger. They all join in the search for the Guardians in the hopes that they can help defeat the Pure Ones and stop their plan of taking over the world.
This film in a word in STUNNING!
I haven't seen animation this amazing in a while. The detail surrounding the owls and the world they live in is so rich that you can over dose from sensory overload. The characters are all living breathing parts of the story. There isn't a frame of eye candy or animated misdirection. A lot of these animated films resort to that tactic to compensate for a weak story. That isn't the case here. In fact you can make the case and I do in fact that the story could have used some more beef to it. There was a sense of flying through (no pun intended) character and story developments that may have shed more light to the Guardians and the need for their protection.
This movie is supposedly based on a trilogy of Ga'Hoole books. Since I never read them I have no idea if they just made the 1st book or mashed all 3 into this film. I am leaning toward the combination of all 3 books into this movie not being the case just by the way this one ends. Having said that, if sequels are most likely made then Snyder and company missed a golden opportunity to educate the Ga'Hoole iliterate like yours truly. I would have loved to have seen the Guardians backstory. Where did they come from? Why are they the protectors of the owl world? What caused the war in the 1st place? These things are lightly touched upon in exposition and opening credit narration.
Not good enough.
The rest of the movie is too good to be given the wash over treatment with some core elements of the saga. This is a shame because the man at the helm of this picture has done a terrific job in respecting a movies that's been adapted from a book. Just look at 300 and Watchmen for proof of that. This time the movie felt rushed and short changed. I'm not sure who made that choice but it's too bad because we could have been talking about one of the best fantasy films in the last decade.
Does this kill the movie completely? Absolutely not. Legend of The Guardians is still an amazing adventure filled with breathtaking animation and heart wrenching action. These owls are the coolest looking birds you will ever see on screen. I would however proceed with caution when taking the kiddies. Despite the PG rating, I wouldn't bring any kids younger than 7-8. The fighting between the owls can be brutal at times. There isn't any blood but it's implied by some of the injuries the owls suffer from the battles. Also, the warrior owls wear armor masks that give them a cool yet menacing look. They may give the little ones a spook so don't say I didn't warn you.
On the 5 star scale. Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole gets 4 stars with a "Go See It!" recommendation.
I wanted so bad to give this one a full house 5 stars and Worth Every Penny recommendation but the overwhelming feeling I had of missing story and character development just couldn't sway my mind.
This is still a wonderful movie that should be seen.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is The Social Network.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole. Directed by Zack Snyder. Written by John Orloff and Emil Stern. Based on novels Guardians of Ga'Hoole written by Kathryn Lasky.
100th review countdown....#84
MPAA Rating : PG for some sequences of scary action.
Runtime : 90 min
Cast
Emily Barclay - Gylfie (voice)
Abbie Cornish - Otulissa (voice)
Essie Davis - Marella (voice)
Adrienne DeFaria - Eglantine (voice)
Joel Edgerton - Metalbeak (voice)
Deborra-Lee Furness - Barran (voice)
Sacha Horler - Strix Struma (voice)
Bill Hunter - Bubo (voice)
Ryan Kwanten - Kludd (voice)
Anthony LaPaglia - Twilight (voice)
Miriam Margolyes - Mrs. Plithiver (voice)
Helen Mirren - Nyra (voice)
Sam Neill - Allomere (voice)
Barry Otto - Echidna (voice)
Richard Roxburgh - Boron (voice)
From the same studio that created Happy Feet, comes a tale of fantasy, action, family and wonder. Placed in the hands of Hollywood's most gifted director when it comes to visuals and more importantly adapting another published work.
Soren is a young barn owl who is fascinated with a legendary group of protectors called the Guardians of Ga'Hoole. They are in charge of maintaining a truce between their world against the Pure Ones, an evil race of owls led by Metalbeak. His goal is to capture and brainwash orphaned owls for his army in an attempt to destroy the Guardians and take hold of the world. Soren and his brother Kludd are abducted by the Pure Ones and are taken away to join the resistance. Soren meets Gylfie and manages to escape and search for the Guardians. Kludd stays behind and choses to join the Pure Ones. Soren during his travel befriends Twilight and Digger. They all join in the search for the Guardians in the hopes that they can help defeat the Pure Ones and stop their plan of taking over the world.
This film in a word in STUNNING!
I haven't seen animation this amazing in a while. The detail surrounding the owls and the world they live in is so rich that you can over dose from sensory overload. The characters are all living breathing parts of the story. There isn't a frame of eye candy or animated misdirection. A lot of these animated films resort to that tactic to compensate for a weak story. That isn't the case here. In fact you can make the case and I do in fact that the story could have used some more beef to it. There was a sense of flying through (no pun intended) character and story developments that may have shed more light to the Guardians and the need for their protection.
This movie is supposedly based on a trilogy of Ga'Hoole books. Since I never read them I have no idea if they just made the 1st book or mashed all 3 into this film. I am leaning toward the combination of all 3 books into this movie not being the case just by the way this one ends. Having said that, if sequels are most likely made then Snyder and company missed a golden opportunity to educate the Ga'Hoole iliterate like yours truly. I would have loved to have seen the Guardians backstory. Where did they come from? Why are they the protectors of the owl world? What caused the war in the 1st place? These things are lightly touched upon in exposition and opening credit narration.
Not good enough.
The rest of the movie is too good to be given the wash over treatment with some core elements of the saga. This is a shame because the man at the helm of this picture has done a terrific job in respecting a movies that's been adapted from a book. Just look at 300 and Watchmen for proof of that. This time the movie felt rushed and short changed. I'm not sure who made that choice but it's too bad because we could have been talking about one of the best fantasy films in the last decade.
Does this kill the movie completely? Absolutely not. Legend of The Guardians is still an amazing adventure filled with breathtaking animation and heart wrenching action. These owls are the coolest looking birds you will ever see on screen. I would however proceed with caution when taking the kiddies. Despite the PG rating, I wouldn't bring any kids younger than 7-8. The fighting between the owls can be brutal at times. There isn't any blood but it's implied by some of the injuries the owls suffer from the battles. Also, the warrior owls wear armor masks that give them a cool yet menacing look. They may give the little ones a spook so don't say I didn't warn you.
On the 5 star scale. Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole gets 4 stars with a "Go See It!" recommendation.
I wanted so bad to give this one a full house 5 stars and Worth Every Penny recommendation but the overwhelming feeling I had of missing story and character development just couldn't sway my mind.
This is still a wonderful movie that should be seen.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is The Social Network.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps
Welcome to another episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps. Directed by Oliver Stone. Written by Allan Loeb & Steven Schiff. Based on characters created by Stanley Weiser and Oliver Stone.
100th review countdown....#83
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for brief strong language and thematic elements.
Runtime : 133 min
Cast
Michael Douglas - Gordon Gekko
Shia LaBeouf - Jake Moore
Josh Brolin - Bretton James
Carey Mulligan - Winnie Gekko
Eli Wallach - Jules Steinhardt
Susan Sarandon - Jake's Mother
Frank Langella - Louis Zabel
Austin Pendleton - Dr. Masters
"Someone reminded me I once said greed is good. Now it seems it's legal."
This is a quote from one of film's greatest movie villains of all time in this long awaited sequel. Gordon Gekko.
23 years ago audiences were introduced to Gordon Gekko, the narcissistic villain of Oliver Stone's Wall Street. Well it's 2010 and Michael Douglas is back in the role that won him the Academy Award for Best Actor in the original Wall Street. The story begins with Gordon Gekko getting out of prison in 2001, having been sent away for insider trading and securities fraud. There is no one on the outside waiting for him. He is alone, shattered, and seemingly humbled.
Fast forward seven years to Jake Moore, a Wall Street yuppie in a relationship with Gekko's daughter Winnie. They are a young happy couple, but tragedy strikes when Jake's firm is taken over by Bretton James a slimy Wall Street suit looking to make a buck in the economic climate. James spreads rumors about Moore's firm and its leader, James Zabel who, in the film, serves as Jake's father figure.
When Zabel commits suicide Jake blames Bretton James and seeks vengeance. Who better to help him than his future father-in-law and the king of illegal corporate raiding, Gordon Gekko? But life is not without its little trades and Gekko wants his daughter back in his life. Not an easy thing to accomplish, considering Winnie blames Gordon for everything that has gone sour in her life.
The buzz around the announcement of this film was lukewarm at best. Many in the industry and movie goers questioned the relevance and more importantly the necessity of another Wall Street film. When the original was made, it was topical and served as a wake up call to the people hiding their heads in the sand about the ethical or lack of ethical practices of the men on Wall St. So the questions began about Wall Street 2.0 and I have to say.....It worked....to a degree.
The first thing you think of when the movie starts is how are they going to handle the extremely long passage of time between films. The last time we saw Gekko, he was in the prime of his financial life with the moussed up hair and $1,000 suits. Now he's a broken down shell of his former self just out of prison. I feared the movie would suffer due to the dated atmosphere. It played well and set up the future events of the story nicely.
The highlight of this movie is hands down the cast. Led by Douglas. The hairs are grayer but the Gekko fire still burns red hot in this one. You are instantly transported back to Gekko land circa 1987. He commands your attention and delivers his lines with the calculated resound of a caged lion that's just been released back into the wild. Shia LeBeouf really steps his game up with the talent he's surrounded by. This kid has something about him. I can't really place it. His timing is stellar, his mannerism's and facial expressions do more for him at times then actually speaking. I talked about this about Denzel and Clooney. Shia's not there yet but he's on his way. Then you have Carey Mulligan who gives the film it's heart as Winnie. Finally you got Josh Brolin followed by Frank Langella.
Need I say more?
Visually, the film is very stylish. There was a lot of graphical work to display the ebb and flow of the market. There was also some very fancy camera work and editing which added more spice to the overall presentation.
The script is well written save for 1 aspect. The structure. As an editor I know a "little" bit about structure. Telling a story when you have a massive amount of elements at your disposal is not as easy as it sounds. You have to be able to make tough decisions that require losing some great material for the sake of the overall project. Working in TV, I deal with that issue all the time because we are bound by a hard line run time. You would think that working in cinema is easier because you can make a film as long as you want. That's true in theory but let's be real about this. You run the risk of losing your audience if you bombard them with countless scenes of minutiae. They may respond one of two ways and neither of them are good.
Apathy or boredom.
Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps very carefully toes that line. They throw a lot of stuff at you but it's in just the right amount that you still care about everything and everyone. Could the film have been better had Ollie spent some more time in the Avid? For all I know he did and this is what he came up with. The end result is satisfactory considering how much is covered and was meant to be covered in a shade under two and a half hours.
This film isn't perfect but it suits it's purpose. It was another entertaining wake up call to society about the countries economic struggles and status presented by some of tinsel town's finest.
On the 5 star scale. Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps. Directed by Oliver Stone. Written by Allan Loeb & Steven Schiff. Based on characters created by Stanley Weiser and Oliver Stone.
100th review countdown....#83
MPAA Rating: PG-13 for brief strong language and thematic elements.
Runtime : 133 min
Cast
Michael Douglas - Gordon Gekko
Shia LaBeouf - Jake Moore
Josh Brolin - Bretton James
Carey Mulligan - Winnie Gekko
Eli Wallach - Jules Steinhardt
Susan Sarandon - Jake's Mother
Frank Langella - Louis Zabel
Austin Pendleton - Dr. Masters
"Someone reminded me I once said greed is good. Now it seems it's legal."
This is a quote from one of film's greatest movie villains of all time in this long awaited sequel. Gordon Gekko.
23 years ago audiences were introduced to Gordon Gekko, the narcissistic villain of Oliver Stone's Wall Street. Well it's 2010 and Michael Douglas is back in the role that won him the Academy Award for Best Actor in the original Wall Street. The story begins with Gordon Gekko getting out of prison in 2001, having been sent away for insider trading and securities fraud. There is no one on the outside waiting for him. He is alone, shattered, and seemingly humbled.
Fast forward seven years to Jake Moore, a Wall Street yuppie in a relationship with Gekko's daughter Winnie. They are a young happy couple, but tragedy strikes when Jake's firm is taken over by Bretton James a slimy Wall Street suit looking to make a buck in the economic climate. James spreads rumors about Moore's firm and its leader, James Zabel who, in the film, serves as Jake's father figure.
When Zabel commits suicide Jake blames Bretton James and seeks vengeance. Who better to help him than his future father-in-law and the king of illegal corporate raiding, Gordon Gekko? But life is not without its little trades and Gekko wants his daughter back in his life. Not an easy thing to accomplish, considering Winnie blames Gordon for everything that has gone sour in her life.
The buzz around the announcement of this film was lukewarm at best. Many in the industry and movie goers questioned the relevance and more importantly the necessity of another Wall Street film. When the original was made, it was topical and served as a wake up call to the people hiding their heads in the sand about the ethical or lack of ethical practices of the men on Wall St. So the questions began about Wall Street 2.0 and I have to say.....It worked....to a degree.
The first thing you think of when the movie starts is how are they going to handle the extremely long passage of time between films. The last time we saw Gekko, he was in the prime of his financial life with the moussed up hair and $1,000 suits. Now he's a broken down shell of his former self just out of prison. I feared the movie would suffer due to the dated atmosphere. It played well and set up the future events of the story nicely.
The highlight of this movie is hands down the cast. Led by Douglas. The hairs are grayer but the Gekko fire still burns red hot in this one. You are instantly transported back to Gekko land circa 1987. He commands your attention and delivers his lines with the calculated resound of a caged lion that's just been released back into the wild. Shia LeBeouf really steps his game up with the talent he's surrounded by. This kid has something about him. I can't really place it. His timing is stellar, his mannerism's and facial expressions do more for him at times then actually speaking. I talked about this about Denzel and Clooney. Shia's not there yet but he's on his way. Then you have Carey Mulligan who gives the film it's heart as Winnie. Finally you got Josh Brolin followed by Frank Langella.
Need I say more?
Visually, the film is very stylish. There was a lot of graphical work to display the ebb and flow of the market. There was also some very fancy camera work and editing which added more spice to the overall presentation.
The script is well written save for 1 aspect. The structure. As an editor I know a "little" bit about structure. Telling a story when you have a massive amount of elements at your disposal is not as easy as it sounds. You have to be able to make tough decisions that require losing some great material for the sake of the overall project. Working in TV, I deal with that issue all the time because we are bound by a hard line run time. You would think that working in cinema is easier because you can make a film as long as you want. That's true in theory but let's be real about this. You run the risk of losing your audience if you bombard them with countless scenes of minutiae. They may respond one of two ways and neither of them are good.
Apathy or boredom.
Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps very carefully toes that line. They throw a lot of stuff at you but it's in just the right amount that you still care about everything and everyone. Could the film have been better had Ollie spent some more time in the Avid? For all I know he did and this is what he came up with. The end result is satisfactory considering how much is covered and was meant to be covered in a shade under two and a half hours.
This film isn't perfect but it suits it's purpose. It was another entertaining wake up call to society about the countries economic struggles and status presented by some of tinsel town's finest.
On the 5 star scale. Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps gets 3.5 stars with a "Go See It" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole.
Until Next Episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
The Town
Welcome to the 1st episode of Lights....Camera....Popcorn!
Today's review is The Town. Directed by Ben Affleck. Written by Peter Craig, Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard. Based on the book "Prince of Thieves" written by Chuck Hogan.
100th review countdown....#82
MPAA Rating : R for strong violence, pervasive language, some sexuality and drug use.
Runtime : 123 min
Cast
Ben Affleck - Doug MacRay
Rebecca Hall - Claire Keesey
Jon Hamm - FBI Special Agent Adam Frawley
Jeremy Renner - James "Jem" Coughlin
Blake Lively - Krista Coughlin
Slaine - Albert "Gloansy" Magloan
Owen Burke - Desmond Elden
Titus Welliver - Dino Ciampa
Pete Postlethwaite - Fergus 'Fergie' Colm
Chris Cooper - Stephen MacRay
And the Oscar for Best Director goes too......Ben Affleck????? Sounds weird right? But after walking out of this movie, that statement may not be that far off.
Doug runs a 4 man heist crew in the town of Charlestown Mass. After a bank job goes a little off kilter, the crew takes a hostage (Claire) only to find out later that she lives near where the guys hang out. With this uncertainty hanging over their heads, Jem offers to just fix the problem with a bullet but Doug uses a more subtle approach which cause trouble for all parties involved.
That's all you're getting out of me and I'm afraid I said too much. If you caught the trailers for this one then I really didn't spoil anything. I saved all the good stuff for you to see for yourselves and trust me, there is a TON of good stuff here to see.
The only thing I have to say against this film are the comparisons that other critics are using to praise it. I have heard that The Town is Heat meets The Departed. That's pretty high praise because Heat and The Departed are 2 very excellent crime films. I see the parallel with Heat and if you remember Heat then you will notice it when you see The Town. I don't see it with The Departed. The Departed dealt at it's core with 2 separate rats infiltrating the police and the mob respectively. There was nothing of the sort here. Unless I'm missing something I think The Departed was a poor choice to include in The Town's comparison. Aside from that there really was just all good to be had with this one.
I'll begin with the cast.
Just like in his directorial debut, 2007's Gone Baby Gone, big Ben surrounded himself with top notch talent that turned out performances that do more than just move the story along. They give you a feel of what the world these characters are living in is actually like. Affleck even treats the neighborhood of Charlestown as a character in it's own right. The surrounding area is dingy and working class which plays into the hands of the heist crew and the cops that look the other way. Everyone is so good that it's impossible to pick out just 1 standout performance. When these characters are on screen, they all capture your attention and respect. Nobody outshines the other, they share the screen equally. Just when I was going to give the nod to Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm comes on screen and takes the lead then Rebecca Hall steals it from Jon then Ben takes it from everyone. That kind of balance is VERY hard to create let alone maintain and Affleck does this masterfully.
Next up are the heist scenes. They are shot, blocked, edited, scored and paced with care, precision and intensity. You are transported into that situation as you follow the tactical nature of this crew as they rob the bank. The camerawork is fast and in your face. The shot choices between cuts were perfect. There was a faint hint of music during some of the more tense moments. You could just tell that Affleck did his homework and looked at other good heist movies when he prepared the robberies in this film.
Finally we come to the pacing of the film. At a shade over 2 hours, the film is lightning quick. This is in large part to the rapid cutting style that shows passage of time in the blink of an eye. For a film this deep it would seem like a bad move because it can be confused with a lack of plot development but it works here. You don't wonder what's been going on with these people. You just accept what they have been up to and what the future holds for them.
This is another winner for Ben Affleck the director. I haven't been the biggest fan of him as an actor. Not because of his acting ability because he has that. It's mainly due to the roles he's chosen over time. His reinvention behind the camera has given him some clout and better yet a chance to return to the fold as the strong actor that he is. One things for sure, the man can direct. He has the flare for storytelling especially when it comes to gritty, in your face, no holds barred material. Shooting in and around his hometown of Boston doesn't hurt either. He really captures the heart and soul of the state and uses it to get his point across.
Stay with it Ben....You got some hardware in your future.
On the 5 star scale. The Town gets 4 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps to be followed by Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The Town. Directed by Ben Affleck. Written by Peter Craig, Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard. Based on the book "Prince of Thieves" written by Chuck Hogan.
100th review countdown....#82
MPAA Rating : R for strong violence, pervasive language, some sexuality and drug use.
Runtime : 123 min
Cast
Ben Affleck - Doug MacRay
Rebecca Hall - Claire Keesey
Jon Hamm - FBI Special Agent Adam Frawley
Jeremy Renner - James "Jem" Coughlin
Blake Lively - Krista Coughlin
Slaine - Albert "Gloansy" Magloan
Owen Burke - Desmond Elden
Titus Welliver - Dino Ciampa
Pete Postlethwaite - Fergus 'Fergie' Colm
Chris Cooper - Stephen MacRay
And the Oscar for Best Director goes too......Ben Affleck????? Sounds weird right? But after walking out of this movie, that statement may not be that far off.
Doug runs a 4 man heist crew in the town of Charlestown Mass. After a bank job goes a little off kilter, the crew takes a hostage (Claire) only to find out later that she lives near where the guys hang out. With this uncertainty hanging over their heads, Jem offers to just fix the problem with a bullet but Doug uses a more subtle approach which cause trouble for all parties involved.
That's all you're getting out of me and I'm afraid I said too much. If you caught the trailers for this one then I really didn't spoil anything. I saved all the good stuff for you to see for yourselves and trust me, there is a TON of good stuff here to see.
The only thing I have to say against this film are the comparisons that other critics are using to praise it. I have heard that The Town is Heat meets The Departed. That's pretty high praise because Heat and The Departed are 2 very excellent crime films. I see the parallel with Heat and if you remember Heat then you will notice it when you see The Town. I don't see it with The Departed. The Departed dealt at it's core with 2 separate rats infiltrating the police and the mob respectively. There was nothing of the sort here. Unless I'm missing something I think The Departed was a poor choice to include in The Town's comparison. Aside from that there really was just all good to be had with this one.
I'll begin with the cast.
Just like in his directorial debut, 2007's Gone Baby Gone, big Ben surrounded himself with top notch talent that turned out performances that do more than just move the story along. They give you a feel of what the world these characters are living in is actually like. Affleck even treats the neighborhood of Charlestown as a character in it's own right. The surrounding area is dingy and working class which plays into the hands of the heist crew and the cops that look the other way. Everyone is so good that it's impossible to pick out just 1 standout performance. When these characters are on screen, they all capture your attention and respect. Nobody outshines the other, they share the screen equally. Just when I was going to give the nod to Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm comes on screen and takes the lead then Rebecca Hall steals it from Jon then Ben takes it from everyone. That kind of balance is VERY hard to create let alone maintain and Affleck does this masterfully.
Next up are the heist scenes. They are shot, blocked, edited, scored and paced with care, precision and intensity. You are transported into that situation as you follow the tactical nature of this crew as they rob the bank. The camerawork is fast and in your face. The shot choices between cuts were perfect. There was a faint hint of music during some of the more tense moments. You could just tell that Affleck did his homework and looked at other good heist movies when he prepared the robberies in this film.
Finally we come to the pacing of the film. At a shade over 2 hours, the film is lightning quick. This is in large part to the rapid cutting style that shows passage of time in the blink of an eye. For a film this deep it would seem like a bad move because it can be confused with a lack of plot development but it works here. You don't wonder what's been going on with these people. You just accept what they have been up to and what the future holds for them.
This is another winner for Ben Affleck the director. I haven't been the biggest fan of him as an actor. Not because of his acting ability because he has that. It's mainly due to the roles he's chosen over time. His reinvention behind the camera has given him some clout and better yet a chance to return to the fold as the strong actor that he is. One things for sure, the man can direct. He has the flare for storytelling especially when it comes to gritty, in your face, no holds barred material. Shooting in and around his hometown of Boston doesn't hurt either. He really captures the heart and soul of the state and uses it to get his point across.
Stay with it Ben....You got some hardware in your future.
On the 5 star scale. The Town gets 4 stars with a "Worth Every Penny" recommendation.
That's a wrap for today. Up next is Wall Street : Money Never Sleeps to be followed by Legend of The Guardians : The Owls of Ga'Hoole.
Until next episode...."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Welcome
What's up everyone. Welcome to my brand new movie review web page. Made by a geek for geeks. The most recent review is The American. I have also posted all of the reviews I have done this year plus the ones I have done in the past. Just follow the links to the right of the page and they will take you there.
Feel free to pass along any comments, questions or suggestions and spread the word to your friends.
Enjoy,
"D"
Feel free to pass along any comments, questions or suggestions and spread the word to your friends.
Enjoy,
"D"
The American
Welcome to another episode of The "D" List.
Today's review is The American. Directed by Anton Corbijn. Written by Rowan Joffe. Based on the novel A Very Private Gentleman. Written by Martin Booth.
100th review countdown.....#81
MPAA Rating: R for violence, sexual content and nudity.
Runtime: 105 mins
Cast
George Clooney - Jack / Edward
Irina Björklund - Ingrid
Johan Leysen - Pavel
Paolo Bonacelli - Father Benedetto
Thekla Reuten - Mathilde
Violante Placido - Clara
Since the inception of The "D" List, I have made a conscious effort not to allow the opinions of my very cherished and loyal fans influence me on whether or not I see a film. This past Sunday I had a conversation with my cousin and her husband about this film and they loathed it. I hadn't seen it yet so their very strong feelings toward this film just inspired me to see what the fuss was all about.
Well I have to respectfully disagree with my kin regarding the worth of this film.
Jack/Edward is a highly trained assassin who committed the cardinal sin for someone in his profession. He fell in love. We all know in cases like this, things never end well. After an attempt on his life is thwarted he contacts his handler Pavel looking for refuge. Jack holds up in a small town in Rome while his exit out of the country is being attended to. During the time in this small town, Jack is contracted to do a job, while he executes the job, he meets a local prostitute (Clara) that warms other parts of his anatomy than just the one we know prostitutes are notorious for warming. The events of said courtship send Jack's life out of balance creating a rather dangerous paradox.
On the surface, this film is cut and dry. For the most part, that is the case with one very big exception.
The American can be best described in two words.
Those words are Tense and Deliberate.
All throughout the film, Jack is constantly relying on his training, he surveys the lay of the land, scoping out accessible exits and getaway routes. He examines the daily habits of the neighboring population looking for possible troublemakers. Clearly he needs to be on high alert since he's supposed to be in hiding anyway but this is modus operandi day in and day out. A perfect example of this is when he's on a date with Clara. When they toast to the evening, he waits for Clara to drink her wine before sipping his. If that isn't the height of his training to always be on your guard no matter who you're with then I don't know what is.
This aspect of Jack's existence is executed masterfully. You really get the sense that this man needs to have eyes in the back of his head. He's calculated, cunning and detached. It's those attributes however, that also lend to his torment. Jack can't have a normal life, how can he. The man kills for money. It's a very unsavory and hostile world where a conventional life is impossible. The end result is a man constantly on the edge and on ultra high alert.
This is where the Tense part comes in.
Corbjin's use of the slow tracking shot produces a very subtle yet obvious anxiety. You never know what or who may come around the corner. This of course is aided by the beautiful italian architecture. The side streets and narrow alley ways lend themselves to very scary and intricate moments of hide and seek.
Speaking of beautiful and italian......I must say BRAVO! to the casting director for selecting two of the most exquisite females I have seen in a film set in Europe. A point of contention with my cousin about the women (Clara in particular) was her performance. In her opinion it was dreadful. I, on the other hand felt the opposite. Now by no means is this woman going to take away an Oscar for her work here but I felt that she played the part she needed to play. Meaning her character was a prostitute with no real ambition and maybe a little naivety. That came across to me very clearly.
Six one way, half dozen the other I guess.
Now there was something that I know cuz and I can both agree on and that's the performance of Mr. Clooney. This man is an actor's actor who defies you not to watch him. You can't do it. The guy just oozes cool. The power of his performance here comes through more via his facial expressions or lack there of at times than his actual dialogue. He and Denzel possess this ability in spades. There should definitely be a nomination in his future.
If I had to gripe about this film. Ironically, it would be concerning one of the elements that made it work. The film is so deliberate in nature and structure that it does give you a slight dragging impression. For a film that's only 105 minutes long, it doesn't play like one. Aside from that I have very little else to complain about minus some issues I had with the overall narrative that I will spare you all from.
On the 5 star scale. The American gets 4 stars. With a "Go See It!" recommendation.
That's all for today. Up next is The Town with possibly Machete mixed in between. I'm kind of on the fence with that one. I love Robert Rodriguez but I'm not into the grindhouse genre and this is one of those types of films. We'll have to wait and see.
Until Next Episode......."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Today's review is The American. Directed by Anton Corbijn. Written by Rowan Joffe. Based on the novel A Very Private Gentleman. Written by Martin Booth.
100th review countdown.....#81
MPAA Rating: R for violence, sexual content and nudity.
Runtime: 105 mins
Cast
George Clooney - Jack / Edward
Irina Björklund - Ingrid
Johan Leysen - Pavel
Paolo Bonacelli - Father Benedetto
Thekla Reuten - Mathilde
Violante Placido - Clara
Since the inception of The "D" List, I have made a conscious effort not to allow the opinions of my very cherished and loyal fans influence me on whether or not I see a film. This past Sunday I had a conversation with my cousin and her husband about this film and they loathed it. I hadn't seen it yet so their very strong feelings toward this film just inspired me to see what the fuss was all about.
Well I have to respectfully disagree with my kin regarding the worth of this film.
Jack/Edward is a highly trained assassin who committed the cardinal sin for someone in his profession. He fell in love. We all know in cases like this, things never end well. After an attempt on his life is thwarted he contacts his handler Pavel looking for refuge. Jack holds up in a small town in Rome while his exit out of the country is being attended to. During the time in this small town, Jack is contracted to do a job, while he executes the job, he meets a local prostitute (Clara) that warms other parts of his anatomy than just the one we know prostitutes are notorious for warming. The events of said courtship send Jack's life out of balance creating a rather dangerous paradox.
On the surface, this film is cut and dry. For the most part, that is the case with one very big exception.
The American can be best described in two words.
Those words are Tense and Deliberate.
All throughout the film, Jack is constantly relying on his training, he surveys the lay of the land, scoping out accessible exits and getaway routes. He examines the daily habits of the neighboring population looking for possible troublemakers. Clearly he needs to be on high alert since he's supposed to be in hiding anyway but this is modus operandi day in and day out. A perfect example of this is when he's on a date with Clara. When they toast to the evening, he waits for Clara to drink her wine before sipping his. If that isn't the height of his training to always be on your guard no matter who you're with then I don't know what is.
This aspect of Jack's existence is executed masterfully. You really get the sense that this man needs to have eyes in the back of his head. He's calculated, cunning and detached. It's those attributes however, that also lend to his torment. Jack can't have a normal life, how can he. The man kills for money. It's a very unsavory and hostile world where a conventional life is impossible. The end result is a man constantly on the edge and on ultra high alert.
This is where the Tense part comes in.
Corbjin's use of the slow tracking shot produces a very subtle yet obvious anxiety. You never know what or who may come around the corner. This of course is aided by the beautiful italian architecture. The side streets and narrow alley ways lend themselves to very scary and intricate moments of hide and seek.
Speaking of beautiful and italian......I must say BRAVO! to the casting director for selecting two of the most exquisite females I have seen in a film set in Europe. A point of contention with my cousin about the women (Clara in particular) was her performance. In her opinion it was dreadful. I, on the other hand felt the opposite. Now by no means is this woman going to take away an Oscar for her work here but I felt that she played the part she needed to play. Meaning her character was a prostitute with no real ambition and maybe a little naivety. That came across to me very clearly.
Six one way, half dozen the other I guess.
Now there was something that I know cuz and I can both agree on and that's the performance of Mr. Clooney. This man is an actor's actor who defies you not to watch him. You can't do it. The guy just oozes cool. The power of his performance here comes through more via his facial expressions or lack there of at times than his actual dialogue. He and Denzel possess this ability in spades. There should definitely be a nomination in his future.
If I had to gripe about this film. Ironically, it would be concerning one of the elements that made it work. The film is so deliberate in nature and structure that it does give you a slight dragging impression. For a film that's only 105 minutes long, it doesn't play like one. Aside from that I have very little else to complain about minus some issues I had with the overall narrative that I will spare you all from.
On the 5 star scale. The American gets 4 stars. With a "Go See It!" recommendation.
That's all for today. Up next is The Town with possibly Machete mixed in between. I'm kind of on the fence with that one. I love Robert Rodriguez but I'm not into the grindhouse genre and this is one of those types of films. We'll have to wait and see.
Until Next Episode......."I'll Save You A Seat!"
"D"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)