Newspaper magnate and overall incredibly rich man Charles Foster Kane (Orson Welles) passes away, leaving a large collection of statues and other stuff and a mystery. What does his last word, Rosebud, refer to? A reporter sets out to find out
Greatest movie of all time? No. But it is bloody good.
Now obviously I knew what Rosebud was before seeing the movie. I’m 30, it’s a bit like knowing what the moon is or that water is wet at this point. Thankfully that doesn’t really detract from anything. It is quite a poignant end to the movie and gives it a big bit of psychological weight, or leave room for analysis, but its not really what the film is about. This is a character piece.
And I was surprised at how funny it is. When you hear Greatest movie you expect something quite dull, serious and boring as hell. I should have known better. As many of you know, I’m a voice actor. Or trying to be. I listen to quite a few podcasts, and a few of them are what’s called OTR now. Old Time Radio. Primarily the OTR Swagcast and the Zombie Astronauts Frequency of Fear. You should check them out, they’re very good. So I’ve heard a fair few productions by the Mercury Theater before now. Possibly my favourite bit of OTR is the famous War of the Worlds one. But they all feature very good acting and writing, and that’s where the folks in this movie came from.
I love me a character piece and that’s what this is. Told in a non-linear fashion, it’s the rise and fall of Kane. A man who started with nothing, became one of the richest men in the world, and died with…well not nothing but not in his prime. And its fantastically written and acted.
Much like I Live In Fear there’s a lot of actors here playing older than they are. The make up is fantastic, they all look convincing at whatever age they are meant to be. While some of the acting is a little off here and there, it’s over all very well done. Particularly by Mr Hyphen himself, Orson Welles. He knocks it out of the park.
And yes, it looks pretty damned good. A little beat up at the stage, but its impressively shot. And it pioneered some techniques which have influenced film making in an Avatar style way (though with more reaching impact than I can ever see that film having).
I don’t really need to recommend this. It has a 100% Fresh rotten tomatoes rating. Ironically if RT was about in 1941 it would probably have been a lot lower than that. Anyone who likes films will enjoy this movie and be entertained through out, but I’m not guaranteeing that it will be your favourite film. It’s not mine, but I sure did like it.
Next up: One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest
Wednesday 31 March 2010
Tuesday 30 March 2010
Movie 89: Nick And Norah’s Infinite Playlist
Nick (Michael Cera) was dumped a month ago, but he can’t quite get over his completely wrong for him ex and keeps making her mix CDs. Norah (Kat Dennings) plucks these CDs from the trash when the ex chucks them, and falls for the man making them. The two bump in to each other at one of Nick’s bands gigs, but the two’s baggage is ever present.
This is a very frustrating movie. I found myself yelling at Norah to just tell him about the mixes, and at Nick to stop obsessing over his vapid ex who is far form right for him. The problem is that it’s pretty true to life.
I’m not old enough to have forgotten the kind of girls you can get all wrapped up in when your younger. So Nick being head over heels for a complete idiot isn’t unrealistic in the least. Being the arty type I can relate a bit, though I was hardly a hit with the ladies back then. Or probably now. And while its realistic it lets the film down a little as what would be frustrating to witness as a friend is even more frustrating as a viewer. Nick and Norah are so ridiculously right for each other that watching them fumble it so much for the first hour is just annoying. At times anyway.
Norah is damned adorable. She’s the kind of girl that I would have KILLED to have known back in the day. She’s also some kind of weird combination of my ex and my current partner too which made this film a lot easier, and slightly weirder, for me to relate to. How anyone couldn’t fall for this girl I’d never understand.
The film has other weak points outside the frustration at the story between the two leads. Norah’s drunk friend provides some gross out humour which didn’t really seem to fit the film and didn’t sit all that right with me at times. It drags at points, and feels over all a bit disjointed.
It does have an excellent sound track though. Not QUITE as excellent as I hope for going in, but still very good stuff if you like indie music. Which I do. I felt slightly cheated by the fact the Vampire Weekend, who’s name you can see in the titles, don’t seem to show up until the end credits. And I really wanted Fluffy to be an actual band that you could here rather than a set up and maguffin.
It’s a good coming of age love story, but not a great one. The two leads are excellent. Cera is realistic as the love struck emo idiot, and Norah as I’ve said is someone who’s easy to feel for. I wish it was more music nerdy though, and that there had been more close play rather than devisive play with the two main characters for the first two thirds. Not amazing, but very decent.
Next up: Citizen Kane. No that’s not a joke.
This is a very frustrating movie. I found myself yelling at Norah to just tell him about the mixes, and at Nick to stop obsessing over his vapid ex who is far form right for him. The problem is that it’s pretty true to life.
I’m not old enough to have forgotten the kind of girls you can get all wrapped up in when your younger. So Nick being head over heels for a complete idiot isn’t unrealistic in the least. Being the arty type I can relate a bit, though I was hardly a hit with the ladies back then. Or probably now. And while its realistic it lets the film down a little as what would be frustrating to witness as a friend is even more frustrating as a viewer. Nick and Norah are so ridiculously right for each other that watching them fumble it so much for the first hour is just annoying. At times anyway.
Norah is damned adorable. She’s the kind of girl that I would have KILLED to have known back in the day. She’s also some kind of weird combination of my ex and my current partner too which made this film a lot easier, and slightly weirder, for me to relate to. How anyone couldn’t fall for this girl I’d never understand.
The film has other weak points outside the frustration at the story between the two leads. Norah’s drunk friend provides some gross out humour which didn’t really seem to fit the film and didn’t sit all that right with me at times. It drags at points, and feels over all a bit disjointed.
It does have an excellent sound track though. Not QUITE as excellent as I hope for going in, but still very good stuff if you like indie music. Which I do. I felt slightly cheated by the fact the Vampire Weekend, who’s name you can see in the titles, don’t seem to show up until the end credits. And I really wanted Fluffy to be an actual band that you could here rather than a set up and maguffin.
It’s a good coming of age love story, but not a great one. The two leads are excellent. Cera is realistic as the love struck emo idiot, and Norah as I’ve said is someone who’s easy to feel for. I wish it was more music nerdy though, and that there had been more close play rather than devisive play with the two main characters for the first two thirds. Not amazing, but very decent.
Next up: Citizen Kane. No that’s not a joke.
Monday 29 March 2010
Movie 88: I Live In Fear
Kiichi Nakajima (Toshiro Mifune) is an elderly foundry owner who is terrified of being killed by an H Bomb, so he decides to move his family to Brazil where its safe. His family doesn’t want to go so they take him to a family court to declare him unfit. But if he really wrong to be worried?
Well yes and no. Part of this film working is putting yourself in to the time period. 1955, Japan. The only country to have had two H bombs dropped on it. EVERYONE must have been at least a bit scared, but as many characters say in the movie “there’s not much you can do about it so don’t let it bother you”. Kiichi’s only really crime is worrying too much.
I grew up in the 80’s when the ever present threat of nuclear annihilation was still about. Technically it still is, but we were more worried then because of the cold war. And every now and again it would cross my mind. If someone had nuked Glasgow and Dundee 10 years before though I think I’d have worried a lot more. Though someone COULD nuke Dundee and no one would notice. There’d be less mutants actually.
But I digress. A film like this could easily have an unsympathetic main character, though he’s observed more than front and center a lot of the time. He’s a bit nuts, he’s against his own family and he’s being obsessive about something he shouldn’t be. But if you go with the time period, or even if you don’t, you can see where he’s coming from.
This is a film from two Japanese masters, which doesn’t hurt. Akira Kurosawa is accepted as one of the best directors of all time, and he’s probably inspired your favourite director. This is only the second of his movies that I’ve seen, the other being Stray Dog. Stray Dog is about a policeman trying to find his lost gun. And it’s a damned good film. It has one thematic thing in common with I Live In Fear, that doesn’t sound like a whole lot of material. And it isn’t, but it works for Stray Dog. Unfortunately that’s not quite the case with I Live In Fear. The film occasionally drags on for longer than it really should. It’s far from bad though.
The performances help a lot, particularly from Mifune. If you look at him in this film you wonder how he survived until 1997. He looks and acts like a man in his late 50’s or 60’s. He’s 35. It’s a subtle performance, the character ranges from very staid to wildly erratic, and Mifune nails it to the wall. Without knowing who it was you could think it’s a great performance by a veteran actor, when it’s actually a fantastic performance by a relatively young actor. Let’s see R-Patz do that!
Whether you should hunt this out or not depends on a few things. 1) Do you like old movies? 2) Do you like Japanese movies? 3) Do you like the old Twilight Zone series? It feels a lot like one of those by the time things are said and done, so I’d let 3 be the biggest factor.
Btw, my enjoyment might have been hampered somewhat by slightly wonky subtitles on the BFI release of this movie. I’m assuming it’s a universal thing but it might have been troubles with my computers DVD software. Either way, if you in the UK you might have some missing text and the like. Which is a shame.
Next up: Nick And Norah’s Infinite Playlist
Well yes and no. Part of this film working is putting yourself in to the time period. 1955, Japan. The only country to have had two H bombs dropped on it. EVERYONE must have been at least a bit scared, but as many characters say in the movie “there’s not much you can do about it so don’t let it bother you”. Kiichi’s only really crime is worrying too much.
I grew up in the 80’s when the ever present threat of nuclear annihilation was still about. Technically it still is, but we were more worried then because of the cold war. And every now and again it would cross my mind. If someone had nuked Glasgow and Dundee 10 years before though I think I’d have worried a lot more. Though someone COULD nuke Dundee and no one would notice. There’d be less mutants actually.
But I digress. A film like this could easily have an unsympathetic main character, though he’s observed more than front and center a lot of the time. He’s a bit nuts, he’s against his own family and he’s being obsessive about something he shouldn’t be. But if you go with the time period, or even if you don’t, you can see where he’s coming from.
This is a film from two Japanese masters, which doesn’t hurt. Akira Kurosawa is accepted as one of the best directors of all time, and he’s probably inspired your favourite director. This is only the second of his movies that I’ve seen, the other being Stray Dog. Stray Dog is about a policeman trying to find his lost gun. And it’s a damned good film. It has one thematic thing in common with I Live In Fear, that doesn’t sound like a whole lot of material. And it isn’t, but it works for Stray Dog. Unfortunately that’s not quite the case with I Live In Fear. The film occasionally drags on for longer than it really should. It’s far from bad though.
The performances help a lot, particularly from Mifune. If you look at him in this film you wonder how he survived until 1997. He looks and acts like a man in his late 50’s or 60’s. He’s 35. It’s a subtle performance, the character ranges from very staid to wildly erratic, and Mifune nails it to the wall. Without knowing who it was you could think it’s a great performance by a veteran actor, when it’s actually a fantastic performance by a relatively young actor. Let’s see R-Patz do that!
Whether you should hunt this out or not depends on a few things. 1) Do you like old movies? 2) Do you like Japanese movies? 3) Do you like the old Twilight Zone series? It feels a lot like one of those by the time things are said and done, so I’d let 3 be the biggest factor.
Btw, my enjoyment might have been hampered somewhat by slightly wonky subtitles on the BFI release of this movie. I’m assuming it’s a universal thing but it might have been troubles with my computers DVD software. Either way, if you in the UK you might have some missing text and the like. Which is a shame.
Next up: Nick And Norah’s Infinite Playlist
Sunday 28 March 2010
Movie 87: Thick As Thieves
Master thief Ripley (Morgan Freeman) recruits younger thief Gabriel (Antonio Banderas) to help him steal some Faberge, I think, eggs from Romanov’s jewellers. A theft that should be damned near impossible. All the while, they are watched and hounded by Lt Weber (Robert Forster) who’s been trying to nab Ripley for years.
If you haven’t seen this you wouldn’t be mistaken in thinking that you have. It’s not all that original. In fact, it’s not really at all original. But that can be fine. Unfortunately it’s not all that great either.
There’s good points. Morgan Freeman is always good, no matter what he’s in. And I would have liked to have seen more interplay between him and Forster, the old cop and old thief that have been dancing partners for years. There’s not quite enough of that. The chemistry between Freeman and Banderas is pretty good too. And the way they get around the security is quite clever.
Unfortunately the heist part is pretty rushed. Not terribly, but it could have been fleshed out a bit more. It seems a little TOO easy. That’s not the films main let down.
The love story is atrocious. Antonio Banderas isn’t some kind of amazing latin lothario that can charm the pants off of any woman. Or if he is, he’s not anymore. And he certainly isn’t convincing as one in this film. All the love story between his character and Radha Mitchell’s does is slow the movie down to a grinding halt, and then drag the ending out by a couple of unnecessary minutes. They have zero chemistry. Well a little, but it’s not acted well enough to be believable and you’ll feel like the DVD has skipped a scene.
There’s some twists and turns, but it’s a familiar plot and no one should really come away shocked and awed. It actually made me wish there were earlier movies of Ripley as it was a good character for Freeman. He plays good bad guys along with, well God and Presidents. And this felt like it was a 4th or 5th in a series rather than a first film.
And probably last. Don’t rush to see it.
Next up: I Live In Fear. What the frak is that Dave?!
If you haven’t seen this you wouldn’t be mistaken in thinking that you have. It’s not all that original. In fact, it’s not really at all original. But that can be fine. Unfortunately it’s not all that great either.
There’s good points. Morgan Freeman is always good, no matter what he’s in. And I would have liked to have seen more interplay between him and Forster, the old cop and old thief that have been dancing partners for years. There’s not quite enough of that. The chemistry between Freeman and Banderas is pretty good too. And the way they get around the security is quite clever.
Unfortunately the heist part is pretty rushed. Not terribly, but it could have been fleshed out a bit more. It seems a little TOO easy. That’s not the films main let down.
The love story is atrocious. Antonio Banderas isn’t some kind of amazing latin lothario that can charm the pants off of any woman. Or if he is, he’s not anymore. And he certainly isn’t convincing as one in this film. All the love story between his character and Radha Mitchell’s does is slow the movie down to a grinding halt, and then drag the ending out by a couple of unnecessary minutes. They have zero chemistry. Well a little, but it’s not acted well enough to be believable and you’ll feel like the DVD has skipped a scene.
There’s some twists and turns, but it’s a familiar plot and no one should really come away shocked and awed. It actually made me wish there were earlier movies of Ripley as it was a good character for Freeman. He plays good bad guys along with, well God and Presidents. And this felt like it was a 4th or 5th in a series rather than a first film.
And probably last. Don’t rush to see it.
Next up: I Live In Fear. What the frak is that Dave?!
Saturday 27 March 2010
Movie 86: The Hunting Party
Celebrated war reporter Simon Hunt (Richard Gere) has a melt down on air during the Bosnian war and kills his career. His camera man, Duck (Terrence Howard) gets a promotion and a cushy job in New York. 5 years after the war has ended he returns with the station anchor and new kid at the station Benjamin Strauss (Jesse Eisenberg). Hunt meets up with his old partner and tells him he has a fantastic story, he knows where wanted war criminal The Fox is. Reluctantly, Strauss and Duck join up with Hunt and head out in to the wilds…
There’s one thing British films do really well. Serious as fuck, with very dark comedy. The US not so much, though they manage it sometimes. This is one of those times.
I vaguely remember the Bosnian conflict. I know it was pretty damned horrible, but I don’t know all that much about the history during and since outside of that. This film does serve as a bit of an education. And as many good political stand ups know, you learn more if you have the odd laugh. This is why The Daily Show’s viewers are the best informed in the US. It keeps your attention if there’s the odd dick joke.
This isn’t really all that base, and it will go from light hearted black humour like telling the kid to watch out for land mines to the main characters being shot at pretty damned quickly.
It all hinges on two things. A well written and worked out plot that gives the characters good motivation, and good chemistry between the leads. Thankfully they got both things right. Hunt is out to get his career going again and for revenge, Duck is there to help out his friend and have some danger in his life again and Strauss is out to prove himself to his dad. And probably himself too.
There is a sense of danger here. They are in very rough and hostile country. There’s also plenty of comedy too as they play off each other, and encounter some quirky side characters. And it sticks a knife in now and again, particularly right before the end credits when you get some data points, with a political message and some satire. As it says at the starts everything is true except for the completely crazy stuff. The question is, what’s the crazy stuff? Personally I think some of that was true.
Its not quite a masterpiece but it did what a good movie should do. I was entertained through out. I cared about the characters, and I’m not much of a Gere fan. And it left me wanting to see more of these guys. So it’s worth a look.
Next up: Thick As Thieves
There’s one thing British films do really well. Serious as fuck, with very dark comedy. The US not so much, though they manage it sometimes. This is one of those times.
I vaguely remember the Bosnian conflict. I know it was pretty damned horrible, but I don’t know all that much about the history during and since outside of that. This film does serve as a bit of an education. And as many good political stand ups know, you learn more if you have the odd laugh. This is why The Daily Show’s viewers are the best informed in the US. It keeps your attention if there’s the odd dick joke.
This isn’t really all that base, and it will go from light hearted black humour like telling the kid to watch out for land mines to the main characters being shot at pretty damned quickly.
It all hinges on two things. A well written and worked out plot that gives the characters good motivation, and good chemistry between the leads. Thankfully they got both things right. Hunt is out to get his career going again and for revenge, Duck is there to help out his friend and have some danger in his life again and Strauss is out to prove himself to his dad. And probably himself too.
There is a sense of danger here. They are in very rough and hostile country. There’s also plenty of comedy too as they play off each other, and encounter some quirky side characters. And it sticks a knife in now and again, particularly right before the end credits when you get some data points, with a political message and some satire. As it says at the starts everything is true except for the completely crazy stuff. The question is, what’s the crazy stuff? Personally I think some of that was true.
Its not quite a masterpiece but it did what a good movie should do. I was entertained through out. I cared about the characters, and I’m not much of a Gere fan. And it left me wanting to see more of these guys. So it’s worth a look.
Next up: Thick As Thieves
Friday 26 March 2010
Movie 85: The Day The Earth Stood Still
An extraterrestrial object is headed for Earth and lands in central park. An alien emerges but someone is trigger happy and pops him one. A giant robot follows him out, but he stops it from doing anything. After emerging from a biological shell the alien looks human and says he has a message for our leaders, but its decided he should be interrogated instead. A scientist helps him escape and tries to find out what he’s doing here as other spheres arrive.
I’m a big fan of the original. Well, I say big fan. I’ve seen it a few times and I think it’s a pretty intelligent 1950 B+ movie. It has a smart message, is well handled and is largely a character piece from what I recall. Low on the kaboom.
The new one isn’t quite that, but it came pretty close which is rather frustrating. I wish they’d kept the ships ship looking instead of big glowing balls, but that’s not a big deal. I’m glad they kept Gort looking like Gort. I’m also glad that Keanu insisted that Klaatu Barrada Nikto was spoken in the film as its what the original is most known for.
I also think that Keanu was a very good choice for Klaatu. People complain about his acting not having much emotion in it, and that’s fine for this character. He really suited it. Updating the nuclear threat to a climate change one was also fine. However it would have been nice if he’d been allowed to say what it was at some point.
LET THE MAIN FUCKING CHARACTER SAY WHY THE FUCK HE’S HERE AND LET PEOPLE DECIDE!!!!!!!!
Ahem, excuse me. But seriously, why didn’t he take over global communications and give a message at some point? Have the normal people rise up and show that humans deserve a chance. This doesn’t happen, sorry if that’s a spoiler.
They missed the mark widely on two things. And yes this probably will get spoilerific. For a start, the kids character isn’t very believable and felt extremely underdeveloped. He didn’t have any realistic motivation. And his dead dad must have been a right prick before he died going by the way the kid thinks he would have acted.
Secondly, the international community puts NO visible pressure on the States to stop being dickheads and try talking. This is FAR to visible an alien encounter for them to be able to behave the way they did. That was massively unbelievable. The fact the aliens gave us basically no chance was unbelievable.
This IS a spoiler too. The fact that Klaatu was totally up for wiping the slate clean and changed his mind suddenly because of a kid and his mum crying and hugging is ridiculous. No effort was made to give him a decent reason. What I said up there about telling everyone and having the normal people rise up and say they want a change? THAT would have been good. It would have gotten the climate message across, heavy handedly I’ll admit but the original was hardly subtly, and it would have been realistic that he’d change his mind.
Also, keep Gort a robot. A giant robot blowing shit up is a lot cooler than a big swirly cloud of nanobots. Galactus in the second Fantastic Four movie kind of proved that.
The first hour is surprisingly decent and this wasn’t the dumb action movie I expected, but they flew far off course in the last third. Particularly Kathy Bates characters action towards the end when she KNOWS she’s doing the wrong thing and does it anyway.
Also, what the hell is supposed to happen next?!
Just go watch the original. Not that this is horrendous, but until I wrote this I didn’t get how much it had actually pissed me off. It’s a reverse grower…
Next up: The Hunting Party
I’m a big fan of the original. Well, I say big fan. I’ve seen it a few times and I think it’s a pretty intelligent 1950 B+ movie. It has a smart message, is well handled and is largely a character piece from what I recall. Low on the kaboom.
The new one isn’t quite that, but it came pretty close which is rather frustrating. I wish they’d kept the ships ship looking instead of big glowing balls, but that’s not a big deal. I’m glad they kept Gort looking like Gort. I’m also glad that Keanu insisted that Klaatu Barrada Nikto was spoken in the film as its what the original is most known for.
I also think that Keanu was a very good choice for Klaatu. People complain about his acting not having much emotion in it, and that’s fine for this character. He really suited it. Updating the nuclear threat to a climate change one was also fine. However it would have been nice if he’d been allowed to say what it was at some point.
LET THE MAIN FUCKING CHARACTER SAY WHY THE FUCK HE’S HERE AND LET PEOPLE DECIDE!!!!!!!!
Ahem, excuse me. But seriously, why didn’t he take over global communications and give a message at some point? Have the normal people rise up and show that humans deserve a chance. This doesn’t happen, sorry if that’s a spoiler.
They missed the mark widely on two things. And yes this probably will get spoilerific. For a start, the kids character isn’t very believable and felt extremely underdeveloped. He didn’t have any realistic motivation. And his dead dad must have been a right prick before he died going by the way the kid thinks he would have acted.
Secondly, the international community puts NO visible pressure on the States to stop being dickheads and try talking. This is FAR to visible an alien encounter for them to be able to behave the way they did. That was massively unbelievable. The fact the aliens gave us basically no chance was unbelievable.
This IS a spoiler too. The fact that Klaatu was totally up for wiping the slate clean and changed his mind suddenly because of a kid and his mum crying and hugging is ridiculous. No effort was made to give him a decent reason. What I said up there about telling everyone and having the normal people rise up and say they want a change? THAT would have been good. It would have gotten the climate message across, heavy handedly I’ll admit but the original was hardly subtly, and it would have been realistic that he’d change his mind.
Also, keep Gort a robot. A giant robot blowing shit up is a lot cooler than a big swirly cloud of nanobots. Galactus in the second Fantastic Four movie kind of proved that.
The first hour is surprisingly decent and this wasn’t the dumb action movie I expected, but they flew far off course in the last third. Particularly Kathy Bates characters action towards the end when she KNOWS she’s doing the wrong thing and does it anyway.
Also, what the hell is supposed to happen next?!
Just go watch the original. Not that this is horrendous, but until I wrote this I didn’t get how much it had actually pissed me off. It’s a reverse grower…
Next up: The Hunting Party
Thursday 25 March 2010
Movie 84: The Spirit
Denny Colt is a cop who was killed on the job, only to return from the grave for some unknown reason. Now more of less immortal he takes on the persona of The Spirit, protector of Central City. He fights his nemesis, the Octopus, an evil scientist who is also damned near impossible to kill.
Something like that, I dunno. There’s a lot missing from that synopsis but the one on IMDB appears to be about a different movie.
I SHOULD like the movie. It has numerous elements that I do like most of the time.
The style is very much Sin City, though you could throw in a bit of 300 and even Sky Captain. I really like all those films. In fact I think the reason that Frank Miller even got to make this is because he had a director credit on Sin City. It’s because you drew a comic Frank, not for any other reason. So I should like the look. And I do, but wasn’t wowed by it in any way. It felt overly stylised too, got a bit old.
It’s noir, or at least noir-ish. There wise cracking dialogue, sort of. The women are called dames a fair bit. The men all wear hats. It seems to be set in a version of the 20’s or 30’s that’s been transposed in to the current world with electronic money transfers and Kevlar vests. That’s the kind of thing I should like. But the dialogue doesn’t quite work most of the time.
Scarlett Johansson has probably never been as attractive as she is in this film. She’s made for the above time period and she looks gorgeous here playing a twisted scientist. Samuel L Jackson chews up the scenery as The Octopus, a completely off the wall villain who’s as nuts as a bag of crazy people. Louis Lombardi plays a large number of throw away hench clones, and they’re complete idiots who are occasionally funny. There’s nothing wrong with Gabriel Macht’s performance as The Spirit. Dan Lauria, the dad from The Wonder Years, plays a very good police chief and I always like seeing that guy. Eva Mendes doesn’t suck out loud, and the girl playing her as a kid in flash back (Seychelle Gabriel) might have a pretentious as fuck name, but she’s a good young actress.
It has a bunch of cats in it.
For all those reasons I should like this. Lots. I don’t. It’s meh. I don’t feel cheated for watching it. I don’t want to yell about how terrible it is, or tear it a new one. It just felt really really really long. It was kinda boring. It never gelled. It had trouble holding my attention. Thing is, I don’t really know WHY that’s the case.
Pretty much a complete waste of your time in my opinion and from all the scuttlebutt about it on the web. It’s a miss fire, but I couldn’t tell you exactly why it’s a miss fire…
Next up: The Day The Earth Stood Still. A remake of a film I really like. Hold on to your hats, it may not be a pretty blog…
Something like that, I dunno. There’s a lot missing from that synopsis but the one on IMDB appears to be about a different movie.
I SHOULD like the movie. It has numerous elements that I do like most of the time.
The style is very much Sin City, though you could throw in a bit of 300 and even Sky Captain. I really like all those films. In fact I think the reason that Frank Miller even got to make this is because he had a director credit on Sin City. It’s because you drew a comic Frank, not for any other reason. So I should like the look. And I do, but wasn’t wowed by it in any way. It felt overly stylised too, got a bit old.
It’s noir, or at least noir-ish. There wise cracking dialogue, sort of. The women are called dames a fair bit. The men all wear hats. It seems to be set in a version of the 20’s or 30’s that’s been transposed in to the current world with electronic money transfers and Kevlar vests. That’s the kind of thing I should like. But the dialogue doesn’t quite work most of the time.
Scarlett Johansson has probably never been as attractive as she is in this film. She’s made for the above time period and she looks gorgeous here playing a twisted scientist. Samuel L Jackson chews up the scenery as The Octopus, a completely off the wall villain who’s as nuts as a bag of crazy people. Louis Lombardi plays a large number of throw away hench clones, and they’re complete idiots who are occasionally funny. There’s nothing wrong with Gabriel Macht’s performance as The Spirit. Dan Lauria, the dad from The Wonder Years, plays a very good police chief and I always like seeing that guy. Eva Mendes doesn’t suck out loud, and the girl playing her as a kid in flash back (Seychelle Gabriel) might have a pretentious as fuck name, but she’s a good young actress.
It has a bunch of cats in it.
For all those reasons I should like this. Lots. I don’t. It’s meh. I don’t feel cheated for watching it. I don’t want to yell about how terrible it is, or tear it a new one. It just felt really really really long. It was kinda boring. It never gelled. It had trouble holding my attention. Thing is, I don’t really know WHY that’s the case.
Pretty much a complete waste of your time in my opinion and from all the scuttlebutt about it on the web. It’s a miss fire, but I couldn’t tell you exactly why it’s a miss fire…
Next up: The Day The Earth Stood Still. A remake of a film I really like. Hold on to your hats, it may not be a pretty blog…
Wednesday 24 March 2010
Movie 83: Max Payne
Max Payne’s (Mark Whalberg) wife is killed and he kind of loses his mojo, taking a desk on cold cases and trying to solve the unsolvable as the third killer is never found. His investigation leads him to a drug called Valkyre made by the pharmaceutical company she used to work for.
I actually don’t have that much to say about this movie. I haven’t played the game, but apparently it didn’t go down to well with fans. It’s overly convoluted and a bit boring to be honest. And from reading the trivia, doesn’t bear much relation to the games plot.
Which makes no sense. Why the hell wouldn’t they use the plot of a successful game instead of reworking it? This is why game adaptations rarely work…
There are some very pretty shots and some not bad acting but outside of that its all a bunch of nonsense. There’s some plot holes that make no sense and are never addressed. And why the drug isn’t called Berserker, considering its effects, I’ll never know.
Not really one to bother your arse with. Besides being a bit shiny it doesn’t have all that much to offer.
Next up: The Spirit
I actually don’t have that much to say about this movie. I haven’t played the game, but apparently it didn’t go down to well with fans. It’s overly convoluted and a bit boring to be honest. And from reading the trivia, doesn’t bear much relation to the games plot.
Which makes no sense. Why the hell wouldn’t they use the plot of a successful game instead of reworking it? This is why game adaptations rarely work…
There are some very pretty shots and some not bad acting but outside of that its all a bunch of nonsense. There’s some plot holes that make no sense and are never addressed. And why the drug isn’t called Berserker, considering its effects, I’ll never know.
Not really one to bother your arse with. Besides being a bit shiny it doesn’t have all that much to offer.
Next up: The Spirit
Tuesday 23 March 2010
Movie 82: Ghost Town
Bertram Pincus (Ricky Gervais) is a dentist who hates people. He’s generally just a bit of a prick. When he goes for a routine colonoscopy he insists on general anaesthetic, and dies for around 7 minutes. When he comes back he’s able to see the ghosts of dead people who can’t move on because of unfinished business. One of them, Frank (Greg Kinnear), smooth talks Pincus in to helping him move on by splitting up his wife and her new guy who he thinks is after her money.
I’ll say right now that I don’t jump for joy when I say the name Ricky Gervais. While he can be funny I think the guy is an arrogant prick. Basically the roles he plays, though the roles themselves are more human and vulnerable. Of course this is his public persona I’m going by, he might actually be a decent guy. ANYWAY what I’m saying is that I wasn’t particularly looking forward to this movie and the trailer didn’t make it look funny.
But it is. I wouldn’t say its hilarious, but it’s a funny little rom com type movie. Pretty predictable, nice little twist on a generic movie type. You know how its going to progress and how it will end, but it entertains you on the way there.
Gervais is somewhat toned down from full on snarky prick, his character isn’t particularly arrogant just a bit of a cynic.
Greg Kinnear’s character IS a prick, but he’s good at this kind of smooth bastard. The real good point is seeing Aasif Mandvi from The Daily Show getting to stretch some acting muscles in what is essentially a straight role. He’s a fine actor.
Another plus point. It has some opportunities for some very base gross out humour, and doesn’t take them. It would have hurt rather than helped the movie where as handling them subtly works really well. Take note, shit comedy directors. BUT it is a bit heavy on the fumbly speech where characters kind of stumble over each other for comedic effect. It works a couple of times, but starts to get a bit old before the film is done.
It’s a good bank holiday watch, or for a rainy Sunday or something. If you’re a Gervais fan you’ve probably already seen it, and if you haven’t should probably hunt it out. For the rest of you it’s the kind of movie that’s worth watching but not busting your gut to try and find or anything.
Next up: Max Payne
I’ll say right now that I don’t jump for joy when I say the name Ricky Gervais. While he can be funny I think the guy is an arrogant prick. Basically the roles he plays, though the roles themselves are more human and vulnerable. Of course this is his public persona I’m going by, he might actually be a decent guy. ANYWAY what I’m saying is that I wasn’t particularly looking forward to this movie and the trailer didn’t make it look funny.
But it is. I wouldn’t say its hilarious, but it’s a funny little rom com type movie. Pretty predictable, nice little twist on a generic movie type. You know how its going to progress and how it will end, but it entertains you on the way there.
Gervais is somewhat toned down from full on snarky prick, his character isn’t particularly arrogant just a bit of a cynic.
Greg Kinnear’s character IS a prick, but he’s good at this kind of smooth bastard. The real good point is seeing Aasif Mandvi from The Daily Show getting to stretch some acting muscles in what is essentially a straight role. He’s a fine actor.
Another plus point. It has some opportunities for some very base gross out humour, and doesn’t take them. It would have hurt rather than helped the movie where as handling them subtly works really well. Take note, shit comedy directors. BUT it is a bit heavy on the fumbly speech where characters kind of stumble over each other for comedic effect. It works a couple of times, but starts to get a bit old before the film is done.
It’s a good bank holiday watch, or for a rainy Sunday or something. If you’re a Gervais fan you’ve probably already seen it, and if you haven’t should probably hunt it out. For the rest of you it’s the kind of movie that’s worth watching but not busting your gut to try and find or anything.
Next up: Max Payne
Monday 22 March 2010
Movie 81: Three O’Clock High
Rumours abound about the new kid in school, Buddy Revell. The all add up to him being a hard ass that doesn’t like to be touched. Jerry Mitchell, a bit of a dweeb, is tasked with writing an actual story about him for the school paper. When gives Buddy a friendly pat on the arm he’s in for a world of trouble as Buddy wants to fight him at 3pm. Jerry is having one of those days.
The film is basically about the outlandish steps that Jerry goes to to get out of the fight, the reactions of the other students, that kind of thing. It’s a John Hughes film, but not quite as good. Which is why its probably not as recognisable to most of you. It is the kind of thing we should all have watched when we were 14 or 15.
And I did. There’s two films that have stuck in my mind from late night accidental viewing from years ago. This, and another that I can’t quite remember the name of. It’s a nam film, shot like it’s a documentary crew following a squad of guys. I think it has .22 in the title. Think I found it a few years ago. I remember it being very good anyway.
This….well it isn’t VERY good but it is good. It’s hardly going to replace the Breakfast Club but the only thing that seems to have hurt it is a lack of names. Not quite a classic, but not bad for what it is.
There’s a few adults that are semi well known now. It’s got Jeffery Tambor and Mitch Pileggi in it. The main character has gone on to a shit load of TV appearances, and the bad guy seems to live in DTDVD land. He was a main character in a short lived 80’s detective show I also remember watching late at night/on video called Hardball. It lasted a season and its one of those shows no one really knows all that well but might vaguely remember. It’s possibly where I recognise him from. The guys actually really good at small expressions.
So check it out, or let the nerdy teenager you know have a look. I bought it for £3 and it wasn’t wasted.
Next up: Ghost Town
The film is basically about the outlandish steps that Jerry goes to to get out of the fight, the reactions of the other students, that kind of thing. It’s a John Hughes film, but not quite as good. Which is why its probably not as recognisable to most of you. It is the kind of thing we should all have watched when we were 14 or 15.
And I did. There’s two films that have stuck in my mind from late night accidental viewing from years ago. This, and another that I can’t quite remember the name of. It’s a nam film, shot like it’s a documentary crew following a squad of guys. I think it has .22 in the title. Think I found it a few years ago. I remember it being very good anyway.
This….well it isn’t VERY good but it is good. It’s hardly going to replace the Breakfast Club but the only thing that seems to have hurt it is a lack of names. Not quite a classic, but not bad for what it is.
There’s a few adults that are semi well known now. It’s got Jeffery Tambor and Mitch Pileggi in it. The main character has gone on to a shit load of TV appearances, and the bad guy seems to live in DTDVD land. He was a main character in a short lived 80’s detective show I also remember watching late at night/on video called Hardball. It lasted a season and its one of those shows no one really knows all that well but might vaguely remember. It’s possibly where I recognise him from. The guys actually really good at small expressions.
So check it out, or let the nerdy teenager you know have a look. I bought it for £3 and it wasn’t wasted.
Next up: Ghost Town
Sunday 21 March 2010
Movie 80: Role Models
Wheeler and Danny work for an energy drink company, pushing Minotaur to kids instead of drugs. Danny is massively disgruntled, and when his girlfriend leaves him he loses his shit and drives the Minotaur truck on to a horse statue. Instead of jail the two are offered 150 hours of community service with a Big Brother style programme. Wheeler gets a young black kid with a foul mouth and an attitude, Danny gets a massive nerd who likes LARPing. Hilarity, for once actually doth, ensue.
It really does too. I laughed a lot at this. I expected to from the trailer, but with something like this it could easily go the other way and be painfully bad. Luckily it was rather good.
I’m a geek myself, obviously. And I probably could have been close to Chris Mitz-Plasse’s Augie if someone had chucked me a foam rubber and duct tape sword. I did used to Vampire LARP actually, but it was more staid than what you see here. This is actually where the film could have gone over the line for me but while there’s a fair bit of mocking, it’s handled in the right way. And that kind of shit IS pretty good fun if you don’t take it too seriously.
This is the first film I’ve seen CMP in as I haven’t seen Superbad (I know, it’s on the list) and Kick-Ass isn’t out for a few weeks. He’s pretty much the stereotypical geek here, but he plays it well so that’s fine. Bobb’e J Thompson is the little black kid who loves boobies. He shows good range and going by his IMDB is a busy little fucker. He plays one of Tracy Jordan’s kids in 30 Rock and that’s kind of what he comes across as, a young Tracy Jordan. Though less weird.
As for the adults, well Paul Rudd is never bad. He’s always kind of the same, a cynical wise ass kinda guy. I always find him funny though. Seann William Scott is Stifler again. Well, Stifler light. At this point I’ve kind of come to the conclusion that that’s all he can actually play and I assume that’s pretty much what he’s really like. But it’s fine in the same way that Adam Sandler (who can actually stretch) is fine. When he’s toned down a bit. I like Sandler when he isn’t a shouty spaz, I like Stifler when he’s the early American Pie Stifler. That character lost it when they took him too far. Same with Scott, he’s good when it doesn’t go too far.
With the side characters I guess the most important would be Jane Lynch. Like the other adults she’s doing what she always does. She’s a hard ass who spouts somewhat confusing nonsense and is slightly threatening most of the time. I happen to enjoy that, and she was a big part in hooking me on to Glee. You want some big screen Sue, you don’t have to go much further than this.
Well worth a look if your up for a laugh. It’s predictable, it follows the “things are bad, they get better, they fall in the shitter, everyone comes together to short things out” formula note for note, but it’ll entertain you all the way. Unless your easily offended.
But if you were, you probably wouldn’t read this shit fuck blog ass now would you? Bollocks.
Well done Dave, your showing how mature 30 year olds are.
Next up: Three O’Clock High. I’m cheating with this as I did see it once and it stuck with me. But it was many moons ago and I want to see if its STILL good. I’m allowed to cheat a little, it’s not like I’m going to count Clerks and do a review. I have to watch this again after all. What do you people want from me, I’m not getting paid dammit.
It really does too. I laughed a lot at this. I expected to from the trailer, but with something like this it could easily go the other way and be painfully bad. Luckily it was rather good.
I’m a geek myself, obviously. And I probably could have been close to Chris Mitz-Plasse’s Augie if someone had chucked me a foam rubber and duct tape sword. I did used to Vampire LARP actually, but it was more staid than what you see here. This is actually where the film could have gone over the line for me but while there’s a fair bit of mocking, it’s handled in the right way. And that kind of shit IS pretty good fun if you don’t take it too seriously.
This is the first film I’ve seen CMP in as I haven’t seen Superbad (I know, it’s on the list) and Kick-Ass isn’t out for a few weeks. He’s pretty much the stereotypical geek here, but he plays it well so that’s fine. Bobb’e J Thompson is the little black kid who loves boobies. He shows good range and going by his IMDB is a busy little fucker. He plays one of Tracy Jordan’s kids in 30 Rock and that’s kind of what he comes across as, a young Tracy Jordan. Though less weird.
As for the adults, well Paul Rudd is never bad. He’s always kind of the same, a cynical wise ass kinda guy. I always find him funny though. Seann William Scott is Stifler again. Well, Stifler light. At this point I’ve kind of come to the conclusion that that’s all he can actually play and I assume that’s pretty much what he’s really like. But it’s fine in the same way that Adam Sandler (who can actually stretch) is fine. When he’s toned down a bit. I like Sandler when he isn’t a shouty spaz, I like Stifler when he’s the early American Pie Stifler. That character lost it when they took him too far. Same with Scott, he’s good when it doesn’t go too far.
With the side characters I guess the most important would be Jane Lynch. Like the other adults she’s doing what she always does. She’s a hard ass who spouts somewhat confusing nonsense and is slightly threatening most of the time. I happen to enjoy that, and she was a big part in hooking me on to Glee. You want some big screen Sue, you don’t have to go much further than this.
Well worth a look if your up for a laugh. It’s predictable, it follows the “things are bad, they get better, they fall in the shitter, everyone comes together to short things out” formula note for note, but it’ll entertain you all the way. Unless your easily offended.
But if you were, you probably wouldn’t read this shit fuck blog ass now would you? Bollocks.
Well done Dave, your showing how mature 30 year olds are.
Next up: Three O’Clock High. I’m cheating with this as I did see it once and it stuck with me. But it was many moons ago and I want to see if its STILL good. I’m allowed to cheat a little, it’s not like I’m going to count Clerks and do a review. I have to watch this again after all. What do you people want from me, I’m not getting paid dammit.
Saturday 20 March 2010
Movie 79: Righteous Kill
Someone is killing criminals that have escaped justice. Veteran cops Rooster (Pacino) and Turk (De Niro) investigate, with the help of two younger detectives (Donnie Wahlberg and Johnny Legs). The team soon realise that its someone on the job that’s doing the killings and have to find out which of their own it is.
I really enjoyed this, but it’s apparently partly because I’m an idiot as I didn’t see the twist coming a mile away like everyone else. I can be an idiot that way sometimes when I just sit down to be entertained.
And I was. What you have here is four well played cops, all seem a bit bored with the job and crack wise. And you have two cops played by two very able veteran actors teaming up together for the first time. Pacino and De Niro make damned good partners, which makes sense as they’ve been dancing around each other for a couple of decades. This is the cop or gangster equivalent of Sly and Arnie having a punch up.
Or it would be if they didn’t share a scene in Heat. And if this wasn’t derided by fans and critics alike. It is a pretty standard cop thriller when you get down to it, the kind of thing that graces our screens on a daily basis. So don’t go in expecting anything remarkable. I went in with no major expectations and I think that might be WHY this has been lambasted so much, people expected a lot from what’s a basic procedural movie.
Outside of the two masters, the young cops are damned fine too if a little under drawn. John Leguizamo is a good actor when he’s given decent material, and a shitty actor when he’s making crappy films or has an annoying character. Here he’s good. And Marky Mark might be the Wahlberg with the Oscar nod, but Donnie is possibly the superior actor. He plays good cops. Apart from this check out Saw II (haven’t seen past that so can’t speak to how he does) or the mini series Kill Point. He’s basically playing the same character here, more or less, and he plays it well. Give him a gun and a badge and he’s a good actor.
He was also in New Kids On The Block, who I was a fan off. I wasn’t one of Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch. Plus Donnie never fucked up a Planet of the Apes film, and he hasn’t sucked out loud in the last two things I saw him in. Mark has.
Yes, you can give me shit for the NKOTB thing. It was when I was a kid. No I’m not gay.
So if you go in to this with less than really high expectations and looking to enjoy an episode of Law & Order: Righteous Kill Unit you’ll like it. If you go in expecting the best cop movie ever made, you won’t. Quit all the bitching, it was entertaining enough even if I’m too dumb to see a twist coming.
Next up: Role Models
I really enjoyed this, but it’s apparently partly because I’m an idiot as I didn’t see the twist coming a mile away like everyone else. I can be an idiot that way sometimes when I just sit down to be entertained.
And I was. What you have here is four well played cops, all seem a bit bored with the job and crack wise. And you have two cops played by two very able veteran actors teaming up together for the first time. Pacino and De Niro make damned good partners, which makes sense as they’ve been dancing around each other for a couple of decades. This is the cop or gangster equivalent of Sly and Arnie having a punch up.
Or it would be if they didn’t share a scene in Heat. And if this wasn’t derided by fans and critics alike. It is a pretty standard cop thriller when you get down to it, the kind of thing that graces our screens on a daily basis. So don’t go in expecting anything remarkable. I went in with no major expectations and I think that might be WHY this has been lambasted so much, people expected a lot from what’s a basic procedural movie.
Outside of the two masters, the young cops are damned fine too if a little under drawn. John Leguizamo is a good actor when he’s given decent material, and a shitty actor when he’s making crappy films or has an annoying character. Here he’s good. And Marky Mark might be the Wahlberg with the Oscar nod, but Donnie is possibly the superior actor. He plays good cops. Apart from this check out Saw II (haven’t seen past that so can’t speak to how he does) or the mini series Kill Point. He’s basically playing the same character here, more or less, and he plays it well. Give him a gun and a badge and he’s a good actor.
He was also in New Kids On The Block, who I was a fan off. I wasn’t one of Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch. Plus Donnie never fucked up a Planet of the Apes film, and he hasn’t sucked out loud in the last two things I saw him in. Mark has.
Yes, you can give me shit for the NKOTB thing. It was when I was a kid. No I’m not gay.
So if you go in to this with less than really high expectations and looking to enjoy an episode of Law & Order: Righteous Kill Unit you’ll like it. If you go in expecting the best cop movie ever made, you won’t. Quit all the bitching, it was entertaining enough even if I’m too dumb to see a twist coming.
Next up: Role Models
Movie 78: Mad Dog And Glory
Wayne “Mad Dog” Dobie (Robert De Niro) is a timid cop with an ironic nick name who rarely draws his gun. When he’s caught up in a grocery store robbery he saves the life of Frank Milo (Bill Murray), a mobster and a stand up comic. The two become sort of friends and Frank gives Wayne Glory (Uma Thurman) for a week as a very awkward present.
This is a role reversal for the two male leads and essentially a character piece. Its also a lot more star packed now than it was at the time with the three I already mentioned and David Caruso as De Niro’s partner.
To get the tone of the movie out of the way before I talk about the performances, it has a good first half hour, a bit of a saggy middle then a very good last half hour. Unfortunately for that middle section I was wishing they’d made another movie. Mad Dog and Milo spend the night out on the piss basically. Mad Dog loves taking pictures, Milo does some stand up. They’re two guys on opposite sides who wish they were doing something else in their heart of hearts. A full on character piece with these guys would have been great, though I didn’t buy Murray as a gangster at this point, then the Glory thing kind of derails it for a while.
De Niro is very good in this, giving a discrete performance as an unremarkable cop. The relationship between him and Glory is believable and there’s one very awkward sex scene and another very realistic one. I know he’s a method actor, but I’m pretty sure it’s Jack Nicholson that’s claimed that he never faked a sex scene so I doubt he actually did it with Thurman. I wouldn’t be all that shocked if it turns out they had though. There’s a lot of little character moments for Bobby here and as expected of early 90’s De Niro he handles them well.
There’s not much to say about Uma’s Glory really. She’s good, but that’s all really. Vulnerable for the duration.
Murray really sold me after the first hour. He’s absent for quite a while and in the first Milo scenes it’s just Bill Murray really. He doesn’t have to be anything but nice. But when he has to flip that switch and be the nasty mob guy he really flips the switch. Bill Murray is fucking SCARY at times in this.
And Caruso… CSI Miami isn’t my favourite. I’m not actually a big CSI fan, but his character in that is a bit of a joke with the shades before the credits and the almost constant posing. I can only remember seeing him in two movies, this and Rambo. He’s a cop in both. And you could technically treat that as the CSI Miami characters career. He doesn’t have much to do in Rambo. Here he’s a guy who doesn’t take any shit and is a good partner. It’s actually the most likeable I’ve seen him. There’s a few lines that could have had a pause inserted then been followed with a YEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHH! But that’s the script. His performance on the whole is spot on and he’s a very enjoyable side character.
Reading the trivia they changed the characterisations of Mad Dog and Milo a bit after audience reactions which is a shame. They also added some stuff for Glory to make her more sympathetic, which I have less problems with. I’d love to see the pre-test screening version to see how Milo came out in that though as it was nice seeing Murray get a chance to stretch some nasty muscles.
Worth a look, and it only cost me a quid or two out of Morrisons.
Next up: Righteous Kill. More De Niro then.
This is a role reversal for the two male leads and essentially a character piece. Its also a lot more star packed now than it was at the time with the three I already mentioned and David Caruso as De Niro’s partner.
To get the tone of the movie out of the way before I talk about the performances, it has a good first half hour, a bit of a saggy middle then a very good last half hour. Unfortunately for that middle section I was wishing they’d made another movie. Mad Dog and Milo spend the night out on the piss basically. Mad Dog loves taking pictures, Milo does some stand up. They’re two guys on opposite sides who wish they were doing something else in their heart of hearts. A full on character piece with these guys would have been great, though I didn’t buy Murray as a gangster at this point, then the Glory thing kind of derails it for a while.
De Niro is very good in this, giving a discrete performance as an unremarkable cop. The relationship between him and Glory is believable and there’s one very awkward sex scene and another very realistic one. I know he’s a method actor, but I’m pretty sure it’s Jack Nicholson that’s claimed that he never faked a sex scene so I doubt he actually did it with Thurman. I wouldn’t be all that shocked if it turns out they had though. There’s a lot of little character moments for Bobby here and as expected of early 90’s De Niro he handles them well.
There’s not much to say about Uma’s Glory really. She’s good, but that’s all really. Vulnerable for the duration.
Murray really sold me after the first hour. He’s absent for quite a while and in the first Milo scenes it’s just Bill Murray really. He doesn’t have to be anything but nice. But when he has to flip that switch and be the nasty mob guy he really flips the switch. Bill Murray is fucking SCARY at times in this.
And Caruso… CSI Miami isn’t my favourite. I’m not actually a big CSI fan, but his character in that is a bit of a joke with the shades before the credits and the almost constant posing. I can only remember seeing him in two movies, this and Rambo. He’s a cop in both. And you could technically treat that as the CSI Miami characters career. He doesn’t have much to do in Rambo. Here he’s a guy who doesn’t take any shit and is a good partner. It’s actually the most likeable I’ve seen him. There’s a few lines that could have had a pause inserted then been followed with a YEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHH! But that’s the script. His performance on the whole is spot on and he’s a very enjoyable side character.
Reading the trivia they changed the characterisations of Mad Dog and Milo a bit after audience reactions which is a shame. They also added some stuff for Glory to make her more sympathetic, which I have less problems with. I’d love to see the pre-test screening version to see how Milo came out in that though as it was nice seeing Murray get a chance to stretch some nasty muscles.
Worth a look, and it only cost me a quid or two out of Morrisons.
Next up: Righteous Kill. More De Niro then.
Thursday 18 March 2010
Movie 77: My Bloody Valentine
There’s a mining accident and presumably to survive one man kills the others trapped with him. When he awakens 1 year later he goes on a killing spree, murdering many hospital staff and a bunch of teenagers having a party in the mine. Ten years later one of the few survivors, the mine owners son Tom (Jensen Eckles) returns to sell the mine. And the killer returns from the dead and starts striking again.
I watched this in 2D which probably hurts the film a lot. The 3D shots are pretty glaringly in 3D. Stuff is lingered on or is strangely in focus, where it would have been thrown at you from the screen. It’s a slasher flick in 3D, lots of throwing and not a lot of depth. Anywhere really.
As slasher fair its not too bad. It harkens back to the old “guy in a mask” movies with plenty of relatively creative hacking and some tits. In fact to quote the Booger from Revenge of the Nerds “BUSH, WE’VE GOT BUSH!” All the nudity is collected in one extended sequence with a woman in a motel room then a parking lot nekked for about 5 minutes, so get your fill lads.
The gore is pretty decent, very well done actually without being too detailed like in modern torture porn movies.
You may have guessed that I’m not trying to review this as if it was a proper movie btw.
There’s people who’ve been cut in half, a few pick axes through the head, that kind of malarkey. I think the fact that it was in 3D may have given them some big challenges with the CGI as one shot where a girls head is cut in half with a spade early on looks damned cheesy.
If you like the old Friday the 13th movies, you’ll no doubt like this. If not, then probably not. I enjoyed it for what it was. They make an effort to keep you guessing as to who the killer is, and I frankly think they cheated a bit with that, but its not a movie that rests on plot. There’s a lot of clunky scenes. The acting is fine and I’m a big fan of Jensen Eckles so I might be being a little too forgiving.
Actually to be fair I’m a big fan of Supernatural. It’s a bit Dean light here, he’s dressed very similarly. The biggest thing the film left me wanting was a Supernatural movie of some kind. I think the show might have been picked up for a 6th season but the 5 year arc is done now so it’s about time Hollywood, get on it!
Next up: Mad Dog And Glory
I watched this in 2D which probably hurts the film a lot. The 3D shots are pretty glaringly in 3D. Stuff is lingered on or is strangely in focus, where it would have been thrown at you from the screen. It’s a slasher flick in 3D, lots of throwing and not a lot of depth. Anywhere really.
As slasher fair its not too bad. It harkens back to the old “guy in a mask” movies with plenty of relatively creative hacking and some tits. In fact to quote the Booger from Revenge of the Nerds “BUSH, WE’VE GOT BUSH!” All the nudity is collected in one extended sequence with a woman in a motel room then a parking lot nekked for about 5 minutes, so get your fill lads.
The gore is pretty decent, very well done actually without being too detailed like in modern torture porn movies.
You may have guessed that I’m not trying to review this as if it was a proper movie btw.
There’s people who’ve been cut in half, a few pick axes through the head, that kind of malarkey. I think the fact that it was in 3D may have given them some big challenges with the CGI as one shot where a girls head is cut in half with a spade early on looks damned cheesy.
If you like the old Friday the 13th movies, you’ll no doubt like this. If not, then probably not. I enjoyed it for what it was. They make an effort to keep you guessing as to who the killer is, and I frankly think they cheated a bit with that, but its not a movie that rests on plot. There’s a lot of clunky scenes. The acting is fine and I’m a big fan of Jensen Eckles so I might be being a little too forgiving.
Actually to be fair I’m a big fan of Supernatural. It’s a bit Dean light here, he’s dressed very similarly. The biggest thing the film left me wanting was a Supernatural movie of some kind. I think the show might have been picked up for a 6th season but the 5 year arc is done now so it’s about time Hollywood, get on it!
Next up: Mad Dog And Glory
Wednesday 17 March 2010
Movie 76: My Best Friend’s Girl
Tank (Dane Cook) is a professional asshole. Men hire him to take their recent exes on a horrendous date so that they’ll reconsider them and give them a second chance. When his best friend asks him to do this for him he’s hesitant but does it. Unfortunately things go to far with the girl and he ends up falling for her.
So far so formulaic. And it is relatively formulaic. The plot does twist and turn a fair bit though so it doesn’t SEEM as conventional. It fucks with the formula in the middle, but you still know what’s probably going to happen throughout.
I had a preconceived opinion of Dane Cook going in. A little unfairly as I haven’t seen him in anything but small side parts and actually have a few of his movies on the rental list. This is the first I’ve seen him in as the lead. I figured he was an unfunny douche bag. It turns out he’s actually a funny douche bag. And not a terrible actor by a long shot.
As I said it’s a formulaic movie, and it has a couple of glaring holes in it. The transition from reel two to three (around the hour mark in human speak) feels like its been trimmed. And there’s another part 15 minutes later that has the same issue. I’ve experienced problems with writing before where you get gnarled up, bang something simple out and intend to come back and untangle it later so your not bogged down and can get the story out. This may have happened, then the writers got a phone call and forgot to fix it.
It also wastes Alec Baldwin’s character. He’s found a new home in comedy, and he’s a funny guy. He’s a bit part in this. In fact most of the characters outside of the two main leads are quite sidelined. But it’s a stupid comedy not a character piece.
Cook carries it well with a realistic performance of a complete dick who isn’t actually a complete dick and might just be buying in to his own press a bit too much. There’s some genuinely entertaining stuff in this movie and its worth a look.
Just don’t expect it to re-invent anything too dramatically. There’s only so many wheels, and as long as you bring a little something to the table its okay to use the same old spokes. I think they might run through the formula twice actually…
OH and it’s pretty light on what I’d consider gross out stuff if you’re as sick of that shit as I am. Enough people eating poop then vomiting it on grandmothers people, it’s not funny (that doesn’t happen btw, but some comedy writer will probably steal it now)
Next up: My Bloody Valentine. In 2D so it might lose a fair bit of enjoyment. Couldn’t have seen it in 3D as I don’t think my local cinema HAD 3D when it came out. Vue, just fucking excellent as always. We don’t try because you have no choice.
So far so formulaic. And it is relatively formulaic. The plot does twist and turn a fair bit though so it doesn’t SEEM as conventional. It fucks with the formula in the middle, but you still know what’s probably going to happen throughout.
I had a preconceived opinion of Dane Cook going in. A little unfairly as I haven’t seen him in anything but small side parts and actually have a few of his movies on the rental list. This is the first I’ve seen him in as the lead. I figured he was an unfunny douche bag. It turns out he’s actually a funny douche bag. And not a terrible actor by a long shot.
As I said it’s a formulaic movie, and it has a couple of glaring holes in it. The transition from reel two to three (around the hour mark in human speak) feels like its been trimmed. And there’s another part 15 minutes later that has the same issue. I’ve experienced problems with writing before where you get gnarled up, bang something simple out and intend to come back and untangle it later so your not bogged down and can get the story out. This may have happened, then the writers got a phone call and forgot to fix it.
It also wastes Alec Baldwin’s character. He’s found a new home in comedy, and he’s a funny guy. He’s a bit part in this. In fact most of the characters outside of the two main leads are quite sidelined. But it’s a stupid comedy not a character piece.
Cook carries it well with a realistic performance of a complete dick who isn’t actually a complete dick and might just be buying in to his own press a bit too much. There’s some genuinely entertaining stuff in this movie and its worth a look.
Just don’t expect it to re-invent anything too dramatically. There’s only so many wheels, and as long as you bring a little something to the table its okay to use the same old spokes. I think they might run through the formula twice actually…
OH and it’s pretty light on what I’d consider gross out stuff if you’re as sick of that shit as I am. Enough people eating poop then vomiting it on grandmothers people, it’s not funny (that doesn’t happen btw, but some comedy writer will probably steal it now)
Next up: My Bloody Valentine. In 2D so it might lose a fair bit of enjoyment. Couldn’t have seen it in 3D as I don’t think my local cinema HAD 3D when it came out. Vue, just fucking excellent as always. We don’t try because you have no choice.
Tuesday 16 March 2010
Movie 75: Bedtime Stories
Skeeter Bronson (Adam Sandler) is a hotel handyman who SHOULD be running the hotel if the owner had kept a promise he made to his father, but isn’t. Instead his arch rival is offered the job. Stuck looking after his niece and nephew, Skeeter tells them a bedtime story like his dad used to tell him. The story contains allegories for people in the real world, and some stuff he wishes would happen. When the events of the story appear to come true, including a rain of gumdrops, Skeeter tries to steer his life using the magical power of the stories.
It’s actually better than it sounds, for the most part. Or not quite as good as it sounds depending on your point of view.
Adam Sandler is generally a bit hit or miss for me. When he tones it down he’s pretty damned good, when he plays full on spaz it’s awful. This is for the most part toned down. He’s the goofy uncle, so a bit of spazzy kind of fits. And the fantasy sequences have input from the kids so they would be a bit stupid.
The best move they made here, though that goes away towards the end, is keeping it ambiguous as to whether the stories actually ARE having some kind of magical influence on his life. The parallels, at least the most outlandish ones like the gumball rain, have quite practical reasons for existing in the real world. The gumballs are because of a truck spilling its load. And Skeeters reaction to it all is realistic too in a world where we’ve all watched a bunch of movies with stuff like this happening in them.
It TOTALLY loses it in the last 25 minutes unfortunately. Until then the story progression is well paced. There’s a fourth wall smashing moment and then a long “everything works out” sequence. Bit disappointing, but it will be perfectly fine for the target audience which is young to pre-teen kids.
They’ll no doubt love this and there’s enough to keep the parents happy too. Nothing is really hugely annoying, even Buggy the guinea pig who seemed like a bad idea but ends out kinda cute.
It’s far from an amazing family film, but it is a good one and worth a look if you have kids. Or a niece or nephew that you have to keep entertained for a bit.
Next up: My Best Friend’s Girl
It’s actually better than it sounds, for the most part. Or not quite as good as it sounds depending on your point of view.
Adam Sandler is generally a bit hit or miss for me. When he tones it down he’s pretty damned good, when he plays full on spaz it’s awful. This is for the most part toned down. He’s the goofy uncle, so a bit of spazzy kind of fits. And the fantasy sequences have input from the kids so they would be a bit stupid.
The best move they made here, though that goes away towards the end, is keeping it ambiguous as to whether the stories actually ARE having some kind of magical influence on his life. The parallels, at least the most outlandish ones like the gumball rain, have quite practical reasons for existing in the real world. The gumballs are because of a truck spilling its load. And Skeeters reaction to it all is realistic too in a world where we’ve all watched a bunch of movies with stuff like this happening in them.
It TOTALLY loses it in the last 25 minutes unfortunately. Until then the story progression is well paced. There’s a fourth wall smashing moment and then a long “everything works out” sequence. Bit disappointing, but it will be perfectly fine for the target audience which is young to pre-teen kids.
They’ll no doubt love this and there’s enough to keep the parents happy too. Nothing is really hugely annoying, even Buggy the guinea pig who seemed like a bad idea but ends out kinda cute.
It’s far from an amazing family film, but it is a good one and worth a look if you have kids. Or a niece or nephew that you have to keep entertained for a bit.
Next up: My Best Friend’s Girl
Monday 15 March 2010
Movie 74: Surveillance
Two FBI agents arrive in town investigating a serial killer case. They interview 3 witnesses, a drugged out skank, a cop and a little girl to see what happened. This is the story of the lead up, the accident and the follow up.
It’s billed as a horror but it’s actually more of a black comedy. A very black comedy for the most part. Also a fair bit of a character piece. It isn’t all that scary though, maybe tense at a few moments.
And it works for a lot of the time. The skank and her druggy boyfriends story is a bit edgy, just a bit, and has its funny moments.
Hugh “Ed from Flashpoint” Dillon and his families typical ish family vacation story line is pretty good. It’s nice to see him in some movie stuff, even if it is basically small indy fair that few will see. Unfortunately it’s a bit of miss casting though as when they are being bullied by the cops it’s a bit unbelievable. He’s a big guy, bit of a Willis type or maybe a young Michael Ironside, so he should have been able to take the guy.
The two cops are raging arseholes. Obviously bored as hell they shoot out someone’s tyre, then pull them over and torment them in horrible horrible ways. Psychologically. And its all for shits and giggles. This is where the black part of the comedy comes in. Imagine the meow scene from Super Troopers, but the cops are making you suck a gun while they do it. That’s funny to these guys.
It’s all intercut so you see bits of the story with interview pieces in between. Judging by the way that the cops from the station act the two that shoot out tires aren’t exact stand out weird for this station.
What could have been quite a decent, if predictable, film is let down a bit by the fact that it never really manages to find a steady tone. The last 25 minutes are dragged out as well and the performances fall apart a bit there. It also woefully under uses Michael Ironside who’s probably the main reason I stuck this on my “want to watch” list as I’ll watch any piece of shit with that guy in it.
The one stand out of the picture is Ryan Simpkins, the cute little blonde girl. Everyone is fine in this, she’s a bit better than fine and could have a meaty career ahead of her. For a few years anyway.
Not great, not terrible. There’s worse ways to spend 90 minutes
Next up: Bedtime Stories
It’s billed as a horror but it’s actually more of a black comedy. A very black comedy for the most part. Also a fair bit of a character piece. It isn’t all that scary though, maybe tense at a few moments.
And it works for a lot of the time. The skank and her druggy boyfriends story is a bit edgy, just a bit, and has its funny moments.
Hugh “Ed from Flashpoint” Dillon and his families typical ish family vacation story line is pretty good. It’s nice to see him in some movie stuff, even if it is basically small indy fair that few will see. Unfortunately it’s a bit of miss casting though as when they are being bullied by the cops it’s a bit unbelievable. He’s a big guy, bit of a Willis type or maybe a young Michael Ironside, so he should have been able to take the guy.
The two cops are raging arseholes. Obviously bored as hell they shoot out someone’s tyre, then pull them over and torment them in horrible horrible ways. Psychologically. And its all for shits and giggles. This is where the black part of the comedy comes in. Imagine the meow scene from Super Troopers, but the cops are making you suck a gun while they do it. That’s funny to these guys.
It’s all intercut so you see bits of the story with interview pieces in between. Judging by the way that the cops from the station act the two that shoot out tires aren’t exact stand out weird for this station.
What could have been quite a decent, if predictable, film is let down a bit by the fact that it never really manages to find a steady tone. The last 25 minutes are dragged out as well and the performances fall apart a bit there. It also woefully under uses Michael Ironside who’s probably the main reason I stuck this on my “want to watch” list as I’ll watch any piece of shit with that guy in it.
The one stand out of the picture is Ryan Simpkins, the cute little blonde girl. Everyone is fine in this, she’s a bit better than fine and could have a meaty career ahead of her. For a few years anyway.
Not great, not terrible. There’s worse ways to spend 90 minutes
Next up: Bedtime Stories
Sunday 14 March 2010
Movie 73: Step Brothers
Two doctors meet at a convention, they hit it off and get married. They both have sons that still live at home and are around 40. When they move in together these two guys have a hard time getting along. Hilarity ensues.
Well, it didn’t for me. Apparently it did for many others (a Facebook status saying this was shit got a fair bit of ire, a conversation on the bus with my gf had her completely agreeing with me on the shitness and the one funny bit) so maybe take this with a pinch of salt.
I will say that me not liking this didn’t have anything to do with any personal problem with the set up. I’m 30, on the day of publishing strangely enough, and I still live with my mum. It’s purely for financial reasons, though I guess if it was a shittier living arrangement I’d live in near squalor at my own place instead. Many people are in the same kind of situation now. 10 years ago these guys could have been 30 instead of 40 and it might have worked a bit better.
The problem I had was that they’re billed as losers. THAT in and of itself is perfectly fine. They are. They can’t hold down or get a job. The problem is that there’s a difference between being a slacker or a loser and being border line, if not actually, retarded which is how the characters come across. Even simple stuff like them having a beer with dinner might have helped, but they drink soda as if they were 8. I’ve never seen losers portrayed as childishly as the dudes in this film.
Essentially it looks like a very standard comedy was written with two young boys, somewhere between 8 and 14, having trouble dealing with their parents getting remarried and moving in together. No one would make it as it wasn’t all that funny. So they changed the ages on the script, threw in some more swears and a bit of plot about getting your life together, then didn’t change anything else. Cause that’s funny right?
It wasn’t. Not for me anyway. I’ve always found Will Ferrell to be hit or miss, and this missed as far as I’m concerned. Same goes for John C Reilly. And there aren’t any likeable side characters either. The dick brother is actually a full on dick head. His wife is weird as fuck. The parents are fine, but they must still be in that film with the 8-14 year olds as they don’t react the way they should most of the time.
The one funny bit comes in the credits. This is a spoiler but who the fuck cares. John C Reilly’s character is regularly bullied by some kids in a local park (yeah, that makes lots of sense. That IS a little funny btw, but plays on the retarded angle again). The two of them are beaten up in an earlier scene including poop, hahahahaha. In the credits the now successful (which happens easily for them so why the fuck didn’t it happen earlier) guys turn up in a helicopter and beat the shit out of the kids. It’s a bit like the end of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and it is pretty funny.
Unfortunately I had to sit through 90 minutes of balls to get there.
Next up: Surveillance
Well, it didn’t for me. Apparently it did for many others (a Facebook status saying this was shit got a fair bit of ire, a conversation on the bus with my gf had her completely agreeing with me on the shitness and the one funny bit) so maybe take this with a pinch of salt.
I will say that me not liking this didn’t have anything to do with any personal problem with the set up. I’m 30, on the day of publishing strangely enough, and I still live with my mum. It’s purely for financial reasons, though I guess if it was a shittier living arrangement I’d live in near squalor at my own place instead. Many people are in the same kind of situation now. 10 years ago these guys could have been 30 instead of 40 and it might have worked a bit better.
The problem I had was that they’re billed as losers. THAT in and of itself is perfectly fine. They are. They can’t hold down or get a job. The problem is that there’s a difference between being a slacker or a loser and being border line, if not actually, retarded which is how the characters come across. Even simple stuff like them having a beer with dinner might have helped, but they drink soda as if they were 8. I’ve never seen losers portrayed as childishly as the dudes in this film.
Essentially it looks like a very standard comedy was written with two young boys, somewhere between 8 and 14, having trouble dealing with their parents getting remarried and moving in together. No one would make it as it wasn’t all that funny. So they changed the ages on the script, threw in some more swears and a bit of plot about getting your life together, then didn’t change anything else. Cause that’s funny right?
It wasn’t. Not for me anyway. I’ve always found Will Ferrell to be hit or miss, and this missed as far as I’m concerned. Same goes for John C Reilly. And there aren’t any likeable side characters either. The dick brother is actually a full on dick head. His wife is weird as fuck. The parents are fine, but they must still be in that film with the 8-14 year olds as they don’t react the way they should most of the time.
The one funny bit comes in the credits. This is a spoiler but who the fuck cares. John C Reilly’s character is regularly bullied by some kids in a local park (yeah, that makes lots of sense. That IS a little funny btw, but plays on the retarded angle again). The two of them are beaten up in an earlier scene including poop, hahahahaha. In the credits the now successful (which happens easily for them so why the fuck didn’t it happen earlier) guys turn up in a helicopter and beat the shit out of the kids. It’s a bit like the end of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and it is pretty funny.
Unfortunately I had to sit through 90 minutes of balls to get there.
Next up: Surveillance
Saturday 13 March 2010
Movie 72: Live!
The, well pretty sure it’s the present actually. This is a mockumentary following a studio program director trying to get a Russian Roulette reality show on the air, and the show itself.
What should be a damning black comedy about reality TV, the things people will do for fame and to get on TV, and how heartless networks can be. It falls a bit short of all that for a few reasons.
The good first though. A fair few of the cast members are decent actors. I’m always happy to see Jeffery Dean “Papa Winchester” Morgan in something, though he’s woefully underused here. David “Mr Universe” Krumholtz is generally good, and he has a hefty role in this as the documentary maker. And the shows contestants manage the job of mocking reality to an extent. You have a wannabe actress, a pretentious artist, an extreme sports nut and a few regular types. All bar one, Morgan’s Rick, who are basically up for shooting themselves for pretty shallow reasons.
The show is immensely popular which is also a good bit for what it set out to do, but pretty obvious. And the fact that no one at the network seems bothered about what the consequences are and just worry about ratings and advertisers seems well done.
It’s majorly let down by it’s lead actress though. Eva Mendes doesn’t have the chops to carry something like this. She’s really quite unbelievable in the role of a programme director. Plus the fact that she is so involved in making the show is a misunderstanding of what ones does. She should be a producer if anything. Heads of programming don’t MAKE shows. That’s a niggle I suppose.
The script also thinks it’s smarter than it actually is, with people spouting what should be intelligent dialogue but actually sounds like people saying things they don’t really understand. Like a child laughing at a double entendre because the adults are laughing. I say people, but its mainly Mendes’ character. Not really her failing though, I believe that one sits squarely with the writers. The jump from current reality programming to someone killing themselves on the air isn’t believable either. They go from a Russian show where you have to avoid the police in a stolen car to this. There should have been a more logical progression.
It also left a few questions un-answered for me. This is a bit spoilery so I’ll just say its worth a look but not searching for if you don’t want spoiled.
What happens if the first person shoots themselves in the head? Your shows over. And MORE importantly what happens if you get through the first five contestant and there’s no loser? Does the 6th person HAVE to shoot themselves? If this was my movie I’d have had it get to this point, have the crowd baying for blood and have Mendes come out as the voice of reason (finally) then end with her shooting herself. Shocking ending, much more damning than what actually happens which I won’t bother telling you about.
Short of the mark then, but not too shabby.
Next up: Step Brothers
What should be a damning black comedy about reality TV, the things people will do for fame and to get on TV, and how heartless networks can be. It falls a bit short of all that for a few reasons.
The good first though. A fair few of the cast members are decent actors. I’m always happy to see Jeffery Dean “Papa Winchester” Morgan in something, though he’s woefully underused here. David “Mr Universe” Krumholtz is generally good, and he has a hefty role in this as the documentary maker. And the shows contestants manage the job of mocking reality to an extent. You have a wannabe actress, a pretentious artist, an extreme sports nut and a few regular types. All bar one, Morgan’s Rick, who are basically up for shooting themselves for pretty shallow reasons.
The show is immensely popular which is also a good bit for what it set out to do, but pretty obvious. And the fact that no one at the network seems bothered about what the consequences are and just worry about ratings and advertisers seems well done.
It’s majorly let down by it’s lead actress though. Eva Mendes doesn’t have the chops to carry something like this. She’s really quite unbelievable in the role of a programme director. Plus the fact that she is so involved in making the show is a misunderstanding of what ones does. She should be a producer if anything. Heads of programming don’t MAKE shows. That’s a niggle I suppose.
The script also thinks it’s smarter than it actually is, with people spouting what should be intelligent dialogue but actually sounds like people saying things they don’t really understand. Like a child laughing at a double entendre because the adults are laughing. I say people, but its mainly Mendes’ character. Not really her failing though, I believe that one sits squarely with the writers. The jump from current reality programming to someone killing themselves on the air isn’t believable either. They go from a Russian show where you have to avoid the police in a stolen car to this. There should have been a more logical progression.
It also left a few questions un-answered for me. This is a bit spoilery so I’ll just say its worth a look but not searching for if you don’t want spoiled.
What happens if the first person shoots themselves in the head? Your shows over. And MORE importantly what happens if you get through the first five contestant and there’s no loser? Does the 6th person HAVE to shoot themselves? If this was my movie I’d have had it get to this point, have the crowd baying for blood and have Mendes come out as the voice of reason (finally) then end with her shooting herself. Shocking ending, much more damning than what actually happens which I won’t bother telling you about.
Short of the mark then, but not too shabby.
Next up: Step Brothers
Friday 12 March 2010
Movie 71: Green Street 2: Stand Your Ground
Some members of the GSE were banged up after the end of the last film, and find themselves transferred to a prison with their Millwall (I think) rivals. The bad guys are teamed up with a corrupt screw who makes hell for our…ahem…heroes. A decent guard tries to help them out, as does some Russian mafia (again I think) members who compete with them for business.
A direct to DVD sequel that doesn’t feature the main characters from the first film? Bound to be awesome. Apparently the characters in this were part of the original crew. At one point they recount a bit of the first film so I’ll take their word for it as I can’t really remember.
This wouldn’t be that bad a film if the script didn’t sound like it was written by a 16 year old. Guys acting all hard and saying cunt every 5 words does not a good script make. Also if you worry that there hasn’t been a fight scene for 3 minutes just wait an extra minute and one will turn up. If you like seeing idiots hit each other a lot this is the film for you. In 90 minutes there must be 6287613 fights.
Well I say fights. The majority of the time its one guy hitting another guy while he takes the beating, then maybe hits back. And a few times its really hard to see who is who as one bald idiot with a goatee looks like another one.
This also features probably the least subtle corrupt prison officer you will ever see in a film. Marina Siritis, yes Councillor Troi from Star Trek, plays a woman guard who swears a lot and gets people hit in front of cameras a lot. Her character doesn’t even try to be subtle about being a bitch. And I’d say her scenes are among the worst.
It’s not really her fault though. In fact its not really most of the actors faults, they all do a decent enough job with what they’re given but its so badly written that it doesn’t matter. There’s moments, but it’s just moments. The best characters are the Russians and they are under used.
It also has a pretty good old school punk soundtrack. The problem is that the punk tunes appear at random and for no real purpose. I’d skip the movie and try and find the sound track if you like head bangy stompy punk music.
I didn’t expect much and I got pretty much what I expected. It’s actually a bit better than I set myself up for, but not by much.
Next up: Live!
A direct to DVD sequel that doesn’t feature the main characters from the first film? Bound to be awesome. Apparently the characters in this were part of the original crew. At one point they recount a bit of the first film so I’ll take their word for it as I can’t really remember.
This wouldn’t be that bad a film if the script didn’t sound like it was written by a 16 year old. Guys acting all hard and saying cunt every 5 words does not a good script make. Also if you worry that there hasn’t been a fight scene for 3 minutes just wait an extra minute and one will turn up. If you like seeing idiots hit each other a lot this is the film for you. In 90 minutes there must be 6287613 fights.
Well I say fights. The majority of the time its one guy hitting another guy while he takes the beating, then maybe hits back. And a few times its really hard to see who is who as one bald idiot with a goatee looks like another one.
This also features probably the least subtle corrupt prison officer you will ever see in a film. Marina Siritis, yes Councillor Troi from Star Trek, plays a woman guard who swears a lot and gets people hit in front of cameras a lot. Her character doesn’t even try to be subtle about being a bitch. And I’d say her scenes are among the worst.
It’s not really her fault though. In fact its not really most of the actors faults, they all do a decent enough job with what they’re given but its so badly written that it doesn’t matter. There’s moments, but it’s just moments. The best characters are the Russians and they are under used.
It also has a pretty good old school punk soundtrack. The problem is that the punk tunes appear at random and for no real purpose. I’d skip the movie and try and find the sound track if you like head bangy stompy punk music.
I didn’t expect much and I got pretty much what I expected. It’s actually a bit better than I set myself up for, but not by much.
Next up: Live!
Thursday 11 March 2010
Movie 70: Pink Panther 2
Steve Martin returns as Inspector Jacques Clouseau. An international dream team of detectives is formed to try and catch a master thief, The Tornado, who is stealing priceless artefacts from around the world including the pink panther diamond. Clouseau is chosen to represent France as it’s top detective after the events of the first movie. For some reason.
I’m going to say something I didn’t think I’d say now. I’d welcome a Pink Panther 3.
I can remember laughing once during the first film, and only wance. The hamburger scene. You can search on You Tube if you haven’t seen it. That was genuinely funny. The rest of the film was pretty damned awful. This……wasn’t.
I may have been an easier audience this time. It might be because I had low expectations and expected to hate it. But it has plenty of laughs. This isn’t the common consensus but comedy is subjective.
It’s not overly clever, I worked out any twists before they happened. The humour is generally broad slapstick. And the weak point of the film is still Martin’s overly hammed Clouseau, the worst scenes are when he has to completely carry them, but it’s a VAST improvement over the first.
I don’t have any particular fondness for the originals btw. I don’t think I’ve seen a whole Pink Panther movie, which I know is a shame. I do like Sellers a lot. I did watch a fair few of the Rinky Dink Panther’s cartoon shows and seem to remember liking them. So if you’re a big fan of the old ones the deep abiding hatred might still be there for this as I doubt it’s on par.
There’s some decent slapstick, some alright verbal humour, John Cleese being funny John Cleese, and comedy foils Alfred Molina and Andy Garcia doing a great job at being more or less straight men (the sparing between Clouseau and Garcia’s Vicenzo does provide a few of the laughs though). It’s a not bad film. Not amazing, but not bad.
I doubt you have to suffer the first, just watch the amburgarrrrrrrr scene, to get the deal with this one. Though I will admit I could be wrong on this one.
Next up: Green Street 2. Heard that’s meant to be shite too.
I’m going to say something I didn’t think I’d say now. I’d welcome a Pink Panther 3.
I can remember laughing once during the first film, and only wance. The hamburger scene. You can search on You Tube if you haven’t seen it. That was genuinely funny. The rest of the film was pretty damned awful. This……wasn’t.
I may have been an easier audience this time. It might be because I had low expectations and expected to hate it. But it has plenty of laughs. This isn’t the common consensus but comedy is subjective.
It’s not overly clever, I worked out any twists before they happened. The humour is generally broad slapstick. And the weak point of the film is still Martin’s overly hammed Clouseau, the worst scenes are when he has to completely carry them, but it’s a VAST improvement over the first.
I don’t have any particular fondness for the originals btw. I don’t think I’ve seen a whole Pink Panther movie, which I know is a shame. I do like Sellers a lot. I did watch a fair few of the Rinky Dink Panther’s cartoon shows and seem to remember liking them. So if you’re a big fan of the old ones the deep abiding hatred might still be there for this as I doubt it’s on par.
There’s some decent slapstick, some alright verbal humour, John Cleese being funny John Cleese, and comedy foils Alfred Molina and Andy Garcia doing a great job at being more or less straight men (the sparing between Clouseau and Garcia’s Vicenzo does provide a few of the laughs though). It’s a not bad film. Not amazing, but not bad.
I doubt you have to suffer the first, just watch the amburgarrrrrrrr scene, to get the deal with this one. Though I will admit I could be wrong on this one.
Next up: Green Street 2. Heard that’s meant to be shite too.
Wednesday 10 March 2010
Movie 69: The Librarian: The Curse Of The Judas Chalice
In the third film in the TV adventure serious Flynn has had enough and is near nervous breakdown. His girlfriend has left him and he’s just generally on edge, so gets some vacation time. After having a strange dream he heads to New Orleans on vacation and ends up embroiled in the hunt for another mythical artefact. Some people just can’t get a break from work. Ask Jessica Fletcher.
You’d think it would be a case of diminishing returns but that’s not…uh the case. Bad sentence that. This is actually an improvement on the second and possibly the first film.
Instead of the globe hoping adventure of King Solomon the action takes us to the Big Easy and that’s it. Ordinarily this would mean a whole butt load of voodoo and nothing much else. Refreshingly there’s only a tiny touch of voodoo, and even that barely impacts on the story. What we have here is a vampire story.
Classic vampires too. Scared of crosses, staked by Aspen, came from Judas. The bad guys of the film are a group of Russians who want the good old cold war days back and plan to resurrect ol’ Vlad the Impaler to help them do it. The Judas Chalice is the vampire version of the Holy Grail so Flynn has to beat them to it. Strangely enough, with the help of a vampire.
And it’s a good vampire movie. A PG one sure, but with well rounded characters that stick to the mythos that they set up.
This is aided by having a damned fine side cast. The love interest/assistant of this movie is played ably by Stana Katic, the female lead from Castle. A very good actress. Bruce Davison (senator Kelly in the X-Men films, one of the best bits of the recent Knight Rider series and a whole lot of other stuff) has an important supporting role that I won’t go in to too much. Both have surprisingly non-cheesy accents.
The Russian bad guys are pretty generic Russian bad guys, but not in a terrible way. And a stand out is Flynn’s guide who unfortunately I can’t find on IMDB. He’s a happy Creole taxi driver who has a million “cousins” who can help out with pretty much anything you could want or need. A little light comic relief and Nawlins flavour.
Flynn himself is a bit like Peter Parker when he doesn’t want to be Spider-Man here. He’s sick of the library and being a librarian, but finds his purpose again and cheers up. He’s not as mopey as I’m making him sound, but there are some actual genuine tender moments here.
Some good holiday weekend entertainment then. I don’t know if you’d HAVE to see the first two, but they expand on the established universe a bit too and I doubt you’d be lost.
Next up: (God help me) Pink Panther 2. The Steve Martin one. Merde.
You’d think it would be a case of diminishing returns but that’s not…uh the case. Bad sentence that. This is actually an improvement on the second and possibly the first film.
Instead of the globe hoping adventure of King Solomon the action takes us to the Big Easy and that’s it. Ordinarily this would mean a whole butt load of voodoo and nothing much else. Refreshingly there’s only a tiny touch of voodoo, and even that barely impacts on the story. What we have here is a vampire story.
Classic vampires too. Scared of crosses, staked by Aspen, came from Judas. The bad guys of the film are a group of Russians who want the good old cold war days back and plan to resurrect ol’ Vlad the Impaler to help them do it. The Judas Chalice is the vampire version of the Holy Grail so Flynn has to beat them to it. Strangely enough, with the help of a vampire.
And it’s a good vampire movie. A PG one sure, but with well rounded characters that stick to the mythos that they set up.
This is aided by having a damned fine side cast. The love interest/assistant of this movie is played ably by Stana Katic, the female lead from Castle. A very good actress. Bruce Davison (senator Kelly in the X-Men films, one of the best bits of the recent Knight Rider series and a whole lot of other stuff) has an important supporting role that I won’t go in to too much. Both have surprisingly non-cheesy accents.
The Russian bad guys are pretty generic Russian bad guys, but not in a terrible way. And a stand out is Flynn’s guide who unfortunately I can’t find on IMDB. He’s a happy Creole taxi driver who has a million “cousins” who can help out with pretty much anything you could want or need. A little light comic relief and Nawlins flavour.
Flynn himself is a bit like Peter Parker when he doesn’t want to be Spider-Man here. He’s sick of the library and being a librarian, but finds his purpose again and cheers up. He’s not as mopey as I’m making him sound, but there are some actual genuine tender moments here.
Some good holiday weekend entertainment then. I don’t know if you’d HAVE to see the first two, but they expand on the established universe a bit too and I doubt you’d be lost.
Next up: (God help me) Pink Panther 2. The Steve Martin one. Merde.
Tuesday 9 March 2010
Movie 68: The Librarian: Return To King Solomon’s Mines
This is a sequel and a TV movie so I’ll recap the premise a bit too.
Flynn Carsen is a bookish young man, a professional student, with 22 degrees. He gets a job for the Metropolitan Public Library and its not all it seems. The Librarian doesn’t just stack books, he’s tasked with finding and protecting ancient powerful artefacts. So it’s like Indiana Jones meets Warehouse 13.
In the first instalment it’s the Spear of Destiny. In the second film it’s a hunt for King Solomon’s Mines to protect its secrets and find the book of Solomon. In an added twist Flynn already has a connection to the secret via his father. He’s aided by Emily Davenport, played by Fiona from Burn Notice.
The series is cheesy as hell, but I find them quite entertaining. This is a bit of a step down from the first one but still relatively decent. Your looking at mainly actors who are on hiatus from TV shows or are regular guest stars all over the place, cheap and cheerful CGI and thrown together fight scenes
Nothing remarkable then. In fact it does sort of come across as a fan film to Indy. The start of the movie finds Flynn on another mission and it’s to find the Crystal Skull. These 10 minutes are actually possibly a little better than the 4th Jones movie. Their treatment of the skull mythology is anyway, at least it’s a bloody HUMAN skull this time.
I’m pretty sure TNT made these as family adventures too, and this is enough to keep the kids entertained on a public holiday for a couple of hours. Flynn, a bit like Macgyver, uses his book learning to help himself out of some tricky spots but not quite as much as I would have liked. The script didn’t seem to be as smart as it wanted to be and they might have gone for too big a story.
And Jonathan Frakes shoots it’s adequately, he’s a good TV director.
If you see the first one The Librarian: The Quest For The Spear on the telly then give it a look. If you like it, you’ll probably like this. And I’ll be rounding out the so far trilogy tomorrow as
Next up: The Librarian: The Curse Of The Judas Chalice
They seem to come along every 2 years so maybe there’ll be another one before 10 is done. However, wikipedia indicates that it was headed for theatres last year but there’s nothing since and I can’t remember hearing anything about that. As you can see they stick to the biblical themes, just like the Indy series. Hopefully they’ll keep that up if they do make another one as we saw what happened when they made a change there
Flynn Carsen is a bookish young man, a professional student, with 22 degrees. He gets a job for the Metropolitan Public Library and its not all it seems. The Librarian doesn’t just stack books, he’s tasked with finding and protecting ancient powerful artefacts. So it’s like Indiana Jones meets Warehouse 13.
In the first instalment it’s the Spear of Destiny. In the second film it’s a hunt for King Solomon’s Mines to protect its secrets and find the book of Solomon. In an added twist Flynn already has a connection to the secret via his father. He’s aided by Emily Davenport, played by Fiona from Burn Notice.
The series is cheesy as hell, but I find them quite entertaining. This is a bit of a step down from the first one but still relatively decent. Your looking at mainly actors who are on hiatus from TV shows or are regular guest stars all over the place, cheap and cheerful CGI and thrown together fight scenes
Nothing remarkable then. In fact it does sort of come across as a fan film to Indy. The start of the movie finds Flynn on another mission and it’s to find the Crystal Skull. These 10 minutes are actually possibly a little better than the 4th Jones movie. Their treatment of the skull mythology is anyway, at least it’s a bloody HUMAN skull this time.
I’m pretty sure TNT made these as family adventures too, and this is enough to keep the kids entertained on a public holiday for a couple of hours. Flynn, a bit like Macgyver, uses his book learning to help himself out of some tricky spots but not quite as much as I would have liked. The script didn’t seem to be as smart as it wanted to be and they might have gone for too big a story.
And Jonathan Frakes shoots it’s adequately, he’s a good TV director.
If you see the first one The Librarian: The Quest For The Spear on the telly then give it a look. If you like it, you’ll probably like this. And I’ll be rounding out the so far trilogy tomorrow as
Next up: The Librarian: The Curse Of The Judas Chalice
They seem to come along every 2 years so maybe there’ll be another one before 10 is done. However, wikipedia indicates that it was headed for theatres last year but there’s nothing since and I can’t remember hearing anything about that. As you can see they stick to the biblical themes, just like the Indy series. Hopefully they’ll keep that up if they do make another one as we saw what happened when they made a change there
Monday 8 March 2010
Movie 67: Cloverfield
Rob is leaving for Japan as he has a new job. His friends are throwing a surprise party for him, and documenting it on video. The a giant monster attacks the city and they have to try and survive
Another in the “found footage shakycam” genre, though this is the only monster movie entry as far as I’m aware, it could quite easily have been called ipecac the movie. Image walking in to the theatre to see the new Godzilla film, then the guy behind you decides to shake your seat constantly for the whole thing. Plus there are periodic earthquakes. THAT is Cloverfield.
It’s a brilliant idea, see what a monster movie is like from a normal persons point of view as if you were there, but it’s so damned shaky. I actually stopped watching about 30-45 minutes in because I felt sick. It could have been that I’m just feeling a bit dodgy today, but I felt okay until then.
I am a bit delicate when it comes to this stuff. I can’t really play FPS games any more after an incident with Half Life. It autosaves, and there’s one bit where I had to drop down a hole and land in a pool of water. If you miss the pool you die. It saved right at the drop point, so over and over again I had to watch a spinning death. I had to step away from the PC for a bit as I was very very dizzy. I did manage to continue, but I couldn’t play for very long after that.
Cloverfield is similar at times.
The acting is fine enough though I didn’t really care about the characters much even though they did make some effort to set it up. The monster looked ridiculous and JJ Abrams should have tried to secure some Godzilla rights. The influence of Godzilla, the originals, is pretty obvious as the monster eats people and the army are more or less powerless to stop it. Plus the music over the end credits has a very Japanese monster movie feel and the only other famous city smashing monster I can think of is Gomorra. That’s probably why what looked like an asian guy babbles incoherently at them at one point too.
If shaky cam is likely to make you puke, don’t bother watching the film. If it isn’t then check it out as it is pretty enjoyable. I would like some kind of sequel to this, maybe one that’s not as mental camera wise, to find out a few unexplained things. Maybe a United 93 style drama that shows how the government is responding and the action could be on TVs only. I’d really like to know why being bitten makes you explode for one thing….
Next up: The Librarian: Return To King Solomon’s Mines
Another in the “found footage shakycam” genre, though this is the only monster movie entry as far as I’m aware, it could quite easily have been called ipecac the movie. Image walking in to the theatre to see the new Godzilla film, then the guy behind you decides to shake your seat constantly for the whole thing. Plus there are periodic earthquakes. THAT is Cloverfield.
It’s a brilliant idea, see what a monster movie is like from a normal persons point of view as if you were there, but it’s so damned shaky. I actually stopped watching about 30-45 minutes in because I felt sick. It could have been that I’m just feeling a bit dodgy today, but I felt okay until then.
I am a bit delicate when it comes to this stuff. I can’t really play FPS games any more after an incident with Half Life. It autosaves, and there’s one bit where I had to drop down a hole and land in a pool of water. If you miss the pool you die. It saved right at the drop point, so over and over again I had to watch a spinning death. I had to step away from the PC for a bit as I was very very dizzy. I did manage to continue, but I couldn’t play for very long after that.
Cloverfield is similar at times.
The acting is fine enough though I didn’t really care about the characters much even though they did make some effort to set it up. The monster looked ridiculous and JJ Abrams should have tried to secure some Godzilla rights. The influence of Godzilla, the originals, is pretty obvious as the monster eats people and the army are more or less powerless to stop it. Plus the music over the end credits has a very Japanese monster movie feel and the only other famous city smashing monster I can think of is Gomorra. That’s probably why what looked like an asian guy babbles incoherently at them at one point too.
If shaky cam is likely to make you puke, don’t bother watching the film. If it isn’t then check it out as it is pretty enjoyable. I would like some kind of sequel to this, maybe one that’s not as mental camera wise, to find out a few unexplained things. Maybe a United 93 style drama that shows how the government is responding and the action could be on TVs only. I’d really like to know why being bitten makes you explode for one thing….
Next up: The Librarian: Return To King Solomon’s Mines
Macgyver’s Oscar Round Up
Like I said in my last post, I didn’t end up watching the ceremony. I slept instead. Lots. Anyway, lets see how I did
Actor In a Leading Role – Jeff Bridges - Got it!
Actor In A Supporting Role – Christoph Waltz - Got it!
Actress In A Leading Role – Sandra Bullok - Missed it. Oscar was wrong on this one frankly
Actress In A Supporting Role – Mo’Nique - Got it!
Animated Feature Film – Up - Missed it. Up was my second choice though so I’m fine with this
Art Direction – Avatar - Missed it. I may have misunderstood the role of an art director though and Avatar is deserving of technical Oscars.
Cinematography – Avatar - Missed it. Another techy one.
Costume Design – The Young Victoria – Missed it. The kind of win that annoys me a little as they just have to copy clothes from the period, but I’m not mad about this win.
Directing – The Hurt Locker – Got it! Completely agree!
Documentary Feature – The Cove – Got it!
Film Editing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it. I was attempting not to have a big sweep in my picks.
Foreign Language Film – El Secreto De Sus Ojos – Got it! Well done Oscar! I saw Mark Kermode talking on the BBC News and he says he hasn’t seen it/didn’t know about it. Give me his fucking job, at least I put the effort in…
Markeup – Star Trek – Got it!
Music (Original Score) – Up – Missed it. I rolled the dice for this one though
Music (Original Song) – The Weary Kind – Got it!
Best Picture – The Hurt Locker – Got it! REALLY happy that this one got the double
Short Film (Animated) Logorama – Missed it, but I didn’t see the nominees so that’s fine
Sound Editing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, another dice roll.
Sound Mixing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, and this proves that redundant Oscar is redundant
Visual Effects – Avatar – Got it! No brainer really
Writing (Adapted Screenplay) – Precious – Missed it, so did they. In The Loop was better but as I said in my long posts no one knew what it was over there.
Writing (Original Screenplay) – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, avoiding the sweep and giving Up this instead of Animated Picture.
Overall – 10/22
Not my best year. I know I got about 15 or 16 last year. Still I’m pretty happy with how it all played out. No back to watching nothing but shite!
Actor In a Leading Role – Jeff Bridges - Got it!
Actor In A Supporting Role – Christoph Waltz - Got it!
Actress In A Leading Role – Sandra Bullok - Missed it. Oscar was wrong on this one frankly
Actress In A Supporting Role – Mo’Nique - Got it!
Animated Feature Film – Up - Missed it. Up was my second choice though so I’m fine with this
Art Direction – Avatar - Missed it. I may have misunderstood the role of an art director though and Avatar is deserving of technical Oscars.
Cinematography – Avatar - Missed it. Another techy one.
Costume Design – The Young Victoria – Missed it. The kind of win that annoys me a little as they just have to copy clothes from the period, but I’m not mad about this win.
Directing – The Hurt Locker – Got it! Completely agree!
Documentary Feature – The Cove – Got it!
Film Editing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it. I was attempting not to have a big sweep in my picks.
Foreign Language Film – El Secreto De Sus Ojos – Got it! Well done Oscar! I saw Mark Kermode talking on the BBC News and he says he hasn’t seen it/didn’t know about it. Give me his fucking job, at least I put the effort in…
Markeup – Star Trek – Got it!
Music (Original Score) – Up – Missed it. I rolled the dice for this one though
Music (Original Song) – The Weary Kind – Got it!
Best Picture – The Hurt Locker – Got it! REALLY happy that this one got the double
Short Film (Animated) Logorama – Missed it, but I didn’t see the nominees so that’s fine
Sound Editing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, another dice roll.
Sound Mixing – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, and this proves that redundant Oscar is redundant
Visual Effects – Avatar – Got it! No brainer really
Writing (Adapted Screenplay) – Precious – Missed it, so did they. In The Loop was better but as I said in my long posts no one knew what it was over there.
Writing (Original Screenplay) – The Hurt Locker – Missed it, avoiding the sweep and giving Up this instead of Animated Picture.
Overall – 10/22
Not my best year. I know I got about 15 or 16 last year. Still I’m pretty happy with how it all played out. No back to watching nothing but shite!
Sunday 7 March 2010
Macgyver’s Oscar Picks
This is where I would give the little golden baldies. It’s not what the Academy will do, but we’ll see how I match up. Don’t blame me if you place bets and lose money
In the order from the website:
Actor In A Leading Role – Jeff Bridges
Actor In A Supporting Role – Christoph Waltz
Actress In A Leading Role – Carey Mulligan
Actress In A Supporting Role – Mo’Nique
Animated Feature Film – The Princess And The Frog
Art Direction – The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnasus
Cinematography – The Hurt Locker
Costume Design – Nine
Directing – The Hurt Locker
Documentary – The Cove
Film Editing – District 9
Foreign Language Film – The Secret In Their Eyes (El Secreto De Sus Ojos)
Makeup – Star Trek
Music (Original Score) – I skipped, but I’ll say Sherlock Holmes
Music (Original Song) – The Weary Kind
Best Picture – The Hurt Locker
Short Film (Animated) – A Matter of Load And Death
Sound Editing – Star Trek
Sound Mixing – Inglorious Basterds
Visual Effects – Avatar
Writing (Adapted Screenplay) – In The Loop
Writing (Original Screenplay) – Up
And that’s it. I’ll be happy if I get 15 out of 22 on that, I’m pretty sure I’ve got 8 in the bag. We’ll see tomorrow. Alas there’ll be no live tweeting of the Oscars. Getting up early 7 days on the trot, drinking a bunch last night and getting about 6 hours sleep, fighting sleep in the car back (I wasn’t driving) and all of that jazz means I won’t make it. I’m half a day walker now, for the first Oscars in 4 or 5 years, so I’m not used to the hours. Not that I watched it every year in that period, but being on late shift helped…
It’ll be nowt but reviews after the round up post btw, don’t worry :)
In the order from the website:
Actor In A Leading Role – Jeff Bridges
Actor In A Supporting Role – Christoph Waltz
Actress In A Leading Role – Carey Mulligan
Actress In A Supporting Role – Mo’Nique
Animated Feature Film – The Princess And The Frog
Art Direction – The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnasus
Cinematography – The Hurt Locker
Costume Design – Nine
Directing – The Hurt Locker
Documentary – The Cove
Film Editing – District 9
Foreign Language Film – The Secret In Their Eyes (El Secreto De Sus Ojos)
Makeup – Star Trek
Music (Original Score) – I skipped, but I’ll say Sherlock Holmes
Music (Original Song) – The Weary Kind
Best Picture – The Hurt Locker
Short Film (Animated) – A Matter of Load And Death
Sound Editing – Star Trek
Sound Mixing – Inglorious Basterds
Visual Effects – Avatar
Writing (Adapted Screenplay) – In The Loop
Writing (Original Screenplay) – Up
And that’s it. I’ll be happy if I get 15 out of 22 on that, I’m pretty sure I’ve got 8 in the bag. We’ll see tomorrow. Alas there’ll be no live tweeting of the Oscars. Getting up early 7 days on the trot, drinking a bunch last night and getting about 6 hours sleep, fighting sleep in the car back (I wasn’t driving) and all of that jazz means I won’t make it. I’m half a day walker now, for the first Oscars in 4 or 5 years, so I’m not used to the hours. Not that I watched it every year in that period, but being on late shift helped…
It’ll be nowt but reviews after the round up post btw, don’t worry :)
Road to the Oscars Part 8: Best Mother Crushing Picture
The big award that got twice as big this year because they want ratings or something!
Best Picture
Avatar = Nope. Looks good but it’s a remake of Pocahontas and a hundred other films. If this wasn’t so shiny and had been made by someone else it wouldn’t be near this category
The Blind Side = essentially a made for TV movie about how nice some white folks can be, with Sandra Bullock. Don’t know why this is here.
District 9 = Good on the Oscars! Extremely well made for the cost, a smart story, original to a certain extent though its not an all new idea, damned fine sci fi.
An Education = Yeah it was pretty good, not one of my favourites though
The Hurt Locker = Best live action movie I’ve seen in 3 months. Great stuff.
Inglorious Basterds = Damned good Quentin Tarantino fair. Smart dialogue, well acted, crazy story, Nazi’s.
Precious = Bleak as fuck so you’d expect Oscar to like it.
A Serious Man = Quirky Coen goodness. Found it very enjoyable.
Up = It’s Pixar, you don’t have to say much more than that. The lamp bouncing on to the screen earns their movies 4 stars. Good that they keep trying this hard after this many pictures
Up In The Air = Sure why not? It was pretty good, but I don’t know if it would be in my top ten
That’s what this basically is now huh? Hollyweirds Top Ten list. I would LOVE if The Hurt Locker walked off with this and Directing, but I think that Avatar will probably get it. For James Cameron has decreed that’s what his choice would be. There won’t be any serious upsets here, the only other one I could see winning would be Precious, but it’ll be blue cats over black inner city turmoil incest rape.
Last post to come which is just a round up of my picks. Bet your glad to hear that huh?
Best Picture
Avatar = Nope. Looks good but it’s a remake of Pocahontas and a hundred other films. If this wasn’t so shiny and had been made by someone else it wouldn’t be near this category
The Blind Side = essentially a made for TV movie about how nice some white folks can be, with Sandra Bullock. Don’t know why this is here.
District 9 = Good on the Oscars! Extremely well made for the cost, a smart story, original to a certain extent though its not an all new idea, damned fine sci fi.
An Education = Yeah it was pretty good, not one of my favourites though
The Hurt Locker = Best live action movie I’ve seen in 3 months. Great stuff.
Inglorious Basterds = Damned good Quentin Tarantino fair. Smart dialogue, well acted, crazy story, Nazi’s.
Precious = Bleak as fuck so you’d expect Oscar to like it.
A Serious Man = Quirky Coen goodness. Found it very enjoyable.
Up = It’s Pixar, you don’t have to say much more than that. The lamp bouncing on to the screen earns their movies 4 stars. Good that they keep trying this hard after this many pictures
Up In The Air = Sure why not? It was pretty good, but I don’t know if it would be in my top ten
That’s what this basically is now huh? Hollyweirds Top Ten list. I would LOVE if The Hurt Locker walked off with this and Directing, but I think that Avatar will probably get it. For James Cameron has decreed that’s what his choice would be. There won’t be any serious upsets here, the only other one I could see winning would be Precious, but it’ll be blue cats over black inner city turmoil incest rape.
Last post to come which is just a round up of my picks. Bet your glad to hear that huh?
Road to the Oscars Part 7: Documentary (Feature), Foreign Language Film and Directing
Nearly done with all that. I’ve decided not to bother doing the score and original song. Crazy Heart will win the later one, though it could be something from Princess and the Frog. I have no idea on the score though. Didn’t have time to check out the shorts and I couldn’t see them all anyway. I’d have been going by plot descriptions and maybe trailers for the most part. I’ll give Aardman my pic for short cartoon.
Documentary (Feature)
Burma VJ = Powerful stuff about something that’s been sidelined in the news even though the situation is still shit to worse.
The Cove = Really really horrible, to the extent that I cried a bit. It’s also a very well made doc showing how they got the terrible (in content) footage. In a way this is kind of a making of, but it’s a doc so that’s fine.
Food, Inc = While it has an important message, it’s not exactly one that people are ignorant of
I didn’t see “The Most Dangerous Man In America” or “Which Way Home”
Has to be The Cove. It’s the best made of the 3 I saw, though Burma does have to work with what they’ve got. Food Inc was the food version of An Inconvenient Truth in tone, though thankfully without the Al Gore biography stuff. The Cove earned it.
Foreign Language Film
Ajami = Didn’t see
The Milk of Sorrow (La Teta Asustada) = Load of bizarre arse about a mentally disturbed woman with a tattie in her bajingo. No thanks.
A Prophet (Un Prophete) = Decent prison drama that has a unique ish “crime does kinda pay” message to it. Not as hard hitting as it should have been, everything is just a bit too easy
The Secret In Their Eyes (El Secreto De Sus Ojos) = I really really liked this. It’s literally the only one I’ve recommended, and I’ve done that a lot, to people and most of that is because of that amazing scene half way through.
The White Ribbon (Das Weisse Band) = As exciting as the title sounds. Load of incredibly boring arse with no likeable characters or human emotion on display. No wonder these kids will end up being Nazi’s in 20 years…
My choice is pretty easy, The Secret In Their Eyes was by far my favourite followed by A Prophet. I did want to see Ajami as I think I’ll like that too, but never mind. I have a horrible feeling that The White Ribbon will win for some reason, though I hope it’ll be A Prophet as I don’t think Eyes is in with a shot unfortunately.
Directing
Avatar = Jim Bob might have made a fuck load of money, but as far as Directing goes I consider this the only animated movie in the category. Not saying he’s a bad director though
The Hurt Locker = Fucking amazing film, damned fine job
Inglorious Basterds = It’s QT, who doesn’t like QT
Precious: Yadda Yadda = Yeah sure why not
Up In The Air = Fine enough stuff from Egon’s kid.
Hurt Locker Hurt Locker Hurt Locker. If it doesn’t win it’s a travesty, particularly if Avatar does. Basterds should get a script not if anything, Up In The Air might get an acting one but I didn’t find it hugely remarkable, Precious will probably get something but I can’t remember what…
One last post like this, the biggie, Best God Damned Picture Over All And We List The Guys Who Work Out The Money For Some Reason
Documentary (Feature)
Burma VJ = Powerful stuff about something that’s been sidelined in the news even though the situation is still shit to worse.
The Cove = Really really horrible, to the extent that I cried a bit. It’s also a very well made doc showing how they got the terrible (in content) footage. In a way this is kind of a making of, but it’s a doc so that’s fine.
Food, Inc = While it has an important message, it’s not exactly one that people are ignorant of
I didn’t see “The Most Dangerous Man In America” or “Which Way Home”
Has to be The Cove. It’s the best made of the 3 I saw, though Burma does have to work with what they’ve got. Food Inc was the food version of An Inconvenient Truth in tone, though thankfully without the Al Gore biography stuff. The Cove earned it.
Foreign Language Film
Ajami = Didn’t see
The Milk of Sorrow (La Teta Asustada) = Load of bizarre arse about a mentally disturbed woman with a tattie in her bajingo. No thanks.
A Prophet (Un Prophete) = Decent prison drama that has a unique ish “crime does kinda pay” message to it. Not as hard hitting as it should have been, everything is just a bit too easy
The Secret In Their Eyes (El Secreto De Sus Ojos) = I really really liked this. It’s literally the only one I’ve recommended, and I’ve done that a lot, to people and most of that is because of that amazing scene half way through.
The White Ribbon (Das Weisse Band) = As exciting as the title sounds. Load of incredibly boring arse with no likeable characters or human emotion on display. No wonder these kids will end up being Nazi’s in 20 years…
My choice is pretty easy, The Secret In Their Eyes was by far my favourite followed by A Prophet. I did want to see Ajami as I think I’ll like that too, but never mind. I have a horrible feeling that The White Ribbon will win for some reason, though I hope it’ll be A Prophet as I don’t think Eyes is in with a shot unfortunately.
Directing
Avatar = Jim Bob might have made a fuck load of money, but as far as Directing goes I consider this the only animated movie in the category. Not saying he’s a bad director though
The Hurt Locker = Fucking amazing film, damned fine job
Inglorious Basterds = It’s QT, who doesn’t like QT
Precious: Yadda Yadda = Yeah sure why not
Up In The Air = Fine enough stuff from Egon’s kid.
Hurt Locker Hurt Locker Hurt Locker. If it doesn’t win it’s a travesty, particularly if Avatar does. Basterds should get a script not if anything, Up In The Air might get an acting one but I didn’t find it hugely remarkable, Precious will probably get something but I can’t remember what…
One last post like this, the biggie, Best God Damned Picture Over All And We List The Guys Who Work Out The Money For Some Reason
Road to the Oscars Part 6: Writing (Adapted Screenplay) and Writing (Original Screenplay)
90% of whether a film is good or not
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
District 9 = I’d agree with this if it wasn’t for the fact that the main characters dialogue is mostly improvised. The story was good though. It was adapted from a short film on the same subject
An Education = I’m assuming its an adapted play? Pretty decent yeah
In The Loop = this film SOUNDS and feels improvised, but it wasn’t. The dialogue is fantastic. Very much deserves the Oscar. Adapted from the TV show they made before I suggested it should be a TV show in my review.
Precious: BLARGHABLOO = Push was a sci fi novel and this is nothing like it. Honestly I can’t say how well adapted it is, but the story was strong enough
Up In The Air = yeah sure why not
In an ideal world In The Loop would walk away with this. Unfortunately no one in the US has a clue what it is so it won’t. Which is a damned shame. I don’t have an academy membership, maybe one day, but I make the effort to see as many of the films as I can before spouting my opinion. I’d like District 9 to win because the story is good, but In The Loop will get it
Writing (Original Screenplay)
The Hurt Locker = I love this movie so hell yeah
Inglorious Basterds = Very clever as you’d expect from QT. Smart dialogue, interesting characters, good stuff.
The Messenger = They researched the hell out of this and it shows as the characters come across as very authentic. Character pieces hang on two things, the performance and the script. The Messenger works on both of those counts
A Serious Man = This is good Coen, so deserves a nod. Smart, kind of weird, a bit twisty.
Up = Hell of a story from Pixar. Some brave choices for a kids cartoon. Just the first 10 minutes of this was a great movie.
Fuck this is a hard category. Not a single one of these films is shit. I kind of want to go for The Hurt Locker, but its not an easy choice. I’ll give it to…Up as they won’t get one of the others its up for.
Still to come: Documentary Film, Best Director, Best Picture, probably the music and I’ll try and do the shorts though I haven’t seen any yet. Wait, saw the Aardman one at Christmas.
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
District 9 = I’d agree with this if it wasn’t for the fact that the main characters dialogue is mostly improvised. The story was good though. It was adapted from a short film on the same subject
An Education = I’m assuming its an adapted play? Pretty decent yeah
In The Loop = this film SOUNDS and feels improvised, but it wasn’t. The dialogue is fantastic. Very much deserves the Oscar. Adapted from the TV show they made before I suggested it should be a TV show in my review.
Precious: BLARGHABLOO = Push was a sci fi novel and this is nothing like it. Honestly I can’t say how well adapted it is, but the story was strong enough
Up In The Air = yeah sure why not
In an ideal world In The Loop would walk away with this. Unfortunately no one in the US has a clue what it is so it won’t. Which is a damned shame. I don’t have an academy membership, maybe one day, but I make the effort to see as many of the films as I can before spouting my opinion. I’d like District 9 to win because the story is good, but In The Loop will get it
Writing (Original Screenplay)
The Hurt Locker = I love this movie so hell yeah
Inglorious Basterds = Very clever as you’d expect from QT. Smart dialogue, interesting characters, good stuff.
The Messenger = They researched the hell out of this and it shows as the characters come across as very authentic. Character pieces hang on two things, the performance and the script. The Messenger works on both of those counts
A Serious Man = This is good Coen, so deserves a nod. Smart, kind of weird, a bit twisty.
Up = Hell of a story from Pixar. Some brave choices for a kids cartoon. Just the first 10 minutes of this was a great movie.
Fuck this is a hard category. Not a single one of these films is shit. I kind of want to go for The Hurt Locker, but its not an easy choice. I’ll give it to…Up as they won’t get one of the others its up for.
Still to come: Documentary Film, Best Director, Best Picture, probably the music and I’ll try and do the shorts though I haven’t seen any yet. Wait, saw the Aardman one at Christmas.
Road To The Oscars Part 5: Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects
Ah, the hard to pick categories. The first two anyway. Why there are TWO sound Oscars I’ll never know. I think it’s from when the talkies came in and no one has thought to get rid of the other one.
Sound Editing
Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Star Trek
Up
All good sound editing, like all good editing, isn’t noticeable. And if you can’t form a rich environment you have no business in doing this at a professional level. I do quite a bit of voice acting and I’ve heard some damned awful mixes, and some really good mixes, but there should be no damned awful mixes on a $100 Million movie. So, Star Trek.
Sound Mixing
Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
See? You tell me the difference between the two. Go on. No idea huh? Inglorious Basterds it is then.
Visual Effects
Avatar
District 9
Star Trek
Now this one I CAN judge. Why this is cut to 3 and the other two from today have 5 I don’t know. This is a no brainer category this year because James Cameron genetically modified some actors and built a planet or something. It’s a shame actually, as District 9 really really earned it. Alas Avatar really really really earned it. Well in most peoples opinion. The new cameras and techniques sure, but I thought the creatures were nothing special. Plants were good though. It’s Avatars.
Next Up: Writing Adapted and Original
Sound Editing
Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Star Trek
Up
All good sound editing, like all good editing, isn’t noticeable. And if you can’t form a rich environment you have no business in doing this at a professional level. I do quite a bit of voice acting and I’ve heard some damned awful mixes, and some really good mixes, but there should be no damned awful mixes on a $100 Million movie. So, Star Trek.
Sound Mixing
Avatar
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Star Trek
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
See? You tell me the difference between the two. Go on. No idea huh? Inglorious Basterds it is then.
Visual Effects
Avatar
District 9
Star Trek
Now this one I CAN judge. Why this is cut to 3 and the other two from today have 5 I don’t know. This is a no brainer category this year because James Cameron genetically modified some actors and built a planet or something. It’s a shame actually, as District 9 really really earned it. Alas Avatar really really really earned it. Well in most peoples opinion. The new cameras and techniques sure, but I thought the creatures were nothing special. Plants were good though. It’s Avatars.
Next Up: Writing Adapted and Original
Road To The Oscars Part 4: Costume Design, Editing and Make up
Pretty clothes, good construction and pretty faces
Costume Design
Bright Star = Mainly contemporary stuff, though I suspect that the clothes worn by the female lead who’s character has an interest in such things are original. I though they looked largely awful though
Coco Before Chanel = well duh. It’s about a fashion designer. However, I’m pretty sure anything in this that would stand out would just be copying Chanel clothing and not coming up with anything yourself.
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus = Some WEIRD clothes for the performance sections, though a fair bit of this is just suits and the like
Nine = The musical sections have musical type clothing, the rest of the time is largely contemporary clothes for the period. The costumes are very well done though
The Young Victoria = Contemporary costumes for the time period again
I guess I’d give this to Nine really, though its not exactly innovative. Maybe Parnassus. I’d guess it will probably go to Chanel though. This category has a tendency to piss me off as it goes to films that are period pieces and its just copying whatever styles people wore at the time rather than inventing new stuff.
Film Editing
Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Precious: Based on a book
This is a tricky one to comment on really. BAD editing is noticed, the point about good editing is that it isn’t. This is a bit of a roll the dice category for me, so I’ll chuck my vote to Inglorious Basterds just because. I’d be fine with any of the middle 3 winning it, but big blue might.
Make up:
Il Divo = Not sure why, another one that I’d understand El Secreto having a nod
Star Trek = Makes perfect sense as there’s some in it
The Young Victoria = makes perfect sense in a world of adverts, but not for special achievement in make up…
The only one that should be here is Star Trek and District 9 should be joining it. This is another annoying one for me as it’s generally filled with films that are just about making people who look attractive look MORE attractive. As far as I’m concerned this should be a practicle version of special effects, special make up effects. The only film that fits that bill is Star Trek, so you know who I’m rooting for.
Next Up: Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects
Costume Design
Bright Star = Mainly contemporary stuff, though I suspect that the clothes worn by the female lead who’s character has an interest in such things are original. I though they looked largely awful though
Coco Before Chanel = well duh. It’s about a fashion designer. However, I’m pretty sure anything in this that would stand out would just be copying Chanel clothing and not coming up with anything yourself.
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus = Some WEIRD clothes for the performance sections, though a fair bit of this is just suits and the like
Nine = The musical sections have musical type clothing, the rest of the time is largely contemporary clothes for the period. The costumes are very well done though
The Young Victoria = Contemporary costumes for the time period again
I guess I’d give this to Nine really, though its not exactly innovative. Maybe Parnassus. I’d guess it will probably go to Chanel though. This category has a tendency to piss me off as it goes to films that are period pieces and its just copying whatever styles people wore at the time rather than inventing new stuff.
Film Editing
Avatar
District 9
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Precious: Based on a book
This is a tricky one to comment on really. BAD editing is noticed, the point about good editing is that it isn’t. This is a bit of a roll the dice category for me, so I’ll chuck my vote to Inglorious Basterds just because. I’d be fine with any of the middle 3 winning it, but big blue might.
Make up:
Il Divo = Not sure why, another one that I’d understand El Secreto having a nod
Star Trek = Makes perfect sense as there’s some in it
The Young Victoria = makes perfect sense in a world of adverts, but not for special achievement in make up…
The only one that should be here is Star Trek and District 9 should be joining it. This is another annoying one for me as it’s generally filled with films that are just about making people who look attractive look MORE attractive. As far as I’m concerned this should be a practicle version of special effects, special make up effects. The only film that fits that bill is Star Trek, so you know who I’m rooting for.
Next Up: Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects
Movie 66: Skinwalkers
There are two factions of werewolves, the skinwalkers of the title. One view being a werewolf as a curse and would happily be without it. They lock themselves up at night and try to avoid feeding at all costs. The second love it and don’t want it to end. Feeding is like a drug, and once you have the first taste you don’t want to give it up. A boy who is half human / half werewolf, holds the key to ending the curse. Somehow. Prophecy is vague like that. So the good guys are trying to protect him, the bad guys want to kill him. The deadline is midnight while there’s a blood moon and he is 13.
We are very very serious, look how cool we are, and serious. Serious and cool, while being serious. That’s the film in a nut shell, and it’s major failing. A film with this silly a plot can’t take itself this seriously, there wasn’t a single joke that I could see, without failing badly.
It appears to want to be a werewolf version of Near Dark. The two aren’t identical, but there are a bunch of similarities down to the bad guy wolves attacking a bunch of assholes in a bar.
The term werewolf is a little fast and loose too as they actually look kind of like Beastman from the He-Man movie rather that the usual werewolf. I’m willing to bet that this is so they can stay cool looking when they have transformed. The female bad guys face appears to be her only change. She keeps a completely in tact bra and seems to be pretty hairless when she’s gone all feral. I’m choosing not to lay the blame on the Stan Winston house for this as it feels like a studio or director decision.
The ending is a load of arse as well, though it redeems itself somewhat in the closing few minutes.
There are plenty of “hey it’s that guy!” actors in it, including Tig from Sons of Anarchy and the jerk in a wheelchair from that Paul Hogan angel movie. And no one is particularly terrible, except maybe that bad guy female werewolf. But the big question is “Why so serious?”
Not one you should hurry to see…
Next up: Cloverfield
We are very very serious, look how cool we are, and serious. Serious and cool, while being serious. That’s the film in a nut shell, and it’s major failing. A film with this silly a plot can’t take itself this seriously, there wasn’t a single joke that I could see, without failing badly.
It appears to want to be a werewolf version of Near Dark. The two aren’t identical, but there are a bunch of similarities down to the bad guy wolves attacking a bunch of assholes in a bar.
The term werewolf is a little fast and loose too as they actually look kind of like Beastman from the He-Man movie rather that the usual werewolf. I’m willing to bet that this is so they can stay cool looking when they have transformed. The female bad guys face appears to be her only change. She keeps a completely in tact bra and seems to be pretty hairless when she’s gone all feral. I’m choosing not to lay the blame on the Stan Winston house for this as it feels like a studio or director decision.
The ending is a load of arse as well, though it redeems itself somewhat in the closing few minutes.
There are plenty of “hey it’s that guy!” actors in it, including Tig from Sons of Anarchy and the jerk in a wheelchair from that Paul Hogan angel movie. And no one is particularly terrible, except maybe that bad guy female werewolf. But the big question is “Why so serious?”
Not one you should hurry to see…
Next up: Cloverfield
Movie 65: Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa
The animals from the first film have “repaired” King Julian’s plane, and set off for New York. However it barely flies and they end up crash landing in the wildlife preserve that Alex the lion originated from (the film starts with a flash back). Alex has to pass a test to become a full fledged adult member of the pride, and fails. He then has to try and get back in with the help from his friends who have all found a home.
And frankly no one cares about that lot as its all about the penguins, who are hilarious. The rest, not so much.
This does have some nice touches. All the zebras being voiced by Chris Rock and being essentially identical is funny. King Julian has his crazy assed moments though I wasn’t that big a fan of his to begin with. But those penguins…
This is a problem that the Ice Age films have shared with Madagascar. At some point you will find yourself waiting for the B story with the best characters to come up. In Ice Age that’s Scrat, in the Madagascar films it’s the penguins. Whether Scrat could stand a 90 minute film I don’t know, but he works very well in shorts. The penguins are the basis for a TV spin off that I haven’t seen any of, but I think they MIGHT be able to hold their own.
This is an enjoyable kids cartoon, and the main character story arcs are pretty decent if a bit low on the laughs. It’s worth a shot just for the guys in black and white though. And granny is pretty funny.
Sorry this is a bit short, I watched the film on Friday then went to my cousins wedding and I’m now reviewing it on Sunday….
Next up: Skinwalkers
And frankly no one cares about that lot as its all about the penguins, who are hilarious. The rest, not so much.
This does have some nice touches. All the zebras being voiced by Chris Rock and being essentially identical is funny. King Julian has his crazy assed moments though I wasn’t that big a fan of his to begin with. But those penguins…
This is a problem that the Ice Age films have shared with Madagascar. At some point you will find yourself waiting for the B story with the best characters to come up. In Ice Age that’s Scrat, in the Madagascar films it’s the penguins. Whether Scrat could stand a 90 minute film I don’t know, but he works very well in shorts. The penguins are the basis for a TV spin off that I haven’t seen any of, but I think they MIGHT be able to hold their own.
This is an enjoyable kids cartoon, and the main character story arcs are pretty decent if a bit low on the laughs. It’s worth a shot just for the guys in black and white though. And granny is pretty funny.
Sorry this is a bit short, I watched the film on Friday then went to my cousins wedding and I’m now reviewing it on Sunday….
Next up: Skinwalkers
Movie 64: The Unborn
A young woman has been having some weird dreams. When babysitting the neighbours kids, the eldest (about 6?) is acting very strangely. He hits her with a mirror and says “Jumby wants to be born now”. When she sees a Doctor for some eye damage caused by the whack he asks if she’s a twin as her eye colour is changing. She thought she was an only child, but she had a brother who died in the womb. Through investigating her past she finds a haunting that has gone back 3 generations, a family stalked by a dybbuk since Auschwitz.
Yup, some horror drivel. But it’s by David S Goyer, he wrote the first two Blades and Batmans and Flash Forward. Why yes dear reader, but he also wrote Blade: Trinity and Ghost Rider.
This is the later category. The film has its moments, though they are quite short lived. It has some good ideas, but they aren’t really capitalised properly.
The good stuff is mainly in the second half. When the main female character is by herself in the second half she’s fine, in the first, particularly with her best friend, she’s pretty annoying. The scenes with Gary Oldman in them are pretty good. The scenes with Granny in them are pretty good.
The first half has a lot of random weirdness that barely makes sense. Actually that’s exaggerating the amount of sense it makes. Dubbyk’s abilities aren’t exactly well known though. Her lovely boyfriend seems like a bit of a douche, though he redeems himself. There’s a lot of scenes that seems to be shot in a way to just show that she’s sexy, and it looks very unrealistic.
And if you like jump scares, you’ll get plenty. Not much else though. The jump scares are a little cheaply obtained as the dialogue is pretty damned quiet so you have to watch at a volume where the scares with be REALLY LOUD BOO ARGH JUMP! The CGI is also of a pretty low standard, making a lot of the demonic monsterness look like arse.
Definitely a b grade horror, not really worth your time in my opinion. It feels disjointed and the acting in the first half is a big let down. When the exorcism stuff comes along two thirds in its rushed, and it just kind of rampages towards an ending. Then it has a pretty obvious twist. Skippy skip.
Next up: Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa
Yup, some horror drivel. But it’s by David S Goyer, he wrote the first two Blades and Batmans and Flash Forward. Why yes dear reader, but he also wrote Blade: Trinity and Ghost Rider.
This is the later category. The film has its moments, though they are quite short lived. It has some good ideas, but they aren’t really capitalised properly.
The good stuff is mainly in the second half. When the main female character is by herself in the second half she’s fine, in the first, particularly with her best friend, she’s pretty annoying. The scenes with Gary Oldman in them are pretty good. The scenes with Granny in them are pretty good.
The first half has a lot of random weirdness that barely makes sense. Actually that’s exaggerating the amount of sense it makes. Dubbyk’s abilities aren’t exactly well known though. Her lovely boyfriend seems like a bit of a douche, though he redeems himself. There’s a lot of scenes that seems to be shot in a way to just show that she’s sexy, and it looks very unrealistic.
And if you like jump scares, you’ll get plenty. Not much else though. The jump scares are a little cheaply obtained as the dialogue is pretty damned quiet so you have to watch at a volume where the scares with be REALLY LOUD BOO ARGH JUMP! The CGI is also of a pretty low standard, making a lot of the demonic monsterness look like arse.
Definitely a b grade horror, not really worth your time in my opinion. It feels disjointed and the acting in the first half is a big let down. When the exorcism stuff comes along two thirds in its rushed, and it just kind of rampages towards an ending. Then it has a pretty obvious twist. Skippy skip.
Next up: Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa
Thursday 4 March 2010
Movie 63: Rec
But Dave, you already saw Rec
Why yes, who ever reads this I have. But that was the American remake. This is the original Spanish movie
It’s the same damned movie essentially. In fact I’m typing this as I’m watching it, which I never do. And it’s in a language I don’t speak. The ending is subtly different though.
It actually gives me a chance to talk about US remakes of foreign language movies. I won’t bother with a plot synopsis as this is beat for beat the same film. However, the US version had a bigger budget so looks better and has better effects. And the cast were better actors.
I can understand people being mad about remakes, I really can. Particularly when they take the heart out of the original and churn something standard out. I don’t think this is an example of that though. The thing that you have to realise is that people in Europe and other foreign countries are used to subs and dubbing. Most of what they see was originally in English after all. However, those of us in the English speaking world just aren’t. I watch a fair few foreign movies so it doesn’t bother me, but I do notice it. So for a film to do well it basically has to be in English.
When done right, as was the case with Rec, it’s fine. They basically used the same script, punched it up a bit, hired some better actors and made a glossier version of the same movie. I’m fine with that. The original is still a success, they get some money and the people in them get to have some kind of career (I assume). And a bunch of people get to see a story they wouldn’t normally see.
In an ideal world everyone would just see the originals, but its not that world so this is the solution really. And us smart people can’t complain. When was the last time you read a book in Dutch? Or Japanese? Never. Why should films be any different? I wouldn’t go and see a Spanish play with scrolling subtitles or a translator like they have at the UN so I do get why some people don’t like watching foreign movies. Add to the fact that this is more like a big budget remake as well and I doubt you’d see too many film fans complaining. After all, no one has a problem with Evil Dead 2.
For the record I’ve never understood why Sam Raimi says its basically a remake as the story is quite different, but I guess the themes are the same. Plus there’s no continuity.
And to be fair to the original Rec, I’d have said that it looked and felt like a student movie in quality and acting. That they did well with the effects but I would have liked to have seen less obvious cheats used to get around the budget. And that they could have done with fleshing it out a little as the plot jumps a few times. Oh, and it contains far too much screaming. Stuff they improved in the remake then, though that still has too much screaming…
Next up: The Unborn
Why yes, who ever reads this I have. But that was the American remake. This is the original Spanish movie
It’s the same damned movie essentially. In fact I’m typing this as I’m watching it, which I never do. And it’s in a language I don’t speak. The ending is subtly different though.
It actually gives me a chance to talk about US remakes of foreign language movies. I won’t bother with a plot synopsis as this is beat for beat the same film. However, the US version had a bigger budget so looks better and has better effects. And the cast were better actors.
I can understand people being mad about remakes, I really can. Particularly when they take the heart out of the original and churn something standard out. I don’t think this is an example of that though. The thing that you have to realise is that people in Europe and other foreign countries are used to subs and dubbing. Most of what they see was originally in English after all. However, those of us in the English speaking world just aren’t. I watch a fair few foreign movies so it doesn’t bother me, but I do notice it. So for a film to do well it basically has to be in English.
When done right, as was the case with Rec, it’s fine. They basically used the same script, punched it up a bit, hired some better actors and made a glossier version of the same movie. I’m fine with that. The original is still a success, they get some money and the people in them get to have some kind of career (I assume). And a bunch of people get to see a story they wouldn’t normally see.
In an ideal world everyone would just see the originals, but its not that world so this is the solution really. And us smart people can’t complain. When was the last time you read a book in Dutch? Or Japanese? Never. Why should films be any different? I wouldn’t go and see a Spanish play with scrolling subtitles or a translator like they have at the UN so I do get why some people don’t like watching foreign movies. Add to the fact that this is more like a big budget remake as well and I doubt you’d see too many film fans complaining. After all, no one has a problem with Evil Dead 2.
For the record I’ve never understood why Sam Raimi says its basically a remake as the story is quite different, but I guess the themes are the same. Plus there’s no continuity.
And to be fair to the original Rec, I’d have said that it looked and felt like a student movie in quality and acting. That they did well with the effects but I would have liked to have seen less obvious cheats used to get around the budget. And that they could have done with fleshing it out a little as the plot jumps a few times. Oh, and it contains far too much screaming. Stuff they improved in the remake then, though that still has too much screaming…
Next up: The Unborn
Wednesday 3 March 2010
Movie 62: Baby Mama
Kate Holbrook (Tina Fey) has had a successful life. At least a successful working life. But one thing is missing, a baby. She finds out that she’s unable to conceive and goes to a surrogacy service. There she’s paired up with Angie (Amy Poehler), a white trash idiot. Cue the odd couple theme tune
With a cast like this film has it should be hilarious. With a premise like this film has it should suck. It’s neither.
The first half is a little boring, particularly in the early stages when Fey’s character is just baby nuts. And the red neck couple are short on laughs. After that it does pick up a fair bit, and the second half was home to most chuckles. Your not going to bust any guts with this one though.
I love Tina Fey. She’s just okay for the most part in this though. Given the right material, hopefully this years Date Night will have that, she could have a pretty big film career. But she’s got 30 Rock already
Steve Martin used to be funny. He’s generally not now. However, his hippy guru type character here hits the rights marks. The same can be said of Sigourney Weavers ridiculously fertile character who heads up the surrogacy agency.
It’s all fine, but it’s a full blown TV watch. If it happens to be on the stick about for a bit. But don’t go hunting
And why the hell do they give Tina that retarded high hair ski slope look when they doll her up? Looks awful. You know that hair lump instead of a fringe thing, where the fringe is kind of pinned in the middle of your head? A hair horn? Always looks awful….
Next up: Rec
With a cast like this film has it should be hilarious. With a premise like this film has it should suck. It’s neither.
The first half is a little boring, particularly in the early stages when Fey’s character is just baby nuts. And the red neck couple are short on laughs. After that it does pick up a fair bit, and the second half was home to most chuckles. Your not going to bust any guts with this one though.
I love Tina Fey. She’s just okay for the most part in this though. Given the right material, hopefully this years Date Night will have that, she could have a pretty big film career. But she’s got 30 Rock already
Steve Martin used to be funny. He’s generally not now. However, his hippy guru type character here hits the rights marks. The same can be said of Sigourney Weavers ridiculously fertile character who heads up the surrogacy agency.
It’s all fine, but it’s a full blown TV watch. If it happens to be on the stick about for a bit. But don’t go hunting
And why the hell do they give Tina that retarded high hair ski slope look when they doll her up? Looks awful. You know that hair lump instead of a fringe thing, where the fringe is kind of pinned in the middle of your head? A hair horn? Always looks awful….
Next up: Rec
Road to the Oscars Part 3: Best Animated Film, Art Direction and Cinematography
What was pretty and funny, and what was just pretty.
Animated Feature Film
Coraline = Yay! Glad to see it get nominated as I’m a fan of Neil Gaiman and Henry Selick. This follows the standard formula for the two of them (Neil – ancient gods type stuff, Henry – Burtonesque look and flawless stop motion, Both – weirdness). I wasn’t blown away by the film but it was enjoyable.
Fantastic Mr Fox = Another quirky stop motion effort, with indie film type dialogue and semi-Aardman crazyness.
The Princess And The Frog = Looks absolutely stunning, feels like classic Disney, its funny, well written in general. Fantastic stuff
The Secret of Kells = Dunno why this is here except to maybe make the Academy look like it has range. There’s normally the odd foreign animation and this might be all they could find?
Up = It’s Pixar. Pixar don’t make bad movies. They may make bad-for-Pixar films, like Cars and Ratatouille, but even those are better than most other films in general (at least in looks). This is a good for Pixar effort. Not their best, but still really good.
Normally Pixar would walk away with this and everyone else would wonder why they bother to make cartoons. There’s actually two animated films I’d maybe give it to over Up though, and definitely one. Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs is the maybe and it’s not nominated, but Princess and The Frog is the definite one and it is. Won’t be too upset if Pixar get yet another statue, but plain old Disney deserve it more this year. And it’s the same shareholders who’ll be happy.
Art Direction
This is set design in my head, though I may be wrong.
Avatar = The guy who made the green screens gets this?! Okay, that’s unfair. Pandora is very pretty yes
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnasus = Crazy imagination land is visually stunning though I’m a bit unsure if that applies, much like Avatar’s everything, and real world is very bleak and miserable.
Nine = a big musical stage set like the coliseum and some hotels. Wow.
Sherlock Holmes = Victorian England essentially, though slightly steam punk sylised
The Young Victoria = a different aspect of earlier Victorian England. Strictly not Victorian at the very start actually.
Avatar will probably get it, but I’d say the art direction and special effects are so closely married that that is unfair. Not sure what I’d pick for this otherwise, probably Parnasus? It’s going to Avatar though.
Cinematography
Avatar = yes it looks pretty. BUT due to the amount of post production I don’t think this deserves to win.
Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince = Looks pretty similar to the other Potters, not that that’s a bad thing.
The Hurt Locker = Looks brilliant and its fully live action. Kind of a dusty hue to everything, considering the environment and subject matter. Also if I remember correctly its not all shaky hand held like everything is now
Inglorious Basterds = also looks great, slight vintage feel to the footage
The White Ribbon = Yeah looks fine.
Why The White Ribbon gets a nod but El Secreto de Sus Ojos doesn’t baffles me and is a travesty. Due to the similarity to the other Potters, Half Blood is out. Avatar might get this too but I still don’t agree because of how it was made. I’m fine with either of the other two, but edge towards Hurt Locker more.
Next up: Costume Design, Editing and Make Up
Animated Feature Film
Coraline = Yay! Glad to see it get nominated as I’m a fan of Neil Gaiman and Henry Selick. This follows the standard formula for the two of them (Neil – ancient gods type stuff, Henry – Burtonesque look and flawless stop motion, Both – weirdness). I wasn’t blown away by the film but it was enjoyable.
Fantastic Mr Fox = Another quirky stop motion effort, with indie film type dialogue and semi-Aardman crazyness.
The Princess And The Frog = Looks absolutely stunning, feels like classic Disney, its funny, well written in general. Fantastic stuff
The Secret of Kells = Dunno why this is here except to maybe make the Academy look like it has range. There’s normally the odd foreign animation and this might be all they could find?
Up = It’s Pixar. Pixar don’t make bad movies. They may make bad-for-Pixar films, like Cars and Ratatouille, but even those are better than most other films in general (at least in looks). This is a good for Pixar effort. Not their best, but still really good.
Normally Pixar would walk away with this and everyone else would wonder why they bother to make cartoons. There’s actually two animated films I’d maybe give it to over Up though, and definitely one. Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs is the maybe and it’s not nominated, but Princess and The Frog is the definite one and it is. Won’t be too upset if Pixar get yet another statue, but plain old Disney deserve it more this year. And it’s the same shareholders who’ll be happy.
Art Direction
This is set design in my head, though I may be wrong.
Avatar = The guy who made the green screens gets this?! Okay, that’s unfair. Pandora is very pretty yes
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnasus = Crazy imagination land is visually stunning though I’m a bit unsure if that applies, much like Avatar’s everything, and real world is very bleak and miserable.
Nine = a big musical stage set like the coliseum and some hotels. Wow.
Sherlock Holmes = Victorian England essentially, though slightly steam punk sylised
The Young Victoria = a different aspect of earlier Victorian England. Strictly not Victorian at the very start actually.
Avatar will probably get it, but I’d say the art direction and special effects are so closely married that that is unfair. Not sure what I’d pick for this otherwise, probably Parnasus? It’s going to Avatar though.
Cinematography
Avatar = yes it looks pretty. BUT due to the amount of post production I don’t think this deserves to win.
Harry Potter And The Half Blood Prince = Looks pretty similar to the other Potters, not that that’s a bad thing.
The Hurt Locker = Looks brilliant and its fully live action. Kind of a dusty hue to everything, considering the environment and subject matter. Also if I remember correctly its not all shaky hand held like everything is now
Inglorious Basterds = also looks great, slight vintage feel to the footage
The White Ribbon = Yeah looks fine.
Why The White Ribbon gets a nod but El Secreto de Sus Ojos doesn’t baffles me and is a travesty. Due to the similarity to the other Potters, Half Blood is out. Avatar might get this too but I still don’t agree because of how it was made. I’m fine with either of the other two, but edge towards Hurt Locker more.
Next up: Costume Design, Editing and Make Up
Road to the Oscars Part 2: Best Actress and Supporting Actress
Time for the ladies!
Actress In A Leading Role
Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side = I’ve ranted about Bullock before, think it was in a different review, and how she’s only really impressed me in one film and generally she sucks. This hasn’t really changed, and that film wasn’t The Blind Side. There’s nothing amazing about this performance outside the fact that she DOESN’T suck out loud. The nomination baffles me.
Helen Mirren in The Last Station = haven’t seen, Helen is always good though
Carey Mulligan in An Education = For some reason, mainly appearance I think, Carey Mulligan reminded me of my cousin Katie a fair bit in this. Not that that matters. It’s a damned fine performance and she’s given plenty to play with as a young girl living a life too grown up for her.
Gabourey Sidibe in Precious: Etcetcetc = Yeah fine. The problem I have with this performance is that I can’t see her playing anything else ever. She’s more or less playing herself, though possibly a grumpy version of herself. It’s relatively one not, or a couple of notes but one at a time. Not that she sucked, but wasn’t the best thing in the movie.
Meryl Streep in Julie And Julia = the movie that inspired this blog kinda! Like Helen Mirren they probably draw up this category with a “Meryl Streep in *insert film here*” place holder then pick one of her movies from that year as she’s always good. No exception here, playing a flamboyant Julia Childs
Depressingly this might, probably will, go to Bullock going by the buzz and she’ll get it in to her head that she has some talent of some kind. Which she does, but she has to try for it. Which she didn’t here. I would give it to Carey out of this lot, having not seen Helen Mirren though I doubt that would effect my pick.
Actress in Supporting Role
Penelope Cruz in Nine = Fuck Penelope Cruz
Vera Farmiga in Up In The Air = The older business chick love interest. I say this as I had to look up the film to see who was who, I’m crap for that. Realistic performance, great chemistry with Clooney, doesn’t miss any beats
Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart = I had to check her name 3 times to make sure I’d spelled it correctly. I hadn’t. Very nice performance this but she’s the female lead so it would be in the previous category, no? Good range on show here and Maggie performs it admirably.
Anna Kendrick in Up In The Air = The young upstart. She’s given a wide range and strong character arc to play with and plays well. Some moments could have been over played but weren’t, though she’s a bit TOO understated at time in my opinion.
Mo’Nique in Precious: Longassedtitle = I’m not familiar with her comedy work, but that doesn’t matter so much. This all hinges on the final scene in the film for her character. Up until that point she’s just been a bitch, but the raw emotion on show in that last scene earned this nomination in the same way that Viola Davis did last year in Doubt.
This isn’t even a race is it? If Mo’Nique hadn’t been nominated I’d actually be calling for Mariah Carrey and I never thought I’d say that. But the Academy must have realised that nominating a diva for coming across as a human was a bit pointless really. If anyone else gets this, which they won’t, it should be Maggie.
Next up: Animated, Art and Cinematography
Actress In A Leading Role
Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side = I’ve ranted about Bullock before, think it was in a different review, and how she’s only really impressed me in one film and generally she sucks. This hasn’t really changed, and that film wasn’t The Blind Side. There’s nothing amazing about this performance outside the fact that she DOESN’T suck out loud. The nomination baffles me.
Helen Mirren in The Last Station = haven’t seen, Helen is always good though
Carey Mulligan in An Education = For some reason, mainly appearance I think, Carey Mulligan reminded me of my cousin Katie a fair bit in this. Not that that matters. It’s a damned fine performance and she’s given plenty to play with as a young girl living a life too grown up for her.
Gabourey Sidibe in Precious: Etcetcetc = Yeah fine. The problem I have with this performance is that I can’t see her playing anything else ever. She’s more or less playing herself, though possibly a grumpy version of herself. It’s relatively one not, or a couple of notes but one at a time. Not that she sucked, but wasn’t the best thing in the movie.
Meryl Streep in Julie And Julia = the movie that inspired this blog kinda! Like Helen Mirren they probably draw up this category with a “Meryl Streep in *insert film here*” place holder then pick one of her movies from that year as she’s always good. No exception here, playing a flamboyant Julia Childs
Depressingly this might, probably will, go to Bullock going by the buzz and she’ll get it in to her head that she has some talent of some kind. Which she does, but she has to try for it. Which she didn’t here. I would give it to Carey out of this lot, having not seen Helen Mirren though I doubt that would effect my pick.
Actress in Supporting Role
Penelope Cruz in Nine = Fuck Penelope Cruz
Vera Farmiga in Up In The Air = The older business chick love interest. I say this as I had to look up the film to see who was who, I’m crap for that. Realistic performance, great chemistry with Clooney, doesn’t miss any beats
Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart = I had to check her name 3 times to make sure I’d spelled it correctly. I hadn’t. Very nice performance this but she’s the female lead so it would be in the previous category, no? Good range on show here and Maggie performs it admirably.
Anna Kendrick in Up In The Air = The young upstart. She’s given a wide range and strong character arc to play with and plays well. Some moments could have been over played but weren’t, though she’s a bit TOO understated at time in my opinion.
Mo’Nique in Precious: Longassedtitle = I’m not familiar with her comedy work, but that doesn’t matter so much. This all hinges on the final scene in the film for her character. Up until that point she’s just been a bitch, but the raw emotion on show in that last scene earned this nomination in the same way that Viola Davis did last year in Doubt.
This isn’t even a race is it? If Mo’Nique hadn’t been nominated I’d actually be calling for Mariah Carrey and I never thought I’d say that. But the Academy must have realised that nominating a diva for coming across as a human was a bit pointless really. If anyone else gets this, which they won’t, it should be Maggie.
Next up: Animated, Art and Cinematography
Tuesday 2 March 2010
Movie 61: The Eye
Sydney Wells (Jessica Alba) is a blind concert violinist who lost her site in a fireworks accident when she was five. Her sister Helen (Parker Posey) arranges for a cornea transplant out of guilt, as she blames herself for what happened. Sydney slowly starts to adapt to being able to see again and starts seeing things that aren’t there, and having terrible nightmares about a fire.
Another Hollywood remake of an Asian horror film that I haven’t seen the original of. But this isn’t too shabby to be honest. It feels a lot like the pilot of a TV show or a discarded plot from Supernatural, but aside from that it’s pretty good.
I’ve been a fan of Alba since Dark Angel, before she was known for being super hot and not much else. Which isn’t really a fair judgement. Yeah she’s great to look at, but she has some chops too. She doesn’t get to stretch them to much but I personally think she did a pretty damned good job here. She doesn’t play stumbly about blind with a rocking head which is what a lesser actress would give you.
Same with Parker Posey. She’s the darling of the indie circuit though I find her annoying a lot of the time. Her usual craziness is dialled down here and she plays a normal person. Nice to see her getting bigger movie work, though this is hardly mainstream.
The film handles the early stuff well, with her working through getting her sight back and trying to adapt. It’s not a case of “her eyes open, and she can see everything perfectly”. They take their time. Her therapist is a bit of an arse to start with. We’ve all had an appointment where it feels like we’re inconveniencing the doctor by taking up their precious time. He’s that guy. Not exactly what you look for in someone who’s supposed to be helping you get your life together. And he ends up being a nice guy for the second half, sort of out of no where.
The young cancer patient who suddenly befriends Sydney for no damned reason seems tacked on simply so we know she’s really seeing dead people. It wasn’t necessary, there’s plenty in the rest of the film to do that. The ending was a little arse too, but not terrible.
So a pretty good non scary horror movie then, worth a watch on a quiet weekend night in with some beer.
Next up: Baby Mama
Another Hollywood remake of an Asian horror film that I haven’t seen the original of. But this isn’t too shabby to be honest. It feels a lot like the pilot of a TV show or a discarded plot from Supernatural, but aside from that it’s pretty good.
I’ve been a fan of Alba since Dark Angel, before she was known for being super hot and not much else. Which isn’t really a fair judgement. Yeah she’s great to look at, but she has some chops too. She doesn’t get to stretch them to much but I personally think she did a pretty damned good job here. She doesn’t play stumbly about blind with a rocking head which is what a lesser actress would give you.
Same with Parker Posey. She’s the darling of the indie circuit though I find her annoying a lot of the time. Her usual craziness is dialled down here and she plays a normal person. Nice to see her getting bigger movie work, though this is hardly mainstream.
The film handles the early stuff well, with her working through getting her sight back and trying to adapt. It’s not a case of “her eyes open, and she can see everything perfectly”. They take their time. Her therapist is a bit of an arse to start with. We’ve all had an appointment where it feels like we’re inconveniencing the doctor by taking up their precious time. He’s that guy. Not exactly what you look for in someone who’s supposed to be helping you get your life together. And he ends up being a nice guy for the second half, sort of out of no where.
The young cancer patient who suddenly befriends Sydney for no damned reason seems tacked on simply so we know she’s really seeing dead people. It wasn’t necessary, there’s plenty in the rest of the film to do that. The ending was a little arse too, but not terrible.
So a pretty good non scary horror movie then, worth a watch on a quiet weekend night in with some beer.
Next up: Baby Mama
Monday 1 March 2010
Road to the Oscars Part 1: Actors
Over the next week I’ll be posting a category by category break down of my thoughts on the various Oscar categories. Culminating in a Oscar picks post, and then live tweeting the damned thing @therealmacgyver. I’ve seen all of the nominated movies bar 6 so there will be a few gaps unfortunately.
Today, the guy acting
Actor In A Leading Role:
Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart = As I said in the review, he’s playing Kris Kristofferson for the most part. The Dude is long over due an Oscar and will probably win partly because of that fact. But it’s a very real performance. He’s not scared to look tired and flabby and the failings of the movie aren’t down to it’s leading man.
George Clooney in Up In The Air = George is basically playing the same charming dude we’ve seen him play a bunch of times. He’s damned good at it, mainly I suspect due to it being quite close to the real George. Nothing really stand out from him here, for George anyway as it’s a bloody good actor.
Colin Firth in A Single Man = Unfortunately this is one of the ones I haven’t seen
Morgan Freeman in Invictus = Most years he’d probably be in for a shot at the award for this. He plays a damned good Mandela without being a parody, and he’s Morgan fucking Freeman so he’s be riveting reading the phone book. Honestly, I’ve seen him in some terrible stuff and he never sucks.
Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker = I think this might be in the same performance boat as George as his character here is similar to the cop he played in The Unusuals. That said there’s some great acting moments here and he is the central focus in one of the best movies I’ve seen in the last 3 months.
As much as I’d like to see Jeremy Renner scoop it, Jeff Bridges pips him to the post a bit. Plus he’s due, Renner is new as far as Hollywood is concerned. He’ll probably scoop one up in a couple of years but it’s the Dude’s turn this time.
Actor In A Supporting Role
Matt Damon in Invictus = I actually forgot I was watching Matt Damon a few times. Well that’s not strictly true, but he nails the character to the wall. Whether it’s a good impression, well who knows. But it’s some damned fine acting regardless. And he looks like a rugger bugger, though maybe a bit too pretty.
Woody Harrelson in The Messenger = Who would have thought Woody from Cheers would be doing this? It’s another damned fine performance, though for half the time he’s a military man being a military man. Very nuanced, sometimes vulnerable and always hits the right notes.
Christopher Plummer in The Last Station = didn’t see it
Stanley Tucci in The Lovely Bones = He plays a creepy guy and off the top of my head that’s not a normal Tucci role but I don’t quite get all the hype. It’s might partly be because the film was so all over the place. Good stuff, but I don’t think it was amazing.
Christopher Waltz in Inglorious Bastards = playing a shit of a nazi who’s full of charisma. It’s a damned fine performance that has those little telling looks in it. Moments play out in a very tense way down to how well Waltz acted. It’s hard to pull of a likeable character when his nickname is The Jew Hunter, but he plays a glorious bastard (sorry)
I’d say it’s down to Woody or Waltz for this, though the buzz seems to be going Tucci’s way. Personally I’m torn between the W’s, but I guess I’ll lean Waltz’ way
Next up: The Ladies
Today, the guy acting
Actor In A Leading Role:
Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart = As I said in the review, he’s playing Kris Kristofferson for the most part. The Dude is long over due an Oscar and will probably win partly because of that fact. But it’s a very real performance. He’s not scared to look tired and flabby and the failings of the movie aren’t down to it’s leading man.
George Clooney in Up In The Air = George is basically playing the same charming dude we’ve seen him play a bunch of times. He’s damned good at it, mainly I suspect due to it being quite close to the real George. Nothing really stand out from him here, for George anyway as it’s a bloody good actor.
Colin Firth in A Single Man = Unfortunately this is one of the ones I haven’t seen
Morgan Freeman in Invictus = Most years he’d probably be in for a shot at the award for this. He plays a damned good Mandela without being a parody, and he’s Morgan fucking Freeman so he’s be riveting reading the phone book. Honestly, I’ve seen him in some terrible stuff and he never sucks.
Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker = I think this might be in the same performance boat as George as his character here is similar to the cop he played in The Unusuals. That said there’s some great acting moments here and he is the central focus in one of the best movies I’ve seen in the last 3 months.
As much as I’d like to see Jeremy Renner scoop it, Jeff Bridges pips him to the post a bit. Plus he’s due, Renner is new as far as Hollywood is concerned. He’ll probably scoop one up in a couple of years but it’s the Dude’s turn this time.
Actor In A Supporting Role
Matt Damon in Invictus = I actually forgot I was watching Matt Damon a few times. Well that’s not strictly true, but he nails the character to the wall. Whether it’s a good impression, well who knows. But it’s some damned fine acting regardless. And he looks like a rugger bugger, though maybe a bit too pretty.
Woody Harrelson in The Messenger = Who would have thought Woody from Cheers would be doing this? It’s another damned fine performance, though for half the time he’s a military man being a military man. Very nuanced, sometimes vulnerable and always hits the right notes.
Christopher Plummer in The Last Station = didn’t see it
Stanley Tucci in The Lovely Bones = He plays a creepy guy and off the top of my head that’s not a normal Tucci role but I don’t quite get all the hype. It’s might partly be because the film was so all over the place. Good stuff, but I don’t think it was amazing.
Christopher Waltz in Inglorious Bastards = playing a shit of a nazi who’s full of charisma. It’s a damned fine performance that has those little telling looks in it. Moments play out in a very tense way down to how well Waltz acted. It’s hard to pull of a likeable character when his nickname is The Jew Hunter, but he plays a glorious bastard (sorry)
I’d say it’s down to Woody or Waltz for this, though the buzz seems to be going Tucci’s way. Personally I’m torn between the W’s, but I guess I’ll lean Waltz’ way
Next up: The Ladies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)