Entries in the Category "Movies"
Fair Game
Fair Game is a movie about a major event in recent history that reminds us how easy it is to forget what happened just a few years ago. When the Valerie Plame scandal was in the news I didn't pay much attention because it was poorly presented and the full impact of what had happened wasn't apparent for some time. Fair Game on the other hand does a fantastic job of laying out the order of events in a compelling way.
Director Doug Liman is no stranger to cloak and dagger stories and Fair Game, much like his Bourne Identity, keeps a good pace while presenting this complicated mix of spies, intelligence and family concerns. Naomi Watts is great in the lead and Sean Penn is perfectly cast as her husband. Not only is this role right up his alley, but he looks exactly like Joe Wilson. 4/5
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 is a major departure from the rest of the series. This is a surprisingly slow, meandering film. Taking your time with a story requires a lot of skill to prevent the movie from becoming boring and the filmmakers succeed here. This film is in many ways more of a thriller than an action-adventure. Where previous films would have featured an action sequence, Deathly Hallows has moments of tension.
As someone who has not read any of the books I have always felt this series did a good job of keeping the uninformed aware of what was going on. For the most part Deathly Hallows follows this trend; although at times I felt as if I was missing something, which almost never happened in the previous films.
Deathly Hallows is also significantly darker than any of the previous films. I was shocked at how far they went with the story considering how tame the rest of the series has been. This is by no means a bad thing, however, since the darker this series gets the better the films are. 4/5
The Social Network
When I first learned about The Social Network I was surprised that a movie about something so recent and ongoing was being made. On top of that I thought a movie about the creation of a website would be downright boring. When I heard that David Fincher was directing it, however, I wondered why such a talented director would waste his time on this type of material. After watching The Social Network I now understand Fincher's interest. This is one of the most compelling movies I have seen in years.
From the first scene The Social Network is shot out of cannon and doesn't let up. Aaron Sorkin's dialog is incredibly sharp and comes at such a pace it takes a moment to become accustomed to it. This is the heart of the movie; intense conversations in various locations. This movie reminds me a lot of Gosford Park in the way that it can generate intrigue not through action or plot, but through conversation and character. Fincher does a masterful job of adding variety to these scenes and when he has an opportunity (like in a crew race halfway through the film) he really shows his visual prowess.
The acting is also fantastic, especially Jesse Eisenberg as Mark Zuckerberg. Normally a lovable shmuck, here Eisenberg is almost unrecognizable as the brilliant and controversial creator of Facebook. I hate to say it but Justin Timberlake is also very strong as Napster founder Sean Parker. All of these elements are brought together by the combination of amazing editing that perfectly blends the two timelines of the film and a brilliant score by Trent Reznor. I love unconventional music in movies and The Social Network definitely delivers in that area.
I can't emphasize enough how surprising The Social Network is as a film. To take such timely and seemingly mundane material and turn it into this amazing ride demonstrates the skill present in the making of this movie. 5/5
The Town
I almost hate to say it but I'm becoming a big fan of Ben Affleck. As an actor he's been rather inconsistent; as a director, however, he started off with the solid Gone Baby Gone and follows it with The Town.
While the plot of The Town is very similar to the superior Heat, in practice there is enough originality in the characters and setting to distinguish the film. Heat had the advantage of being a 3 hour epic with plenty of time to develop its main characters. The Town is a simpler but nonetheless effective crime drama. Add in a strong cast and some well orchestrated heist sequences and you have an above average thriller.
While The Town is fairly simplistic in places, it takes its time and trusts that the material and acting can carry the film. Well worth your time. 4/5
Machete
Machete originated as the first and arguably best of the fake trailers in the Grindhouse double feature from Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino. I thought the trailer was amazing and when it was announced that Rodriguez would be making a feature length version of Machete I was intrigued. In the end, however, Machete as a movie is too inconsistent to be the insane, camp-fest I was hoping for.
There's a lot of entertainment value in Machete to be sure. Danny Trejo is fantastic as the title character while Cheech Marin and Jeff Fahey round out a decent cast. Most of the action is decent and there are several very funny moments throughout the film. My biggest problem with Machete is how bloated it is. For an all-out action story about a bad-ass Mexican ex-federale there is a lot of downtime that drags the movie down. Several characters and plot lines could have been eliminated, resulting in a leaner more watchable movie. To make matters worse the climax of the movie is a terrible action scene. After several solid sequences and creative kills earlier in the film, this final battle lands with a thud. Machete isn't a bad movie, but it doesn't live up to the promise of the trailer or come close to Rodriguez's better work. 3/5
Inception
When I saw the first trailers for Inception about a year ago I had no idea what this movie was about, but I couldn't wait to see it. Just being the new movie from Christopher Nolan was enough to get me excited. He didn't let me down with his previous 5 films (Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight) and he doesn't disappoint with Inception.
The overall plot of Inception is incredibly simple, but the devil's in the details and it's the details that set Inception apart from other movies. The gist of the movie is that Leonardo DiCaprio and his crew steal ideas from people by breaking into their minds while they are dreaming. There is a lot going on here and it could easily become overwhelming, however, the world and its characters are presented with such skill that I was never truly lost, only more interested in learning more. Inception avoids the problems many other science fiction films fall victim to. It doesn't waste time on technology, side plots or other minutiae but instead keeps the story moving.
Nolan has assembled an amazing cast to fill this story and they prove to be up to the task. DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard are very strong in a pair of complicated roles that are surprisingly deep for a genre film. The remainder of the cast also features a lot of talent, especially Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page.
If Inception succeeds at anything, it affirms Nolan's masterful ability to handle multiple parallel storylines. As with Memento and The Prestige, Nolan uses an unusual timeline that, although necessary to the plot, adds layers of complexity which in lesser hands could have been very confusing. A lot of credit goes to Nolan and the editor Lee Smith for their impeccable pacing of this movie. The way in which they orchestrate the climax of the film is amazing.
This film is quintessential Nolan. Featuring a darkly compelling story, flawed characters, fantastic visuals, incredible cast and a great atmospheric score from Hans Zimmer, Inception is a must see. 4.5/5
Iron Man 2
Iron Man 2 had some big shoes to fill. I loved the first Iron Man and it remains one of the best superhero films ever made. Unfortunately the sequel doesn't match the original in any way.
The first Iron Man worked so well because it kept the story contained and let the characters fill the world. Robert Downey Jr's Tony Stark is a joy to watch and letting him do his thing was key to the film's success. This combined with incredibly well executed pacing allowed the plot of Iron Man to build as the movie progressed. In Iron Man 2, however, this happens with distinct irregularity. The best element of the film involves Tony developing some new tech using his father's work as inspiration. These scenes do a fantastic job of channeling the energy of the first film, unfortunately it doesn't last. Too much time is spent on new characters, meaningless side-plots and other distractions. The movie doesn't take many opportunities to breathe and as a result feels rushed at times. To make matters worse the action just isn't up to par with the first film. The scene where Mickey Rourke is whipping Formula 1 cars is particularly bad. Rourke's character is far more interesting than Sam Rockwell's, but he is given a backseat role for most of the film. Gwyneth Paltrow has some nice scenes with Downey, but the addition of more quiet moments between their characters would have been great.
There is a lot to like in Iron Man 2, just not enough to put it on the level of its predecessor. For every compelling, well executed scene there are one or two distractions that take you out of the experience. 3.5/5
Kick Ass
Kick Ass is a very unique addition to the superhero genre. Hard R rated superhero movies are rare enough, but one this creative and entertaining is truly original. While fairly uneven, it features great characters, action and some amazing comedic moments.
The weakest link in Kick Ass is ironically the title character. Kick Ass' alter ego Dave is about as broadly drawn a character as humanly possible. His generic high school experience and teen angst introduction almost ruin the movie before it starts. The story doesn't kick in and the film doesn't hit its stride until the arrival of Hit Girl and Big Daddy about 15 minutes in. They are the true stars of the movie as their storyline, action sequences and acting are the strongest elements in Kick Ass. Chloe Moretz and Nicolas Cage are brilliant as the father and daughter superhero team. Mark Strong is also fantastic as the mobster villain.
Kick Ass is far from perfect and could have been a lot better, but the strength of the Hit Girl and Big Daddy storyline elevate the film to a fairly high level. This movie has too many fantastic action sequences and purely entertaining moments to be dragged down by its weaker elements. 4/5
Shutter Island
I had high hopes for Shutter Island. The prospect of director Martin Scorsese working on a horror/thriller was very exciting since I love his remake of Cape Fear from 1991. Unfortunately this movie just didn't grab me the way other thrillers have in the past.
The film is drenched in foreboding atmosphere and music which sets the stage for a long, slow build up. The problem I had was that the pacing of Shutter Island is so long and so slow that I began to lose interest after the first hour. In order to fill all of this time, the script drops hint after hint so that when the truth is finally revealed I had a pretty good idea of what was going on. That's fine, I enjoy trying to unravel thrillers, but here the reveal itself is just as long and drawn out as the rest of the film. There is so much talent on display in Shutter Island, from the production design to the direction and the acting, but it just doesn't come together. 3/5
The Wolfman
I like some cool werewolf action as much as the next guy so I decided to give The Wolfman a chance. This movie looked fairly promising with a good cast and a decent director, but a mediocre script drags this film down. I give the filmmakers credit for taking their time with the story and building some tension in the first third of the movie. The middle act also has some great elements, including a very well done sequence in a mental asylum. The final third, however, goes downhill as the storyline begins to resemble something out of the Incredible Hulk. The real downfall of The Wolfman is that it doesn't focus enough on the most interesting aspect of the story, namely the day to day life of a werewolf. There is far too much mediocre action and not enough compelling suspense. Benicio Del Toro is a great actor and definitely up to the task of a more complex role, but unfortunately he isn't provided with one. 2.5/5
Avatar - second viewing, 2D vs 3D
For some movies it takes me multiple viewings to really form a full opinion of how I feel about them. Consequently, when I saw Avatar a second time this weekend, I was unsure whether or not I would like it as much as the first time. I also wanted to see Avatar in 3D, since the first time I didn't want to deal with the crowds at the few theaters capable of 3D in the area. Now that the demand has waned somewhat I took the 3D plunge.
I have to say after a second viewing, I like Avatar more now than I did previously. The quality of the production design and cinematography in this film cannot be overstated. These combine to create a level of purely visual storytelling that is amazing to watch. This movie is also the best yet at melding live action with CGI elements and the interaction of the two is nearly seamless. Due to this high level of polish, it can be fairly jarring the handful of times when the dialogue is truly cringe worthy. Despite these hiccups, I enjoyed the story more than I had the first time around and its similarities to other films became less important.
My experience with the 3D in Avatar was somewhat mixed. When the effects work best are in the world of the Navi/avatars. The 3D puts you in the forest with the characters, plants, animals, and bugs much better than the 2D version. The scene where Jake's avatar walks through the burning, ash laden aftermath of the attack in the last third of the film is incredibly impressive in 3D. On the human side of things, there were many instances where the various characters in frame appeared as flat images on different distinct planes instead of a continuous 3D space as you would expect, and which is present in the computer generated sections of the movie. Maybe this was more pronounced to me since these sections are primarily at the beginning of the film, when my eyes were still adjusting to the 3D, but they were somewhat distracting nonetheless. Still, if you are one of the 20 people who haven't seen Avatar yet, see it in 3D.
Sherlock Holmes
I wasn't sure what to expect from Sherlock Holmes. I am a casual fan of the character and have read a couple of the stories, but they never quite sucked me in. In addition to this director Guy Ritchie's previous work in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch, and RocknRolla doesn't necessarily mesh well with the story of a private detective in Victorian England.
The highlight of Sherlock Holmes is the fantastic performance by Robert Downey Jr. While he isn't who you would immediately picture in the role, he fills it out well and has a lot of fun with the part. Jude Law is also solid as Dr. Watson; the remainder of the cast, however, is hamstrung by the messy script. Rachel McAdams is underused and Mark Strong could have been a much more sinister villain if his part weren't so poorly written at times. The weak villain adds to an already mediocre plot and makes for some tedious moments as Holmes wades through the minutiae of the story. After considerable build-up the movie concludes in an ending that falls fairly flat, especially the five minutes spent setting up a sequel.
Despite these issues, Sherlock Holmes can be a lot of fun. The dynamic between the lead actors is fantastic and Ritchie's stylistic flourishes are a good change of pace for a period piece. The production design also does a very good job of presenting a caricatured version of 19th century London. Sherlock Holmes is an uneven film, but the style, acting, and overall entertainment value make it worth a look. 3.5/5
Avatar
Avatar has received so much hype that I thought it was sure to underwhelm. Despite director James Cameron's pedigree, I was worried that his latest film would be more Titanic than Aliens or Terminator. In reality Avatar is closest to Cameron's The Abyss. Both movies are slow at times, but never boring, and feature a simple story with archetypal characters populating a fantastically realized world.
A lot has been said about the technology used to create Avatar's alien characters and it is indeed impressive. I would say that 95% of the time I completely forgot I was watching a visual effect. The amount of depth and texture visible in closeups of the creatures really sells their realism. Regardless of the technical achievement, artistically the production design is gorgeous featuring some truly amazing alien flora. I was also really impressed by how biologically consistent the various creatures were, they truly appear as if they belong together on an alien world.
The only major criticism that I have for Avatar is that its story and characters are fairly thin. When you really get down to it Avatar's plot is essentially Dances with Wolves in space. Despite this, the concept for the world in which this story takes place is so compelling and the level that this concept is realized is so extremely high that it more than makes up for any flaws in the plot or characterization. From its design, to its effects and attention to detail Avatar is action adventure filmmaking at its best. 4.5/5
Brothers
Brothers is the type of film that I would usually wait to see when it came out on DVD. Despite a terrible trailer, I kept hearing good things about the movie and decided to give it a chance. Brothers isn't a perfect movie, but it does a lot of things very well and works as a whole.
In hindsight, I shouldn't have been too surprised that Brothers is a decent movie given the amount of talent on display. Tobey Maguire, Natalie Portman, and Jake Gyllenhaal are some of the best young actors working, and director Jim Sheridan has a very solid track record. Their characters are the core of the film and they do a fantastic job of drawing the audience into their lives. At times Brothers is a little predictable, but its portrayal of a family dealing with loss is very well done. 3.5/5
9
9 is the type of animated film that needs to be made more often. It doesn't pander to children and go directly for the family film market. Instead it presents a dark, interesting world that doesn't shy away from grit or death.
I'm a sucker for post-apocalyptic fare and 9 fits the bill perfectly. Set in a ruined world where nine automatons have to survive while attempting to discover what caused the disaster and who or what created them, 9 has a fantastic premise. The visuals are also stunning, featuring some of the best art direction of any animated film I have ever seen.
The main flaw with 9 is that the story and consequently the characters are a little thin. At under 90 minutes this film has a short run time and I think another 15 minutes could have added some much needed depth to the story. That said this is still a great entry in the animated science fiction genre. 4/5
Inglourious Basterds
I wasn't sure what to expect when I went to see Inglourious Basterds yesterday. The trailer for the movie was awful, just a lot of shouting and violence. Fortunately Inglourious Basterds is nothing like its trailer. This is throwback movie in a lot of ways, with fantastic location shooting, an incredibly talented international cast and plenty of Quentin Tarantino trade marks.
Despite what the name of the film would have you believe, Inglourious Basterds features relatively little of the basterds (Brad Pitt and his band of Jewish soldiers). Instead this film is a true ensemble piece with many different characters who converge for the climactic final scenes. This allows some of the lesser known cast members who make up the majority of the cast to really shine. Christoph Waltz who plays the main villain and Mélanie Laurent who plays a Jew in hiding were particularly good.
The film making on display here is also impeccable. The cinematography was great, featuring some very long takes as well as some beautiful exteriors. Tarantino does an amazing job milking every bit of suspense from a series of tense, yet entertaining, dialogue heavy scenes. Some of the sequences are hard to watch simply because the buildup is so strong.
I can't say enough good things about this movie. Any problems I had with a few characters or it feeling a little long are vastly overshadowed by how good the rest of the film is. If you are a Tarantino fan, or even if you aren't, give this movie a chance and you might be surprised at what you find. 4.5/5
District 9
District 9 is the kind of movie that needs to be made more often. Unfortunately creative and entertaining science fiction films are few and far between these days. Like the best science fiction it doesn't dwell on the wow factor of its alternate reality, it lives in it and treats it with respect. Instead of trying to blow your mind with visuals, it does what is necessary to get the job done.
Dropping you straight into the story makes for an abrupt start but once you get used to the aliens and the South African accents, District 9 just clicks. It's like a combination of 28 Days Later, Black Hawk Down, and The Fly, but with aliens. I really appreciated that the filmmakers trusted their storytelling and didn't spoon feed the audience the back story, instead dolling it out gradually throughout the film. They also handled the social satire aspects of the film very well. The few times I was afraid the movie was about to get heavy handed, it pulled back and gave some perspective on the situation at hand.
The only issue I had with District 9 was that some of the plot was a bit cliche. Despite the unique circumstances, the film devolves into a standard buddy movie at the end. Even so, this film shows just how much you can do with a relatively low budget. The effects are generally very strong and the acting is solid. Overall a great experience. 4/5
Lonesome Dove Bluray
I have written before about the benefits of old movies that have been remastered in high definition for bluray. After watching Lonesome Dove for the third time, my first in high-def, I cannot complement this title more. While it doesn't look as sharp as a new title would, for a TV miniseries from the late 80's it looks fantastic. In comparison to the DVD version it is amazing how much detail and texture can now be seen where before there was only low resolution video noise. Some of the night scenes still contain a few rough moments, but that can easily be forgiven when the rest of this six hour masterpiece looks so good. If you are a fan of westerns and you haven't seen Lonesome Dove before you owe it to yourself to check it out in high-def. Treat yourself to one of the best and most brutally realistic portrayals of the American west featuring what is arguably Robert Duvall's best performance.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
I am a casual fan of the Harry Potter movie franchise. For someone like me who has not read any of the books they offer a great mix of action-adventure and fantasy. The newest iteration is no exception. I am amazed at how consistent this series has been as a whole. It is a real testament to the producers and writers of this series that it has maintained such a high level of quality through 8 years, 6 films, 4 directors and 2 Dumbledores.
The Half-Blood Prince isn't the best Harry Potter movie (that would go to Prisoner of Azkaban), but I would put it in the top three. Its tone is all over the place, jumping from very dark to comedic, but the storyline is interesting. This is easily the funniest film of the series as the filmmakers get a lot of laughs out of the teenage melodrama. One criticism I have is that it seems more obvious here than in the previous films how much content must have been cut out, as the plot is somewhat confusing upon reflection. Nevertheless, as with the rest of the series, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is a very entertaining movie with a fantastic cast that is well worth your time. 4/5
Public Enemies
Public Enemies is a solid effort from Michael Mann, but doesn't match the heights of his previous epic crime thriller Heat. Following the exploits of John Dillinger and the FBI agent on his tail, Public Enemies has a lot to offer including a fantastic cast and some great action. It fails, however, in being truly engaging. The whole exercise feels very sterile and the characters are rather thin.
In many ways Public Enemies feels like Mann is trying to recapture the magic of Heat, even staging a bank robbery similar to the one in his previous work. While Al Pacino and Robert De Niro were given room to explore their characters in Heat, Johnny Depp and Christian Bale could have been allowed more opportunities to fill out their roles. Public Enemies feels too much like a documentary instead of a human drama. There is a lot of ground to cover in this movie and it feels stretched by its obligation to fit in as much as possible. The movie would have benefited from the addition of another 20 minutes to fill in some background and allow the main story time to take shape.
In spite of any problems I had with it, Public Enemies is an entertaining movie with some great work by Johnny Depp and Christian Bale that is worth a look. 3.5/5
Terminator Salvation
Terminator Salvation further solidifies the decline of James Cameron's original series. The combination of poor writing and mediocre direction are never a recipe for success and that is easily demonstrated by this film. The cast are completely wasted in their roles; Christian Bale has nothing to do, Bryce Dallas Howard is barely in the film, I could go on. There are also a lot of poorly implemented references to the previous films that fall incredibly flat. The filmmakers don't seem to understand that the repetition used in the first two films served to play on the time travel theme inherent to the franchise, which isn't present and barely mentioned in Terminator Salvation. Also the appearance of Arnold as an incredibly fake looking CGI terminator was especially awful.
All of this could have been forgiven if Terminator Salvation brought anything compelling to the franchise, but it fails at every turn. I think the biggest problem here is that it's much more interesting to talk about the coming future war and trying to avoid it, as they did in the previous films, than it is to actually fight said future war. To cap it off, the action really isn't that great. There is one set piece battle with an enormous machine that was cool, but other than that the action sequences are very pedestrian. Don't bother. 2/5
Star Trek
I am the definition of a casual Star Trek fan. I have seen a fair amount of episodes of the original series, the next generation and probably half of the movies. I know enough about the show that I can catch most of the inside jokes, but I don't know every bit of minutiae. That said I wasn't sure what to expect from a Star Trek reboot. While I enjoy the property, I have always had problems with the Trek universe and was apprehensive about what direction a new cast and director would push the series.
Star Trek is a solid action adventure movie with a great cast and fantastic effects. The biggest bright spot is definitely the cast, especially Chris Pine as Kirk. While some of the cast members don't quite make their roles their own, Chris Pine reinvents the role of Kirk. Eric Bana is also great as the villain Nero and Leonard Nimoy makes a fantastic appearance as old Spock.
The plot is unmistakeably Star Trek with its complicated, time bending storyline. My one major criticism is that the movie feels very rushed. The characters' introductions are very brief and most of the side characters do nothing other than inject some humor into the movie. In spite of this J. J. Abrams has a good history of making quality films and television and he solidifies this with a very well made film. 4/5
State of Play
State of Play is the definition of a solid thriller. Good acting, tight direction, and political intrigue are all there. There is a great ebb and flow of plot development and twists that kept me very interested throughout the whole film. The final twist in State of Play, however, is somewhat predictable and follows a little too closely with thriller conventions. There had been such a buildup that the final reveal was a let down. The movie had already taken us in for a landing and then just dropped us on the deck with one last surprise. Aside from this I really liked the characters and thought the dynamic between the journalists was very entertaining. Worth a look. 3.5/5
Adventureland
Adventureland is director Greg Mottola's follow-up to Superbad, a movie that I loved. While Adventureland is not as much of a straight up comedy as Superbad, it is nonetheless a lot of fun. The characters are interesting and well cast. I really enjoyed the story of these people in their early twenties, either in or just graduated from college, trying to find their way in life. Some of the dramatic notes fall flat, but for the most part they work and the comedy is fantastic. Only adding to my enjoyment of the film was its setting. The scenes in the Adventureland amusement park were filmed in the Kennywood amusement park which I have been going to for years, having grown up and still living in the Pittsburgh area. This is one of the first times in a movie where I can recognize specific locations where I have been on a movie screen. It really added a layer of reality to the whole film. 4/5
Duplicity
Duplicity is an entertaining light thriller with a great cast that is ultimately a decent film. Following the twists and turns of two industrial espionage agents' attempt to steal 40 million dollars, Duplicity is more simple fun than dark thriller; in fact it's practically a comedy.
In my opinion Duplicity couldn't quite decide which path to take and ended up straddling the line between thriller and comedy, without realizing the strengths of either. As a thriller it's, well, not very thrilling. As a comedy it's funny at times but not overtly jokey. In the end Duplicity is solid entertainment thanks to its fantastic cast who make the most of the unique premise and have a lot of fun with the sharp dialogue. The use of too many repetitive flashbacks serve to drag out the movie far longer than it should have been, however, it's worth a look nonetheless. 3.5/5
Watchmen
Watchmen is one of the few books that I have read before seeing the movie based on it. It is even more unique for being one of the first graphic novels I read after dipping my toe into comic books around a year ago. While I liked the book, I didn't love it as it seems most comic book fans do. That said, I was very curious how the movie would adapt this very dense comic.
Overall I think that Watchmen is one of the best film adaptations that I have seen. Since Watchmen is a standalone work that isn't as well known as other comic book stories like Batman or Superman, this film had a lot of work to do. It has to establish a lot of characters and the alternate reality world that they live in without losing the audience. In that regard Watchmen succeeds brilliantly. The director Zach Snyder and the writers did a fantastic job of trimming the fat and presenting the core of the story while maintaining the themes and tone of the book.
Zach Snyder leverages his ability for slick effects and brilliant production design to create an amazing visual show. The world of Watchmen is seamlessly produced with texture and style. The credit sequence alone is incredibly impressive, let alone the various fight sequences. This is a movie that benefits significantly from watching it in a theater.
The cast of Watchmen is also fantastic. I can't think of one weak link in the bunch. This is an ensemble movie with no true central character and the cast makes the most of their individual screen time. Jackie Earle Haley, however, nearly steals the show as Rorschach by completely embodying this larger than life character.
Much has been said about the deviation the filmmakers made from the ending of the book. While the film's ending is different, it is more of a modification than a complete change. Frankly I prefer the ending in the movie since it makes more sense, in my opinion. Watchmen always had an atypical ending and I think the films version is somewhat more satisfying.
My only major criticism of Watchmen is the sex scene between Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II. I can't wait to listen to Zach Snyder's commentary for this scene because I really want to know if this scene was purposely played for laughs. The scene is so long and so cheesy it would easily fit in a soft-core porn film.
Watchmen is a fantastic movie and a great translation of a classic graphic novel. I am amazed that the filmmakers were allowed to maintain the uncompromising nature of the book in its adaption for film. Despite being a complex narrative, it is very watchable even for a casual audience. I saw it with my sister, who has never read the book, and she liked it a lot. Definitely worth a look. 4.5/5
Gran Torino
Gran Torino is a tough film to review. I liked a lot of things about it, however, at nearly every turn the movie is held back by its underwhelming supporting cast and often cheesy dialogue.
In typical Clint Eastwood fashion, the main character of Gran Torino grits his teeth and growls a lot. This is to be expected. What I did not expect and what I liked most about the film was the humor provided by this character and his interactions with his family, neighbors and especially his barber. Eastwood's underestimated comic ability is the strength of the film.
Unfortunately, the rest of Gran Torino doesn't hold up to Eastwood's high standard. The side plot involving neighborhood gangs is tiresome and overwrought. This is only exacerbated by the horrible acting from the supporting cast who play the neighbors and gang members. I would have preferred seeing a character piece about an old man's realization that maybe his Asian neighbors aren't so bad and growing as a person in the process. Gran Torino tries to accomplish this, but it can't seem to get away from old-man-Dirty-Harry-esque grand standing. I'm not asking for a sappy, PC film about racial prejudice; I just don't want a movie that treads water and telegraphs its ending for half the film. Gran Torino is not a bad movie, it's just not nearly as good as the reviews it has received. 3/5
The Godfather Blu-ray
I recently purchased The Godfather trilogy on BD and I finished watching it yesterday. I absolutely love the first two movies and had read good things about this hi-def remastering of the films, so I had high hopes. This set of BDs demonstrate perfectly just how great the format can be. The level of clarity and detail that can now be enjoyed is amazing compared to the old DVD editions. Instead of a soft, muddy appearance The Godfather films now exhibit a stunning amount of texture and color that was missing from previous editions. These films were shot with a high amount of underexposure and the higher resolution of BD really helps to pull the most detail out of the shadows.
I love the fact that in order to make the most of the BD format movie studios, in most cases, need to completely remaster old films like The Godfather. This forces them to repair damaged sections of film and clean up the image and it really shows. Many DVDs simply digitized old prints of movies, resulting in less than stellar picture quality. But to do the same with BD would be painfully obvious, forcing studios to rework their old film footage. I have a few older movies on BD and I think that the visual upgrade for films like these will be a secret weapon for the format. While a lot of new movies look better on BD than on DVD, the difference is not as stark as when comparing the the DVD and BD of a 40+ year old classic. 2001: A Space Odyssey and Rio Bravo are just two examples of how big a difference remastering for BD can make to the appearance of a film.
Taken
Taken overcomes its plodding start to deliver a great action thriller. Without an original plot or characters Taken has its work cut out for it, however, Liam Neeson brings weight and authority to his role and the movie as a whole.
The movie starts by displaying how hard Neeson is trying to reconnect with his daughter after retiring from the CIA. While not horrible, it is a bit drawn out and takes its sweet time getting to the point. Once the plot picks up, the movie hits its stride. This is the perfect type of part for Neeson and I am surprised it took this long for someone to offer him a part like this. I also appreciated that the action is frenetic without being disorienting. Too many recent action movies (Quantum of Solace) try so hard to emulate the Bourne series and instead end up numbing the audience.
My favorite aspect of the movie is Neeson's consistency. He is uncompromising in his search for his daughter from start to finish and he'll do anything to get her back, including shooting his friends. I found this a much more interesting direction than many movies like this take where characters debate their decisions endlessly. In Taken, he knows what he needs to do and he does it. Definitely worth checking out. 3.5/5
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is an incredibly well made and entertaining movie. I think this movie suffers most because it attempts to cover so much material that can't possibly completely fulfill its initial promise. Despite this, it is still an interesting and visually stunning film.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button starts very slowly, but once it gets going, you lose yourself in the story. This is made even easier by the insane visual effects on display here. Regularly in this film you see close up shots of Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett in various stages of aging that looks completely seamless. This is one of those rare instances, much like the director David Fincher's previous film Zodiac, where the viewer doesn't notice the vast majority of the effects being used. Amazing stuff.
My only major criticisms of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button involve the story and the editing. Some of the story seems to have been short changed. It seems like we spend a lot of time with Benjamin as a baby and small child and then breeze through much of his middle years. I think this movie could have been 15 minutes longer and been better for it. I also felt the narrative style, involving inter-cutting Benjamin's story with present day events, to be poorly done at times. Instead of occasionally cutting back and forth as most movies which use this format do the editor here on occasion would cut frequently between the two points of view, which really pulled me out of the story.
Overall I have to say that I really enjoyed The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. It combines fantastic direction and effects with two great performances from Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett in one of the more interesting stories to come along in a while. 4/5
Quantum of Solace
Quantum of Solace is what you would expect from a Bond movie; action, adventure, cheesy villains, horrible dialogue. Coming after the very solid Casino Royale, however, it is a disappointment. While Casino Royale is by no means my favorite Bond film, it is definitely close to the top 5. Quantum of Solace by comparison belongs with other mediocre editions such as The World Is Not Enough or Moonraker. I picked these two because, like Quantum, their plots are all over the place.
Quantum of Solace's main problem is that it is insanely uneven. This seems to be due to the director Marc Forster's desire to turn Bond into Jason Bourne. The action sequences are frenetically cut for no other reason than to disorient the audience. Shaky cameras and fast cutting fit Paul Greengrass' style in The Bourne Supremacy & The Bourne Ultimatum. Here the cutting removes any spatial awareness the viewer has of the action that is taking place. This gets old fast and consequently much of the action is just boring.
Without solid action we are forced to pay more attention to the story, which is abysmal. To make matters worse the writers have seen fit to throw in some preachy current event related dialogue that is nothing but heavy handed political jabs. I was also amazed how little sex there is in this movie. Bond has a chaste relationship with Olga Kurylenko, what is the world coming to? 2.5/5
Burn After Reading
Burn After Reading is in many ways a classic Coen brothers film. Black comedy mixed with violence and suspense is the Coen's trademark. Unfortunately some inconsistencies keep Burn After Reading from joining the higher ranks of the Coen's catalog.
The main problem with Burn After Reading is that it takes forever to get going. The first third of the movie is very slow paced setup that drags on without much in the way of entertainment. This is mainly due to the large number of characters that need to be introduced. Once the plot picks up, the movie really hits its stride and the last two thirds are very good. The cast is great and the myriad of subplots are very entertaining. Overall Burn After Reading is a decent film that is more on par with the Coen's Intolerable Cruelty than The Big Lebowski. 3.5/5
Tropic Thunder
Tropic Thunder is a very uneven comedy. The highs are astronomical, but many jokes land with a thud. In that sense it's a fairly typical Ben Stiller movie.
Tropic Thunder's main problem is that it can't quite decide which direction to take the story and instead goes in every direction at once. Simultaneously making a film industry satire, war film, slapstick, gross-out comedy doesn't always work. Despite the issues I had with the plot, I really enjoyed Tropic Thunder. Watching Robert Downey Jr. do a bizzaro Bill Cosby impersonation was worth the price of admission. 3.5/5
The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight is a blast. Great acting, amazing effects, and a much better plot make this a big improvement over Batman Begins. While not perfect, it comes about as close as a comic book movie can.
Much like its predecessor, The Dark Knight is a rather talky movie. For the most part however, this is not a hindrance to the film's pace. Batman Begins takes a fairly philosophic stance at times and some of the soliloquies can be overwrought. The Dark Knight does a much better job of reigning in the dialog and when the characters, especially The Joker, do start filibustering it is more often fascinating than boring.
Speaking of The Joker, he is easily one of the best characters in movie history. Creepy, funny, and sinister, you can't take your eyes off him whenever he's on the screen. Heath Ledger's performance is perfect and combined with excellent writing makes for a fantastic experience. The rest of the cast holds their own as well in spite of having to work in Ledger's shadow.
If I have one criticism of The Dark Knight it is that it could have been tightened up a little bit. At around 2 hours & 30 minutes the plot is very broad and seems to go on and on at times. I think things could have been simplified a little bit, or perhaps some of the minutiae removed to allow for a bit more depth. This is a minor criticism, but I felt that the movie lost steam toward the end. In The Dark Knight's defense however, the first two-thirds are so strong that it really has nowhere to go but down.
Overall I thoroughly enjoyed The Dark Knight. I am a big Christoper Nolan fan and his extensive use of in-camera effects and excellent cinematography create fantastic atmosphere. Easily one of the top three comic book movies I have seen. Can't wait to see it again. 4.5/5
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
I liked the first Hellboy for its mix of interesting characters, solid action and occasional humor. Hellboy II: The Golden Army isn't quite as good as the first film, but it is decent nonetheless.
I have two primary criticisms of Hellboy II: the weak villain and the simplification of the characters. The first Hellboy relied on character interplay and some interesting situations to create a bond between the characters. Its story was cheesy; but at the same time it had fun with itself and contained an interesting message. Hellboy II on the other hand just lays out the plot points and fills in the gaps with jokey moments that don't fit as well as the humor of the first film. The weak villain doesn't help matters and the resulting absence of peril eliminates much of the suspense of the original film.
Hellboy II isn't as good as Guillermo Del Toro's other work such as Pan's Labyrinth, but it is entertaining in spite of its weaknesses. 3.5/5
The Incredible Hulk
The Incredible Hulk is a somewhat uneven movie, but enjoyable overall. I've never been the biggest fan of the Hulk franchise, but this newest version explores some of the more interesting aspects of the mythology. The addition of Edward Norton also helps take this film up a notch.
I wasn't the biggest fan of some of the special effects in The Incredible Hulk. I've read many reviews stating how great they felt the effects were. I don't get it. While the animations are well done, for some reason the Hulk is really shiny all the time. This makes him look as if he was made of plastic rather than skin. Perhaps this is more in line with how he is supposed to look, but I felt it could have been done better.
Aside from the effects, I enjoyed most of the rest of the movie. The script is kept relatively simple, which is always a good idea in a superhero movie, and the dialog has a minimum of cringe-worthy lines. Another major criticism is the final fight between the Hulk and the Abomination. I realize that this is supposed to be an epic battle of mutants, but it seems to go on forever and gets kind of boring. I also was not the biggest fan of the ending where several plot lines are left unresolved. 3.5/5
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Indiana Jones is one of my favorite movie franchises. It's a fantastic mix of adventure, world travel and great stunt work. Which makes it such a shame that the newest addition to the series is not that great. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull falls into the same trap as so many other sequels; in the process of trying to recapture what made the original so great, they used the old formula instead of breaking new ground.
The credit sequence for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was very encouraging. Featuring an entertaining driving sequence with creative cinematography, I was really looking forward to what was in store. Despite this interesting start, the movie immediately shows us just how silly it really is. Any time the plot was explained during this film I wanted to vomit. The story can best be described as a combination of Stargate and Alien vs. Predator. At various times Indy is required to figure out where the clues are trying to point them; in true National Treasure fashion, he works it out in seconds with no explanation or logic.
The acting in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is decent with the exception of Cate Blanchett's terrible Russian accent. Shia Lebouf is fine as Indy's sidekick, but his role is reduced once they join up with Karen Allen, John Hurt, and Ray Winstone. This brings me to another major problem I have with this movie, there's far too many characters. Raiders of the Lost Ark was so good for among other reasons how spare it was. While Indy was rarely alone, the side characters came and went and Indy is left to do what he has to do. Here, Indy has a couple of people with him constantly and the filmmakers feel the need to fill the silence with inane dialog.
The action in the first half of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull leads you to believe that we're in for some old school stuntwork with a touch of CGI to polish the rough edges. The motorcycle chase sequence is particularly good. Like so many other films, however, the plot gets in the way of the fun. The second half of the movie gets so over-the-top that I could have well been watching a superhero movie.
Another thing that bothered me about this movie is the overall look of the film. This movie has been digitally graded to hell and back resulting in a bizarre smoothness. It's just too crisp and almost looks airbrushed. A throwback movie like this should have a throwback look, which means film grain, not super slick digital alteration.
While Indiana Jones has never pretended to be a documentary, it still maintained a level of realism. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on the other hand is in its own universe. The level of sci-fi has been raised past the point of no return at the expense of genuine storytelling and the compelling adventure that made the old movies so great has been replaced with heavy handed computer graphics. 2/5
Iron Man
Iron Man should serve as an example for any science fiction, superhero, or action movie. Put the story and characters first; cast for acting over popularity and the rest will fall into place. Iron Man finally does right what virtually every other recent super-hero movie has done wrong, it keeps it simple.
Let me first say that I know virtually nothing about the Iron Man story and have never followed the cartoons or comic books. While watching the movie I was surprised that this story is in many ways more science fiction than it is superhero. Like Batman's Bruce Wayne, Tony Stark is a normal person who uses his brain and other skills to overcome adversaries. This has always appealed to me more than the purely fantastic superheroes like Spiderman or Superman. This grounding in an alternate reality makes all the scenes showing the creation and modification of the suit that much more compelling. I also appreciated the understated special effects. They are incorporated into the film's flow instead of acting as a separate showpiece unto themselves.
The acting in this movie is fantastic. Robert Downey Jr. was born to play this role. His naturally smooth, fast-talking style matches perfectly with the character of Tony Stark. Gwyneth Paltrow is surprisingly not annoying as his assistant and together they have a lot of fun with their interpersonal banter. Jeff Bridges is the perfect counter to Downey and is especially effective as his character takes a dark turn as the movie progresses.
Iron Man joins Batman Begins and X-Men 2 as one of my favorite superhero movies. 4.5/5
The Bank Job
The Bank Job is easily the best heist movie I've seen in years. It makes the most of a great cast and retro feel to create a fantastic throwback thriller. Too many new movies focus solely on the slickness of the heist. The Bank Job is more about what is being stolen and the consequences of stealing it. As a result this movie is very dense and throws a lot of characters on the screen in the first 30 minutes. While other movies can leave the viewer hanging, The Bank Job does a great job of tying up story points and helping you understand the fairly complicated plot.
It was also good to see Jason Statham in a good movie for a change. I also liked David Suchet as a strip club owner and pornographer; a major departure from his best known role as Hercule Poirot on the BBC. 4/5
DVD vs Bluray, Blade Runner: The Final Cut
In my previous post about the PS3 I said that the image quality between DVD and Bluray was marginal on my small HDTV. This statement is true, but only for a small number of DVDs. I never realized how variable the picture quality of DVDs was. Some DVDs look outstanding and others look terrible, especially when compared with the Bluray version, even on my 26" HDTV. I imagine this is indicative of the level of compression used on some discs versus others. That said I was surprised how variable even recent titles can be. The Departed for example looks rather mediocre on DVD while The Prestige looks great. I have been going through my movie collection and deciding if:
- Do I like the movie enough to buy it again on Bluray?
- Is this the type of movie that would benefit most from upgrading it to HD? (ie. comedies in general don't rely on their cinematography and thus don't matter as much as a western or sci-fi)
Blade Runner: The Final Cut is the first movie I saw on Bluray and it is definitely an improvement over the Director's Cut. The visual upgrade it received in the remastering process is excellent along with the subtle corrections and tweaks made to certain scenes. The Bluray version is a 5 disc set that comes with tons of extras including a 3+ hour documentary on the making of the film, along with the original US, International, and Director's Cut versions of the film; all redone in hi-def. This set is definitely worth the price and is a great example of how to refine a classic without overdoing it (George Lucas should take notes from Ridley Scott).
Indiana Jones Trailer
The trailer for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was released yesterday to much fanfare. After watching the trailer a couple times, I have to say I was very underwhelmed. Harrison Ford is 65 and looks it, making the over-the-top stunts (even for Indiana Jones) look that much more ridiculous.
The amount of CGI is also very disappointing. A lot of the charm of the original movies were the in-camera, real world stunts. In the trailer, however, there are several examples of silly, poorly executed CGI work. The car chase along the cliff showcases some particularly bad blue screen work. A couple of the sequences looked rather unoriginal, such as the spiral staircase that is very reminiscent of National Treasure.
Indiana Jones movies should be breaking new ground, not retreading old ideas. I hate when franchises get dusted off for one more go around and can't keep up the level of quality (see the Alien, Terminator and Die Hard franchises). I realize this is just a teaser, but usually the teaser is so abbreviated that even bad movies look good. A teaser is supposed to get you psyched for the main event (like the Dark Knight trailer did). I hope I am wrong about this movie, but based on this trailer we could be in for a disappointment of Star Wars proportions.
There Will Be Blood
After seeing There Will Be Blood I started thinking why it was that while I enjoyed the film, I didn't like it nearly as much as other movies. I realized that while the film-making was impeccable, the story just didn't inspire the kind of emotion or curiosity that other films have for me. As a director Paul Thomas Anderson is incredible. The production value and cinematography of There Will Be Blood are some of the best I have ever seen. The realism of the oil drilling must be seen to be believed.
In many films, the protagonist isn't necessarily likable, but they at least have some redeemable qualities. Daniel Day-Lewis' character (Plainview) is a single minded, obsessive, overbearing man who must win at all costs. His primary opponent is Paul Dano's shrill, backhanded minister. Neither of these men are likable in any way. No redeemable qualities emerge about either of them. This is a strange way to tell a story. If the audience can never identify in any way with the characters, they can never be drawn into the plot. PTA seems more interested in presenting a challenging piece of art than a thrilling, human tale. When compared with the magnificent No Country For Old Men, There Will Be Blood contains very few genuine moments between people. Every aspect of the film has been twisted to fit Plainview's insanity and thus has no room for human interaction.
Despite this criticism, I did like this movie very much. Day-Lewis is mesmerizing as Plainview, delivering a performance nearly as good as his portrayal of Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New York. Paul Dano holds his own and I particularly liked the performances in their final confrontation at the end of the film. This movie is worth watching just for the camera work and the performances, if not for the plot. 4/5
Juno
2007 may go down as the year of the taser and the pregnancy comedy. This past summer's Knocked Up set a fairly high bar as comedies go for Juno. That said, Juno is still a very good movie. More quirky teen drama than straight comedy, Juno is almost too odd and clever for its own good at times, but it stays true enough to reality to remain a genuine and entertaining film. Much of this is due to its fantastic cast, especially Ellen Page and Michael Cera.
My main criticism of Juno would be that the screenplay seems to try too hard to be unique instead of relying on the strengths inherent in the plot. For example, Juno herself occasionally does some voice-over or throws out a line which is quirky for the sake of being quirky, not to stay true to the character. The soundtrack for this movie is too Wes Anderson for me. The cutesy songs at the beginning and end are enough; the 5+ that are in this movie just get distracting after a while.
This movie deals with unplanned pregnancy in a more dramatic way than Knocked Up. Where Knocked Up went for the laugh out loud moments, Juno prefers more subtle or awkward moments to produce many of its chuckles. The direction from Jason Reitman is very good and shows that Thank You For Smoking was not a fluke. He demonstrates an excellent ability to portray absurdity without it feeling ridiculous. Despite any faults, Juno is smarter and funnier than most movies and definitely worth a viewing. 4/5
The Mist
The Mist is a perfect example of what could have been a great movie that loses its way and ends up only being decent. The plot is fairly standard horror: isolate a group of people, give them no information about their situation, and scare the crap out of them. This is all done very well; I liked the way this movie is shot as well as how the mist itself almost has some character. One of the biggest negatives for me came in an early scene when the first victim was attacked. The CGI special effects were horrible. If this movie had been made in the mid-90s this would be excusable, but not in 2007. This made even less sense given that the special effects later in the movie were more than acceptable. Why was the first (and arguably most important) scare so poorly done? Special effects aside, the acting and atmosphere are excellent and they are what keep this movie from running off the tracks. As the plot evolves, however, we realize that the story really has nowhere to go. This results in some fairly ridiculous situations as well as an absurd assertion about the origins of the monsters. All of this culminates in an incredibly stupid ending. I just wish they could have maintained the intelligence and creativity of the first three-quarters of The Mist into the last quarter. 3/5
No Country For Old Men
No Country For Old Men is an excellent example of a movie that is more about the journey than the destination. Not only that, but the journey we are taking does not steadily follow one character's perspective. No Country For Old Men is about three main characters' parallel trip through an imperfect, stark, fascinating world.
Upon first viewing this movie, I thought it ended rather abruptly. After thinking about it I realized that I had missed the climax of the movie; I had misunderstood the characters. There was a reason that what could have been the biggest action sequence in the film is not shown (we only see the result). That reason is that the Coen brothers are more interested in creating pervasive, engrossing tension than they are in showing gory action (although there's plenty of that too). The level to which they bring this tension is incredible. The way they show the preparations Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem go through before their confrontations is brilliant. We see the level of control and desperation these characters exhibit with every action. There are not many good modern westerns, but this one is excellent. 4.5/5
Michael Clayton
Michael Clayton is a perfect example of a slow burn; a movie that builds in tension and scope and in the end pulls it all together to a satisfying conclusion. For a movie about lawyers it never ventures into the courtroom, which I found especially refreshing. The plot, revolving around a toxic herbicide, isn't particularly original; the characters, however, are compelling to watch. Michael Clayton himself is played very well as are the main supporting roles (especially Tom Wilkinson as the burnt-out attorney of the chemical company). For a slow movie there are a number of surprises that are so well placed and directed that you can't possibly see them coming (and they really make you jump). I wasn't sure what to expect and Michael Clayton delivered a very enjoyable experience. 4/5
The Kingdom
The Kingdom is a pretty good action/thriller that does a lot of things right. It also does enough things wrong that keep it from rising to another level. This movie tries really hard to be a combination of Syriana and The Bourne Supremacy/Ultimatum with a little Clear and Present Danger thrown in. The plot is solid, revolving around terrorism in a Saudi Arabian housing complex for foreign oil workers. The acting is also good with a well rounded cast; although as much as I like Chris Cooper I am getting a little tired of seeing him in this type of movie. The action is well done and it does a great job of conveying to the audience a situational awareness of what is happening. I did not enjoy the heavy handedness of the beginning and ending of the film. The interactions between Jaime Foxx and his colleagues' dead kids is just silly. The ending simply pounds into the audience's head the obvious message of the film one more time. This unfortunate combination takes away some of the good characterizations that were built up over the previous 90 minutes. Overall though, it was still an enjoyable, interesting movie. 3.5/5
3:10 to Yuma
When I first heard about 3:10 to Yuma I was intrigued. The idea of a classic style western, remade by a good director (James Mangold) had a lot of potential. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I was underwhelmed. This movie falls into the good but not great category. It relies far too heavily on western cliches such as the steely-eyed gunfighter who carries two guns and takes no prisoners (Ben Foster's character).
My main criticism of this movie is the plot. Having never seen the original, I can make no comments about any changes that were made to the story, but in my opinion they should have changed something in this remake. The dynamic between Christian Bale's rancher and Russell Crowe's outlaw would have been interesting enough without the constant annoyance of Bale's asshole son constantly showing him up. I also didn't like that throughout the whole movie we are told Bale was a sharpshooter in the army, however, I don't think he ever actually fires his rifle. Why bring up what a good shot he was if we never see him shoot anything? For the entire movie they emphasize how he has one leg and was a sharpshooter; then at the end of the movie all the action focuses on a one-legged rancher and an outlaw running around. Where is the scene where he takes out a couple of gang members from a distance? Good westerns, even mainstream examples, feature far more depth and creativity than this film. 3/5
Grindhouse
I saw Grindhouse on Friday and I have to say it is the best movie I have seen in months. From the first fake trailer to the end credits, Grindhouse is different from anything else in theaters. The first feature, Planet Terror, is just the kind of crazy over-the-top action, horror, suspense, comedy that it should be. The second segment, Death Proof, is what we would expect from Tarantino; lots of interesting dialog punctuated with violence. The fake trailers are also excellent; especially Machete which looks like a genuine Grindhouse film and Thanksgiving which hits all the right points for a mock horror film.
The music for both features is also amazing. Planet Terror is scored by director Robert Rodriguez and it kicks ass (especially the main credits theme of raunchy, bluesy, rock). Death Proof makes use of a lot of fantastic retro tunes (like all Tarantino films) and does not disappoint.
I have seen other reviewers criticize Death Proof for having too much dialog and not enough action, but I think that is only evident since Planet Terror comes first and is almost entirely action. Taken by itself Death Proof is just on a different speed than Planet Terror, but no less potent. Planet Terror is Rodriguez's version of a Grindhouse film while Death Proof is more of a Tarantino film with homage's to Grindhouse pictures. That said I think that Death Proof is by far the better of the two films. It earns its suspense and has some fantastic character exchanges with a great payoff at the end. 4.5/5
Children of Men
I saw Children of Men last night and I have to say I was impressed. Other reviews have compared this movie to Bladerunner, and I very much agree with that assessment. Both movies start slowly and are somewhat confusing for the first 30 minutes. But the plot gradually builds and evolves and the last third of both films is incredible. Children of Men is one of the most visually striking movies I have ever seen. The director, Alfonso Cuaron, makes use of extremely long takes and a minimum of cuts. This has the effect of presenting a truly "living world" where the camera can follow characters through street after street during a major gun fight with no interruption. Combined with incredible production design, this visual style is something to behold and much like Bladerunner it almost overshadows the plot, which is somewhat thin. Any narrative shortcomings can be forgiven in my opinion by the movie being presented as a "slice of time" where we are dropped into a story in progress and only witness a small section of the overall plot. Some movies work better with more exposition but in this case it would have only slowed the beginning down even more. The acting also helps greatly to fill in the gaps (Michael Caine is fantastic), providing a lot of character to an otherwise stoic background. I think this is one of those films where multiple viewings will only increase my appreciation for it. 4.5/5
300
I saw 300 this weekend. After the fantastic Frank Miller adaptation Sin City (by Robert Rodriguez) and Zach Snyder's previous film, a remake of Dawn of the Dead, I had high hopes. The end result, however, was disappointing.
Some aspects of the film were great; in particular the first couple battle sequences are visually stunning. Eventually the battles become repetitive and many of the best moments of the film have already been ruined by being shown in the various trailers for the movie. In addition, the side plot involving the Spartan Queen isn't that interesting. Unlike Sin City I get the impression from various shot comparisons of the graphic novel 300 to the film that while Sin City took the look of the graphic novel it is based on, 300 is almost a verbatim translation to the screen of its graphic novel. This detracts from the movie because storytelling on film is different from in a novel. Adding more cinematic elements would have greatly benefited this movie. Almost all of the film was shot on a blue-screen set and it definitely shows. For such a special effects heavy movie, many of the backgrounds were completely flat and unrealistic. The language of 300 is also fairly annoying. The over-the-top, chest-pounding nature of the dialog wears thin very quickly. Sin City also used an unconventional style, but one fitting it's noir themes. In the end 300 wasn't horrible, but it wasn't too great either. 3/5
Casino Royale
I recently rented the newest James Bond movie Casino Royale. I originally saw it in the theater when it came out, but I enjoy seeing movies at home to get a different perspective.
This movie joins the long list of those that while good, could have been so much better. After 20 Bond movies, I had hoped this new installment would be a departure from the previous movies. To some extent this is the case, Casino Royale isn't nearly as campy as the last few Bond movies, that isn't saying much but it is a step in the right direction. My true desire was for a completely straight, hard, visceral Bond in most likely a R-rated movie. Instead we get half-and-half. The beginning and very end in particular are exactly what I wanted for the whole movie. Most of the rest of the movie isn't too bad, but it's more regular Bond than I would have liked. Toward the end of the movie, however, Casino Royale loses it.
Bond and Vesper Lynd had essentially no romantic relationship during the entire card game section of the movie. In the following act suddenly they are all over each other. This is all later explained, albeit poorly, through the plot development that Vesper's boyfriend is being held hostage. What? She then makes a deal to payoff the bad guys to save her boyfriend with the poker winnings. What? Then she conveniently leaves clues to help Bond find her contact. Wait a minute...so she knows she's going to probably die...then why the charade? Why pretend you like Bond to save your boyfriend then realize you're going to die but still go through with it all? Confused? Me too. Thoroughly disappointing considering the first two thirds of the movie were very enjoyable. 3.5/5
Zodiac
I saw the movie Zodiac over the weekend and I have to say it was excellent. If you don't mind a movie taking its time and developing multiple story lines and characters, this is the movie for you. I would compare this movie to another crime thriller, The Boston Strangler. Both movies deal with many characters and take place over a fairly long span of time (although Zodiac takes this to the extreme taking place over a couple of decades). Having too many characters can weigh a movie down, and Zodiac is a bit messy in that regard. I liked how the director, David Fincher, dealt with this abundance of characters by focusing different parts of the movie on different characters. There is some overlap of the many story lines, but for the most part this technique keeps the movie plot from being too overwhelming. In fact that is one of the best aspects of the film; the film's plot is messy just like the Zodiac case, taking place over hundreds of miles in different communities, dealing with dozens of people.
If you enjoy a good thriller without too much action and don't mind not having a clear cut ending (no one has ever been convicted of the murders after all), make sure to check out Zodiac. It really is the Jack the Ripper story of the US. 4.5/5