Ahhhhh, Chris Pine!!! I am in love with him and everything he does! So, needless to say, I loved this movie. The first one was excellent, and this one was equally excellent. I grew up with trekkie parents, so I have seen a lot of every version of Star Trek. I mean I watched the show, I watched the movies, I watched New Generation, Deep Space Nine, Babylon 5, all of them. I did not watch them as much as my parents, not did I watch them in order like they did. But still, this was part of my life growing up, and I am glad that I get to add new things to it. The new timeline is great because it allows J.J. Abrams and his cast to pay appropriate tribute to the old Star Trek and start a new version that is all their own without making too many people upset.
This second installment continues along the broken timeline from the first movie so that J.J. Abram's Khan story can play out the way he likes. Kirk, though seemingly found in Star Trek, appears to still be struggling with some issues that are brought to the forefront with Colonel Pike's death and a new threat that changes and develops in the course of the movie. Benedict Cumberbatch was excellent as Khan and played a perfect unknown element that kept the suspense in the movie high throughout the whole 2.5 hours!
Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, and the rest of the Star Trek crew were also as equally excellent as they were in the first movie as well. I love them all individually, and I love what they bring to these movies. Add them, to Chris Pine, to J.J. Abrams, and you have a truly fantastic combination that could continue for years (much like the originals). It is nice to have this for my generation to call its own and to share with our trekkie predecessors.
In the end, I give this a 10 out of 10. It may not be perfection, but man is it good.
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Iron Man 3
Robert Downing, Jr. That is all I have to say. He is simply wonderful and is the reason these movies have had such great success. And, in round 3 of Iron Man, he steals the show again. We get even more development, and a time-line connection to The Avengers that helps put all of these connected moves into order.
This is definitely better than the second one, but still not quite as good as the first. The first Transformers and the first Iron Man were just so unexpectedly good, that I doubt any sequel will be able to beat them. They were also some of the first truly spectacular superhero movies in a long time, so they are just hard to beat in general. That being said, this latest installment does the great superhero era justice. There is the bad guy that is tricky to figure out and easy to both love and hate (Guy Pearce played that role excellently). There is the continued love interest that keeps growing with its ebb and flows. And there is the continued development of Tony Stark (a more complicated character than I could have ever wanted!).
The end contains a few surprising twists that will make the next Avengers movie interesting, but could also allow for a satisfying end to the Iron Man movies, if that is what the producers end up deciding to do.Of course Gwyneth Paltrow was great again as Pepper, and, like I said earlier, Guy Pearce was excellent as well.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10. Can't get much better from a cheesy action flick.
This is definitely better than the second one, but still not quite as good as the first. The first Transformers and the first Iron Man were just so unexpectedly good, that I doubt any sequel will be able to beat them. They were also some of the first truly spectacular superhero movies in a long time, so they are just hard to beat in general. That being said, this latest installment does the great superhero era justice. There is the bad guy that is tricky to figure out and easy to both love and hate (Guy Pearce played that role excellently). There is the continued love interest that keeps growing with its ebb and flows. And there is the continued development of Tony Stark (a more complicated character than I could have ever wanted!).
The end contains a few surprising twists that will make the next Avengers movie interesting, but could also allow for a satisfying end to the Iron Man movies, if that is what the producers end up deciding to do.Of course Gwyneth Paltrow was great again as Pepper, and, like I said earlier, Guy Pearce was excellent as well.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10. Can't get much better from a cheesy action flick.
Mud
Matthew McConaughey can actually act! I mean, I know he is an actor, and I generally like his movies, but generally that is regardless of his acting abilities. He usually plays the same kind of person, a jock with a sometimes deeper personality that is either sweet, super intelligent, or otherwise lovable that makes you fall for him every time. This was him in A Time to Kill, Two for the Money, and How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days (which are some of my favorite Matthew McConaughey movies). In this, he is a deeply troubled hick who ends up having layers upon layers of complications that just keep getting added as the story develops.
The kids also try to steal his show by having their own coming of age story, and the two mix together quite well. The boys find Mud on an island in the middle of a river in Mississippi. He convinces them to help him try to escape and reunite with he true love by painting this wonderful story that ends up not being at all reflective of reality. At the same time, the boys are dealing with their own issues of urbanization, growing up, love, and learning how to be just old enough to start truly seeing adult interactions, but still to young to fully comprehend the true complexities of those situations. It really is a great network of stories all rolled together in this new age coming of age adventure.
Reese Witherspoon shows up as Mud's love interest, and definitely dominates the screen during her rather sparse appearances. Michael Shannon plays a small roll, Sam Shepard is wonderful as the father who simply does not know how to be a man when his world is changing and disappearing under his feet, and Sarah Paulson does well as the strong and urbanizing mother/wife.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10. It really is a good one.
The kids also try to steal his show by having their own coming of age story, and the two mix together quite well. The boys find Mud on an island in the middle of a river in Mississippi. He convinces them to help him try to escape and reunite with he true love by painting this wonderful story that ends up not being at all reflective of reality. At the same time, the boys are dealing with their own issues of urbanization, growing up, love, and learning how to be just old enough to start truly seeing adult interactions, but still to young to fully comprehend the true complexities of those situations. It really is a great network of stories all rolled together in this new age coming of age adventure.
Reese Witherspoon shows up as Mud's love interest, and definitely dominates the screen during her rather sparse appearances. Michael Shannon plays a small roll, Sam Shepard is wonderful as the father who simply does not know how to be a man when his world is changing and disappearing under his feet, and Sarah Paulson does well as the strong and urbanizing mother/wife.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10. It really is a good one.
Oblivion
O Tom Cruise, why am I drawn to all of your movies? I blame my mom. She is absolutely in love with Tom Cruise, and I am starting to question why. I'm not saying he is bad, but I also cannot say he is good. He kind of does the same thing in every movie. I like it, I do, but I am starting to lose interest. This is just another installment in the sci-fi obsession with the end of the end of the world via alien invasion, and it can hold its own in the genre even though it is pretty predictable.
There are only two people on earth, monitoring the last pieces left to make sure nothing interferes with the draining of the ocean so that we can move on to bigger and better things. You learn kind of quickly that something is a little off, but you don't really figure out how off until closer to the end of the movie. Again, I don't want to spoil things, since figuring out what is going on is half the fun.
Morgan Freeman is good, as always, and Jamie from Game of Thrones even makes an appearance, which always makes things good since he is fun and nice to look at. (I promise, I do not just pay attention to hot men in movies). Besides that, there is not really a whole lot to say.
In the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. It's worth a Redbox rental.
There are only two people on earth, monitoring the last pieces left to make sure nothing interferes with the draining of the ocean so that we can move on to bigger and better things. You learn kind of quickly that something is a little off, but you don't really figure out how off until closer to the end of the movie. Again, I don't want to spoil things, since figuring out what is going on is half the fun.
Morgan Freeman is good, as always, and Jamie from Game of Thrones even makes an appearance, which always makes things good since he is fun and nice to look at. (I promise, I do not just pay attention to hot men in movies). Besides that, there is not really a whole lot to say.
In the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. It's worth a Redbox rental.
The Man of Steel
Holy cow, Henry Cavill is HOT! They definitely kept that part of the traditional Superman stories, though maybe not much else. The way he speaks in this movie even gets me, and that is rare for me. Voices aren't usually my thing, but man, Henry Cavill makes even his voice ooze every bit of his sexiness. O, right, and the actual movie was good too. :)
This story is much darker than the typical Superman story. He fights with his dad about his abilities, he cannot stay anywhere for long because people are afraid of his abilities, the running theme is that the world is simply not ready to accept someone like Superman. He is held as a prisoner by the military, Lois Lane cannot publish a story about him, and has to keep his secret for his safety. This is not the story we are used to. Everyone loves Superman, he's handsome, he's brave, and he saves the world on a regular basis. There is no fear, there is no distrust, there is no suppression for safety. He hides his true identity to protect himself from his enemies and from fame, not from fear or distrust. This is more real. As sad as it is to say, but I think I like this version better. It's more believable. Though I am not sure why his mother and father could not join him in escaping the dying Crypton.
I really like Christopher Nolan, though I am a little worried that he just found a formula that works and is going to repeat it over and over again. The Batman series starts with a dark version of the story that develops the hero and sets the stage for future movies. He then broke his hero down in the second movie, just to be able to bring him back up again in the final movie. It produces a nice trilogy, and a great set of superhero movies. It seems as if he is doing the same thing to Superman. The similarities between Batman Begins and the Man of Steel are pretty striking. Now, I know the Batman trilogy closely followed the story-line in one of the Batman comics, but I would like to see something a little different than a successful formula from this great director.
Even so, I really liked this movie and am excited for the next ones. I loved Amy Adams, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Michael Shannon (excellent bad guy!), Lawrence Fishburne, and Christopher Maloney. I really love seeing Stabler in so many more things now! Really all of the acting was great, those are just the names I know to reference. The only complaint I really had about this was that it was no where close to the uplifting superhero movie I was looking for during the summer. It really is a downer.
In the end, I give this an 8.5 out of 10. It was great, I just don't know how many times I can watch it. :)
This story is much darker than the typical Superman story. He fights with his dad about his abilities, he cannot stay anywhere for long because people are afraid of his abilities, the running theme is that the world is simply not ready to accept someone like Superman. He is held as a prisoner by the military, Lois Lane cannot publish a story about him, and has to keep his secret for his safety. This is not the story we are used to. Everyone loves Superman, he's handsome, he's brave, and he saves the world on a regular basis. There is no fear, there is no distrust, there is no suppression for safety. He hides his true identity to protect himself from his enemies and from fame, not from fear or distrust. This is more real. As sad as it is to say, but I think I like this version better. It's more believable. Though I am not sure why his mother and father could not join him in escaping the dying Crypton.
I really like Christopher Nolan, though I am a little worried that he just found a formula that works and is going to repeat it over and over again. The Batman series starts with a dark version of the story that develops the hero and sets the stage for future movies. He then broke his hero down in the second movie, just to be able to bring him back up again in the final movie. It produces a nice trilogy, and a great set of superhero movies. It seems as if he is doing the same thing to Superman. The similarities between Batman Begins and the Man of Steel are pretty striking. Now, I know the Batman trilogy closely followed the story-line in one of the Batman comics, but I would like to see something a little different than a successful formula from this great director.
Even so, I really liked this movie and am excited for the next ones. I loved Amy Adams, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Michael Shannon (excellent bad guy!), Lawrence Fishburne, and Christopher Maloney. I really love seeing Stabler in so many more things now! Really all of the acting was great, those are just the names I know to reference. The only complaint I really had about this was that it was no where close to the uplifting superhero movie I was looking for during the summer. It really is a downer.
In the end, I give this an 8.5 out of 10. It was great, I just don't know how many times I can watch it. :)
The Host
I loved this book, I loved this movie. It got horrible reviews, and I don't really know why. I also have not seen Revenge of the Body Snatchers, so that might be where part of the issue is. The story is definitely better, more developed, in the book (as it should be), but it is still a good/moving story. I cried (every time I saw it), and I don't cry (let alone more than once for the same movie)! So there!
This is a story set at some point in the future where a group of aliens, that kind of look like amoebas, have invaded earth by living through human hosts. They are peaceful, they are super intelligent, and they believe they are serving the greater good through their symbiotic occupation. However, as in every alien story, we do not do well with invasions, with being told what to do, and especially with anyone or anything that tries to tell us what should be done for our own good. As a result, there are groups of "rebels" that hide from and sometimes fight the aliens to survive and not become hosts. This story follows one girl who was a part of that group before she was captured after failing to kill herself. She has such an impact on her alien invader that she gets the alien (who has lived for hundreds of years through multiple different lifetimes of other aliens) that has never developed any sort of attachment to forsake her own life for that of the host and her loved ones.
This story was one that made me take back most of the other bad things I thought and believed about Stephanie Meyer. And this movie did the book well. The story was truncated, the timing was cut WAY short, but I still fell in love with all of the characters and felt with and for them in all of their ups and downs along with the way. It might have helped that Max Irons and Jake Abel are super cute, and that William Hurt never fails to impress. I was also impressed with Saoirse Roman's ability to portray the two very different personalities of the alien and her host.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10, I really did love it.
This is a story set at some point in the future where a group of aliens, that kind of look like amoebas, have invaded earth by living through human hosts. They are peaceful, they are super intelligent, and they believe they are serving the greater good through their symbiotic occupation. However, as in every alien story, we do not do well with invasions, with being told what to do, and especially with anyone or anything that tries to tell us what should be done for our own good. As a result, there are groups of "rebels" that hide from and sometimes fight the aliens to survive and not become hosts. This story follows one girl who was a part of that group before she was captured after failing to kill herself. She has such an impact on her alien invader that she gets the alien (who has lived for hundreds of years through multiple different lifetimes of other aliens) that has never developed any sort of attachment to forsake her own life for that of the host and her loved ones.
This story was one that made me take back most of the other bad things I thought and believed about Stephanie Meyer. And this movie did the book well. The story was truncated, the timing was cut WAY short, but I still fell in love with all of the characters and felt with and for them in all of their ups and downs along with the way. It might have helped that Max Irons and Jake Abel are super cute, and that William Hurt never fails to impress. I was also impressed with Saoirse Roman's ability to portray the two very different personalities of the alien and her host.
In the end, I give this a 9 out of 10, I really did love it.
Cloud Atlas
Fascinating movie, though I definitely feel like it could have been better. Now I really want to read the book. In some parts it was kind of hard to follow, and in others I was more than just a little lost. I'm hoping this was just because it was based on a book that was just a little too complicated to adequately translate into a movie.
The idea of the movie seems to be that throughout time there are certain lives that repeat in order to play a different role in the fate of the world at different points in time. These lives run in both identical and different ways each time, and it seems as if there are also people who can manipulate time to try to alter events in the past and future. It truly seems to be a complicated web of events that do not make complete sense until closer to the end of the movie. And even then, I'm obviously still unsure as to how it all exactly worked. I think this is one that they probably should have just ignore pieces of the book to make it a better movie, or should have tried for a mini-series instead of a movie. Like I said, it was fascinating, though it really could have been much better.
Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Jim Sturgess, Hugo Weaving (who will forever be known to me as that evil guy in The Matrix), Susan Sarandon, and Hugh Grant are just a few of the impressive cast selected for the roles in this movie. Some of them have recurring lives in every timeline addressed while others are more sparingly involved. They each did a great job of portraying the similarities and differences choices can make on future timelines. For example, because Tom Cruise chooses the low road in a couple of his lives, he plays more lowly people in some of his future lives.
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. It kept my attention, but left me wanting something so much better.
The idea of the movie seems to be that throughout time there are certain lives that repeat in order to play a different role in the fate of the world at different points in time. These lives run in both identical and different ways each time, and it seems as if there are also people who can manipulate time to try to alter events in the past and future. It truly seems to be a complicated web of events that do not make complete sense until closer to the end of the movie. And even then, I'm obviously still unsure as to how it all exactly worked. I think this is one that they probably should have just ignore pieces of the book to make it a better movie, or should have tried for a mini-series instead of a movie. Like I said, it was fascinating, though it really could have been much better.
Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Jim Sturgess, Hugo Weaving (who will forever be known to me as that evil guy in The Matrix), Susan Sarandon, and Hugh Grant are just a few of the impressive cast selected for the roles in this movie. Some of them have recurring lives in every timeline addressed while others are more sparingly involved. They each did a great job of portraying the similarities and differences choices can make on future timelines. For example, because Tom Cruise chooses the low road in a couple of his lives, he plays more lowly people in some of his future lives.
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. It kept my attention, but left me wanting something so much better.
Now You See Me
Pretty interesting movie. It's fun, suspenseful, not overly predictable, and keeps your attention by holding back the motives until the very end. You really have to pay attention the whole way through to be able to piece everything together in the end, which is really great for my add brain!
I don't really want to say too much about this one because I don't want to accidentally give anything away. This is one of those movies that trying to figure it out before they tell you is more than half of the fun. The story starts by bringing four top-notch magicians together because they each have their own specialties that combine to make a great show. It then skips a year to their first big show, which ends up being a bank heist, and follows the rest through an FBI investigation that tries to figure out how they are operating and tries to stop any more robberies. Each event is tied together and each one has a specific purpose all of its own. The motives behind each show are what really keep things interesting.
Morgan Freeman, Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher, David Franco (James Franco's cute little brother), Mark Ruffalo, Michael Cain, Michael Kelly, and Common are the biggest names in the cast, and they are all pretty excellent. They do a great job of making you cheer, tense with anticipation, and maybe even weep at every appropriate moment.
In the end, I give this an 8 out of 10. It was fun the first go round, and I reserve the right to bump the rating if it is just as much fun the second go round.
I don't really want to say too much about this one because I don't want to accidentally give anything away. This is one of those movies that trying to figure it out before they tell you is more than half of the fun. The story starts by bringing four top-notch magicians together because they each have their own specialties that combine to make a great show. It then skips a year to their first big show, which ends up being a bank heist, and follows the rest through an FBI investigation that tries to figure out how they are operating and tries to stop any more robberies. Each event is tied together and each one has a specific purpose all of its own. The motives behind each show are what really keep things interesting.
Morgan Freeman, Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher, David Franco (James Franco's cute little brother), Mark Ruffalo, Michael Cain, Michael Kelly, and Common are the biggest names in the cast, and they are all pretty excellent. They do a great job of making you cheer, tense with anticipation, and maybe even weep at every appropriate moment.
In the end, I give this an 8 out of 10. It was fun the first go round, and I reserve the right to bump the rating if it is just as much fun the second go round.
Warm Bodies
So, I kind of liked this movie....! I was really disgusted the first time I saw the preview, and then slowly grew interested the more I saw. I, like most intelligent people these days, am kind of tired of all of the zombie movies. I mean really, how many times are we going to see the same story about rotting, dead bodies that are reanimated by disease, fungi/bacteria/etc., or just because? There is a still-running TV show around the whole premise, there seems to be at least one zombie movie released every year, and there are even news stories about people acting zombie-like! I mean really, enough. But, that being said, I like The Walking Dead, I loved Sean of the Dead, and I like this movie. So, maybe I am not as fed up with the zombie craze as I want to be; I keep watching them, so they will keep producing them.
Now, to my credit (:-)), this is not your typical zombie-flick. I mean really, they come back to life!! It is a fun romantic comedy about how powerful love can truly be. It is narrated, in part, by a twenty-something looking zombie who experiences something revolutionary when he sees the girlfriend of a guy he just murdered and started eating. In this rendition, the zombies eat brains for sustenance and to get the memories of the people they are munching on. It's an explanation that I haven't heard yet, and one that makes the grossness of zombies more tolerable (which it should because you have to like these zombies to like the movie). He falls more in love with this girl the more memories he gets from the brains, and becomes more human the more time he spends with her. His love brings him fully back to humanity, and has similar affect on most of the other zombies to end up saving the world! It really is the most uplifting zombie movie. The world is saved by love; not the military, not a war, not destroying every dead thing and starting over, but love. It's kind of refreshing, even if it is insanely cliche.
The acting is good, and John Malkovich is John Malkovich (crazy, funny, all-around awesome). The Kristen Stewart look-a-like, Teresa Palmer, really is at such a disadvantage in everything she does. She is pretty good, but I have to fight to get beyond the Kristen Stewart looks to watch her. But, in this she did it. I completely forgot about K-Stew and could really enjoy Teresa Palmer seeing through the scariness and falling for a half-dead zombie!
In the end, I give this an 8 out of 10. My enjoyment might have been increased by my low expectations going it, but it really was fun and enjoyable to watch.
Now, to my credit (:-)), this is not your typical zombie-flick. I mean really, they come back to life!! It is a fun romantic comedy about how powerful love can truly be. It is narrated, in part, by a twenty-something looking zombie who experiences something revolutionary when he sees the girlfriend of a guy he just murdered and started eating. In this rendition, the zombies eat brains for sustenance and to get the memories of the people they are munching on. It's an explanation that I haven't heard yet, and one that makes the grossness of zombies more tolerable (which it should because you have to like these zombies to like the movie). He falls more in love with this girl the more memories he gets from the brains, and becomes more human the more time he spends with her. His love brings him fully back to humanity, and has similar affect on most of the other zombies to end up saving the world! It really is the most uplifting zombie movie. The world is saved by love; not the military, not a war, not destroying every dead thing and starting over, but love. It's kind of refreshing, even if it is insanely cliche.
The acting is good, and John Malkovich is John Malkovich (crazy, funny, all-around awesome). The Kristen Stewart look-a-like, Teresa Palmer, really is at such a disadvantage in everything she does. She is pretty good, but I have to fight to get beyond the Kristen Stewart looks to watch her. But, in this she did it. I completely forgot about K-Stew and could really enjoy Teresa Palmer seeing through the scariness and falling for a half-dead zombie!
In the end, I give this an 8 out of 10. My enjoyment might have been increased by my low expectations going it, but it really was fun and enjoyable to watch.
Oz: The Great and Powerful
This movie was a prequel to the Wizard of Oz. We get to learn how the wizard got to Oz, why they accepted him, and a little bit more about Oz. It is a fun story, there just isn't a lot of feeling to it. You don't particularly feel for any of the characters, except the witches (believe it or not), but that might just be because they were played by Rachel Weiss and Mila Kunis.
The story starts with James Franco being a tool and using magic to get some ass. He's pretty good at tricking women into falling for him and being his assistant while he is in town. Then he gets caught up in a tornado, and dumped in Oz. He meets the witches, his charm fails, miserably, and he suffers self-defeat, and then he saves the day! It's pretty cookie cutter, except that Mila Kunis and Rachel Weiss added some spice, and evil. They really did kind of steal the show.
I've never really been a fan of Michelle Williams, so it all kind of went down hill for me when she stepped onto the scene. She was very meh, and even adopted a more meh voice as the good witch to go with it. Though, to her credit, the voice and the half closed eyes did temper the passion and evilness of the evil witches.
Despite the lack of feeling, I really did like this story. I always like getting to know the background of any story. It never really made sense to me that someone could just accidentally hot-air balloon into a place and be put on a pedastal the way the Wizard was in the Wizard of Oz. This story really makes it all come together. It explains why the Wizard didn't/couldn't leave Oz, how he got to be in such a position in the first place, and a little bit more about the witches, why they are evil, and why one is green while the other is not. :)
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. It was fun to watch through bleh to feel.
The story starts with James Franco being a tool and using magic to get some ass. He's pretty good at tricking women into falling for him and being his assistant while he is in town. Then he gets caught up in a tornado, and dumped in Oz. He meets the witches, his charm fails, miserably, and he suffers self-defeat, and then he saves the day! It's pretty cookie cutter, except that Mila Kunis and Rachel Weiss added some spice, and evil. They really did kind of steal the show.
I've never really been a fan of Michelle Williams, so it all kind of went down hill for me when she stepped onto the scene. She was very meh, and even adopted a more meh voice as the good witch to go with it. Though, to her credit, the voice and the half closed eyes did temper the passion and evilness of the evil witches.
Despite the lack of feeling, I really did like this story. I always like getting to know the background of any story. It never really made sense to me that someone could just accidentally hot-air balloon into a place and be put on a pedastal the way the Wizard was in the Wizard of Oz. This story really makes it all come together. It explains why the Wizard didn't/couldn't leave Oz, how he got to be in such a position in the first place, and a little bit more about the witches, why they are evil, and why one is green while the other is not. :)
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. It was fun to watch through bleh to feel.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
42
I LOVED this movie! It was great, and moving, and made you laugh and cry all at the same time. If you like baseball, this is a movie for you. If you love baseball, it is even better. If you like stories about true heroes, you will love this movie. If you have a soul, you will love this movie. That is all.
Everybody knows the big stories about racism and overcoming racism in the United States, and I'm sure a lot of people, particularly baseball fans, know at least part of the story of Jackie Robinson becoming the first black professional player with the Brooklyn Dodgers. Even so, this movie is powerful. It does a really good job of showing just how amazing Jackie Robinson truly was. He was incredibly intelligent, incredibly talented, and had an amazing sense of self-worth and self-restraint. Here, you see him refuse to break down in the face of repeated, relentless, and mindless racism that not only put him further in the spotlight, but also helped to break down that senseless racism across the country.
The movie progresses from seeing Jackie Robinson in the black baseball league, to the Dodgers' manager's decision to hire a black player, to the manager's decision to pick Jackie Robinson, to his progression in the league, to his starting place in history. Through all of this you see how day-by-day, person-by-person, Jackie Robinson (and the manager) changed the world. It really was amazing.
Chadwick Boseman was absolutely fantastic as Jackie Robinson. He developed the character over the two hour film, he made you feel Jackie Robinson's pain and joy, he made you laugh, and cry, and cheer, and boo all at the appropriate moments. Harrison Ford was also amazing. He was perfectly unyielding and supportive as the manager who knew exactly what he was doing when he specifically picked Jackie Robinson to be the first black player in major league baseball. Christopher Meloni (from Law and Order: SVU) was also pretty fantastic (I am really happy that his leaving SVU has lead to an increasing number of appearances elsewhere!). And, of course, the rest of the cast was also great.
As you probably have noticed, I could go on and on and on about this movie, but I will resist the urge. In the end, I give this a 10 out of 10!
Everybody knows the big stories about racism and overcoming racism in the United States, and I'm sure a lot of people, particularly baseball fans, know at least part of the story of Jackie Robinson becoming the first black professional player with the Brooklyn Dodgers. Even so, this movie is powerful. It does a really good job of showing just how amazing Jackie Robinson truly was. He was incredibly intelligent, incredibly talented, and had an amazing sense of self-worth and self-restraint. Here, you see him refuse to break down in the face of repeated, relentless, and mindless racism that not only put him further in the spotlight, but also helped to break down that senseless racism across the country.
The movie progresses from seeing Jackie Robinson in the black baseball league, to the Dodgers' manager's decision to hire a black player, to the manager's decision to pick Jackie Robinson, to his progression in the league, to his starting place in history. Through all of this you see how day-by-day, person-by-person, Jackie Robinson (and the manager) changed the world. It really was amazing.
Chadwick Boseman was absolutely fantastic as Jackie Robinson. He developed the character over the two hour film, he made you feel Jackie Robinson's pain and joy, he made you laugh, and cry, and cheer, and boo all at the appropriate moments. Harrison Ford was also amazing. He was perfectly unyielding and supportive as the manager who knew exactly what he was doing when he specifically picked Jackie Robinson to be the first black player in major league baseball. Christopher Meloni (from Law and Order: SVU) was also pretty fantastic (I am really happy that his leaving SVU has lead to an increasing number of appearances elsewhere!). And, of course, the rest of the cast was also great.
As you probably have noticed, I could go on and on and on about this movie, but I will resist the urge. In the end, I give this a 10 out of 10!
Olympus Has Fallen
I liked this movie. Once again, it's a moderately predictable, cheesy action film. North Koreans actually physically and violently take over the White House. You cannot go into this (or I guess rent this at this point) with high expectations of brilliance or class. It is action-packed, suspenseful, and fun.
Gerard Butler is beautiful, Aaron Eckhart is beautiful, Dylan McDermont is pretty, and Gerard Butler kicks some major North Korean butt, could you want more? O right, a plot might be good, but have no fear, this even has a plot (there aren't enough sexy men to make it come close to another Magic Mike)! It starts off kind of sad to set the background for Gerard Butler to be out of the White House and thus make him able to sneak in and save the day. Then we move almost directly into the action. There is apparently an entire army of secret service men in the White House, and they ALL die at the hands of the North Koreans. They planned this so well (without the NSA's or Patriot Act's illegal listening in to everything picking up on it) that they had planes, helicopters, and a full-scale invasion with bazookas (at least that's what I think they are, they blow things up) and everything!
Yes, it is ridiculous, but it is still fun to sit and enjoy the ride. There are some ups and downs, like the search for the President's son, trying to figure out the motive, waiting for Gerard Butler to save the day, etc. And there is even a touch of reality, Gerard Butler ALMOST dies! :)
There really isn't much more to say, for an action movie, I give this a 7 out of 10. If you don't like action, you might want to skip this one.
Gerard Butler is beautiful, Aaron Eckhart is beautiful, Dylan McDermont is pretty, and Gerard Butler kicks some major North Korean butt, could you want more? O right, a plot might be good, but have no fear, this even has a plot (there aren't enough sexy men to make it come close to another Magic Mike)! It starts off kind of sad to set the background for Gerard Butler to be out of the White House and thus make him able to sneak in and save the day. Then we move almost directly into the action. There is apparently an entire army of secret service men in the White House, and they ALL die at the hands of the North Koreans. They planned this so well (without the NSA's or Patriot Act's illegal listening in to everything picking up on it) that they had planes, helicopters, and a full-scale invasion with bazookas (at least that's what I think they are, they blow things up) and everything!
Yes, it is ridiculous, but it is still fun to sit and enjoy the ride. There are some ups and downs, like the search for the President's son, trying to figure out the motive, waiting for Gerard Butler to save the day, etc. And there is even a touch of reality, Gerard Butler ALMOST dies! :)
There really isn't much more to say, for an action movie, I give this a 7 out of 10. If you don't like action, you might want to skip this one.
World War Z
So, I'm not going to lie, I was not particularly interested in seeing this movie. I was not impressed with the previews, and I am starting to get a little annoyed with all the zombie apocalypse things. Dead, rotting beings that are falling apart and tear people to pieces by eating them are really not my cup of tea (though that obviously does not prevent me from watching them - Shaun of the Dead is the BEST!). That being said, Brad Pitt pulled me in, and I kind of liked it.
This movie was rated PG-13, so there wasn't any blood and gore. And I mean it, there was none. Every time there should have been blood they cut away or simply edited out. That made it better on the one hand (I didn't have to advert my eyes every time the zombies came one), but it also made it kind on ridiculous on the other. Someone lost a limb, and I didn't even know it had happened until a few minutes later. Don't get me wrong, I do not need to see the blood spurting out of the wrist, but I don't feel like they really needed to edit THAT much. It's a zombie apocalypse movie for goodness sake, it is not something you should take your pre-teens to, it does not need to be made PG-13 for them.
I love Brad Pitt, always have, always will. Not only is he a super sexy beast (regardless of his age, seriously, it's just impressive), but he can also act pretty well. He plays a retired soldier for the UN who gets scammed into traveling the world to find the origin (cure) of the zombie "disease". He's just supposed to be a hired gun, but ends up being able to help save the world (of course). He seems to be pretty comfortable and composed in all of the high-intensity situations that allow for him to be in complete charge and control in every different situation and group he encounters.
Besides Brad Pitt, there is s some pretty good acting all around. Again, the entire premise is that there is a zombie apocalypse, so of course it is predictable and action-packed, just like most every other zombie movie (it's amazing how there is only one that suggests that love can save us all! See Warm Bodies). That means that this is generally nothing new, nothing different, and you have your generally typical characters in true force. There is a sort of "twist" that does make this different from other zombie flicks, but they each do have to have their own special thing, right? (Shaun of the Dead is funny, The Walking Dead is more like a soap opera with the zombies as a background, Warm Bodies is all about love, Resident Evil has creepy zombie monster things, 28 days is all about the survival, you get the picture).
So, without really giving too much of the plot away (it is fun to be kept in suspense every now and then :)), I'll end by saying that I liked this, on the whole, and I give this movie a solid 6.5 out of 10.
This movie was rated PG-13, so there wasn't any blood and gore. And I mean it, there was none. Every time there should have been blood they cut away or simply edited out. That made it better on the one hand (I didn't have to advert my eyes every time the zombies came one), but it also made it kind on ridiculous on the other. Someone lost a limb, and I didn't even know it had happened until a few minutes later. Don't get me wrong, I do not need to see the blood spurting out of the wrist, but I don't feel like they really needed to edit THAT much. It's a zombie apocalypse movie for goodness sake, it is not something you should take your pre-teens to, it does not need to be made PG-13 for them.
I love Brad Pitt, always have, always will. Not only is he a super sexy beast (regardless of his age, seriously, it's just impressive), but he can also act pretty well. He plays a retired soldier for the UN who gets scammed into traveling the world to find the origin (cure) of the zombie "disease". He's just supposed to be a hired gun, but ends up being able to help save the world (of course). He seems to be pretty comfortable and composed in all of the high-intensity situations that allow for him to be in complete charge and control in every different situation and group he encounters.
Besides Brad Pitt, there is s some pretty good acting all around. Again, the entire premise is that there is a zombie apocalypse, so of course it is predictable and action-packed, just like most every other zombie movie (it's amazing how there is only one that suggests that love can save us all! See Warm Bodies). That means that this is generally nothing new, nothing different, and you have your generally typical characters in true force. There is a sort of "twist" that does make this different from other zombie flicks, but they each do have to have their own special thing, right? (Shaun of the Dead is funny, The Walking Dead is more like a soap opera with the zombies as a background, Warm Bodies is all about love, Resident Evil has creepy zombie monster things, 28 days is all about the survival, you get the picture).
So, without really giving too much of the plot away (it is fun to be kept in suspense every now and then :)), I'll end by saying that I liked this, on the whole, and I give this movie a solid 6.5 out of 10.
Friday, June 14, 2013
GI Joe: Rise of the Cobra
In a word, awful. I know, I know, I shouldn't be surprised, but I was really hoping that this would be entertaining. The first one was ridiculous, but at least it's still fun to watch! This was just painful. However, there was one good thing about this movie: the 3D was pretty spectacular, and I generally HATE 3D.
There is really not a whole lot to say about this movie. It starts kind of like that scene in Zoolander where all of his idiot model friends are going around having a great time, skipping smiling, playing with gas, you know, normal things. Then BOOM, someone lights a cigarette at the gas pump while they're all drenched in gasoline, and the fun is abruptly ended and the next shot is a funeral with 4 caskets. That's kind of what happened. They spend time adding in some new characters to mix with the old, then BOOM, for no real reason, the old characters are all gone and all you're left with is the Rock. Zoolander made sense. It was supposed to be funny and ridiculous, and Channing Tatum was not one of the removed characters.
There is then a ridiculous progression of firefights, the Rock in all his muscular, manly glory, and some side-kicks who try to act like the original G.I. Joe characters. The firefights and action scenes are impressive in the sense that they involve a lot of firepower, but that is it. This movie is really nothing but needless explosions in which everyone miraculously survives, even the bad guys a lot of the times!! There is very little substance, and what is there is unoriginal, horribly cheesy, and simply laughable. I mean, I seriously laughed for the last 30 minutes of the movie, which were not intended to be funny, because it was just THAT ridiculous. Yes, the first go round they melt the Eiffel Tower, but that is not ridiculous compared to what they do in this movie.
In the end, I'd give this a 3 out of 10. There really is nothing to it, but I have seen worse.
There is really not a whole lot to say about this movie. It starts kind of like that scene in Zoolander where all of his idiot model friends are going around having a great time, skipping smiling, playing with gas, you know, normal things. Then BOOM, someone lights a cigarette at the gas pump while they're all drenched in gasoline, and the fun is abruptly ended and the next shot is a funeral with 4 caskets. That's kind of what happened. They spend time adding in some new characters to mix with the old, then BOOM, for no real reason, the old characters are all gone and all you're left with is the Rock. Zoolander made sense. It was supposed to be funny and ridiculous, and Channing Tatum was not one of the removed characters.
There is then a ridiculous progression of firefights, the Rock in all his muscular, manly glory, and some side-kicks who try to act like the original G.I. Joe characters. The firefights and action scenes are impressive in the sense that they involve a lot of firepower, but that is it. This movie is really nothing but needless explosions in which everyone miraculously survives, even the bad guys a lot of the times!! There is very little substance, and what is there is unoriginal, horribly cheesy, and simply laughable. I mean, I seriously laughed for the last 30 minutes of the movie, which were not intended to be funny, because it was just THAT ridiculous. Yes, the first go round they melt the Eiffel Tower, but that is not ridiculous compared to what they do in this movie.
In the end, I'd give this a 3 out of 10. There really is nothing to it, but I have seen worse.
Saturday, May 25, 2013
Admission
So, this movie was different than what I expected. It was much more serious, but still pretty good. Paul Rudd and Tina Fey were both good (as was expected), and their chemistry was pretty good. I'm just not entirely sure I really liked the different plot.
So, my expectation, which came from the trailer, was that it would be a funny movie about a quirky admissions officer's falling in love despite herself while traveling around the country to do her job. The movie wasn't exactly different from that, but the focus really changed from being on the weird/stressful admissions job to an interesting plot twist that explains the guarded nature of Tina Fey and also turns her into a bad admissions officer (but a good person).
Like I said, the twist was good for character development and definitely pushed the story along to make it a little more than your average romantic comedy. However, I'm not entirely sure I actually liked it. I don't really know what it was. Maybe it was the fact that Tina Fey's character let one moment ruin her life. Maybe it was the fact that that one thing continued to mess up her life (she does not end the movie as an admissions officer). Maybe it's because it "shine a light" on the shitty admissions process that made me uncomfortable having gone through two cycles of rejections thus far. I'm not really sure. All I can say is I left the theater unsatusfued with the movie, and that dissatisfaction was not because of the acting, the jokes, the seriousness, or the ending.
It wasn't a movie where I laughed the WHOLE time, but it was pretty dang funny. But seriously, how could it not be with the leads? I have yet to really hate (or not laugh in) a movie with Paul Rudd as the lead (I haven't seen This Is Forty yet, so I'm not saying it doesn't exist). Tina Fey is funny too. But since this had a serious turn, there were also definitely moments where I could not laugh.
I the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. Not great, but not bad.
So, my expectation, which came from the trailer, was that it would be a funny movie about a quirky admissions officer's falling in love despite herself while traveling around the country to do her job. The movie wasn't exactly different from that, but the focus really changed from being on the weird/stressful admissions job to an interesting plot twist that explains the guarded nature of Tina Fey and also turns her into a bad admissions officer (but a good person).
Like I said, the twist was good for character development and definitely pushed the story along to make it a little more than your average romantic comedy. However, I'm not entirely sure I actually liked it. I don't really know what it was. Maybe it was the fact that Tina Fey's character let one moment ruin her life. Maybe it was the fact that that one thing continued to mess up her life (she does not end the movie as an admissions officer). Maybe it's because it "shine a light" on the shitty admissions process that made me uncomfortable having gone through two cycles of rejections thus far. I'm not really sure. All I can say is I left the theater unsatusfued with the movie, and that dissatisfaction was not because of the acting, the jokes, the seriousness, or the ending.
It wasn't a movie where I laughed the WHOLE time, but it was pretty dang funny. But seriously, how could it not be with the leads? I have yet to really hate (or not laugh in) a movie with Paul Rudd as the lead (I haven't seen This Is Forty yet, so I'm not saying it doesn't exist). Tina Fey is funny too. But since this had a serious turn, there were also definitely moments where I could not laugh.
I the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. Not great, but not bad.
Monday, April 15, 2013
The Master
So, this was an interesting movie. It was really hard for me to find the point, so I kept watching, hoping that it would all make sense and come together at some point. Unfortunately, it did not. The acting was stellar, hence all of the awards nominations, but the story itself just wasn't there. A movie is more than just it's moving parts, but this movie did not seem to embrace that concept.
The trailer, and the descriptions at the awards shows, describe this movie as one that goes through a man's journey through life and his involvement in a famous cult. I love The Following, Criminal Minds, really any crazy, psychological, crime drama, so needless to say, I was very intrigued. This also just made me very disappointed as well. I also recently discovered that this was supposed to be a description of the beginning of Scientology which also makes it even more lack luster.
There really is not much for me to say, because there really wasn't much to the plot. Joaquin Phoenix was a drunk, and maybe a druggie, who made his own alcohol that included paint thinner and things (old-timey meth?) that may have actually killed a man who drank it. After he maybe kills the man, he runs, goes on a bender, and somehow ends up on Phillip Seymore Hoffman's boat full of cult-like followers. Phillip Seymore Hoffman then tries to change and better Joaquin Phoenix, but ends up failing (I think). There is the background of Phillip Seymore Hoffman trying to combat the cult charges against him, but that is really secondary to the hodge-podge development of his relationship with Joaquin Phoenix. None of it really makes sense, to me.
So, in the end, this gets a 3 out of 10 in my book.
The trailer, and the descriptions at the awards shows, describe this movie as one that goes through a man's journey through life and his involvement in a famous cult. I love The Following, Criminal Minds, really any crazy, psychological, crime drama, so needless to say, I was very intrigued. This also just made me very disappointed as well. I also recently discovered that this was supposed to be a description of the beginning of Scientology which also makes it even more lack luster.
There really is not much for me to say, because there really wasn't much to the plot. Joaquin Phoenix was a drunk, and maybe a druggie, who made his own alcohol that included paint thinner and things (old-timey meth?) that may have actually killed a man who drank it. After he maybe kills the man, he runs, goes on a bender, and somehow ends up on Phillip Seymore Hoffman's boat full of cult-like followers. Phillip Seymore Hoffman then tries to change and better Joaquin Phoenix, but ends up failing (I think). There is the background of Phillip Seymore Hoffman trying to combat the cult charges against him, but that is really secondary to the hodge-podge development of his relationship with Joaquin Phoenix. None of it really makes sense, to me.
So, in the end, this gets a 3 out of 10 in my book.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Independence Day
So, I know this isn't prototypical of my reviews, but I am doing this because of a special request. :) I love this movie. It was great when I was a kid, it is equally great now, despite all of its little flaws. Sometimes it's just the imperfections that really make you appreciate how magical something used to be.
I grew up with this movie, it was the start of the doomsday alien movies for me, and it was a great one. Will Smith was, and still is really, super hot, Bill Pullman is, and probably always will be, one of my favorite presidents, and you can't go wrong with Jeff Goldbloom or Judd Hirsch. Yes, Jeff Goldbloom may be an asshole, but he does well as the neurotic asshole in dramatic, end-of-the-world type movies.
Now, the plot is a bit ridiculous for many reasons. As Francis pointed out, how is it that an alien race that is so far superior with defenses, weapons, general intelligence, etc. is taken out by a simple computer virus. How crazy is it that they did not have a super advanced form of Norton or McAfee to go along with their impenetrable physical defenses? Also, they spent at least 15 minutes blowing up holes in the big alien ship outside of Area 51, that does no damage, BUT one man in one plane goes up the center of the HUGE ship and then it falls to pieces? I think not, but that is the magic of an end-of-the-world action film, impossible things happen and you love it! Even bringing up these questions does not shake my love of this movie!
Some more unexplained scenes: Area-51 has a full medical center that even in the late 1990s cannot stop internal bleeding, they have a chapel, and they have a room where bullets literally bounce off the walls....with a "poing" and all! There is nothing wrong with nuclear infused fireworks. Fire somehow does not go in every crevice available. And, again, a superior alien race is taken out by a 1990s computer virus.
Now, as I started, I love this movie. The fact that I am pointing out some obvious flaws only makes me appreciate how much I enjoyed this movie. It is ridiculous, it is kind of supposed to be (sort of), and the imperfections really do just make me like it more. I can have even more fun with it!
In the end, I give this movie an 8 out of 10.
I grew up with this movie, it was the start of the doomsday alien movies for me, and it was a great one. Will Smith was, and still is really, super hot, Bill Pullman is, and probably always will be, one of my favorite presidents, and you can't go wrong with Jeff Goldbloom or Judd Hirsch. Yes, Jeff Goldbloom may be an asshole, but he does well as the neurotic asshole in dramatic, end-of-the-world type movies.
Now, the plot is a bit ridiculous for many reasons. As Francis pointed out, how is it that an alien race that is so far superior with defenses, weapons, general intelligence, etc. is taken out by a simple computer virus. How crazy is it that they did not have a super advanced form of Norton or McAfee to go along with their impenetrable physical defenses? Also, they spent at least 15 minutes blowing up holes in the big alien ship outside of Area 51, that does no damage, BUT one man in one plane goes up the center of the HUGE ship and then it falls to pieces? I think not, but that is the magic of an end-of-the-world action film, impossible things happen and you love it! Even bringing up these questions does not shake my love of this movie!
Some more unexplained scenes: Area-51 has a full medical center that even in the late 1990s cannot stop internal bleeding, they have a chapel, and they have a room where bullets literally bounce off the walls....with a "poing" and all! There is nothing wrong with nuclear infused fireworks. Fire somehow does not go in every crevice available. And, again, a superior alien race is taken out by a 1990s computer virus.
Now, as I started, I love this movie. The fact that I am pointing out some obvious flaws only makes me appreciate how much I enjoyed this movie. It is ridiculous, it is kind of supposed to be (sort of), and the imperfections really do just make me like it more. I can have even more fun with it!
In the end, I give this movie an 8 out of 10.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Wreck-It Ralph
This movie is updated version of Toy Story. Instead of your stuffed animals coming to life and having a whole separate, secret world, your video games do. It's a cute idea, and of course there is the growing and learning and blah that always accompanies children movies, but it fell short of my expectations.
Part of the disappointment might stem from my intense hatred of Sarah Silverman. She is the worst. But I don't think that is entirely it. However, she is one of the stars by being a fellow outcast that leads to the defeat of the true evil character in this story, so it definitely relates to the movie as a whole.
This was a cute movie, don't mistake me, I enjoyed it. But, it was not what I was expecting. My problem with children's movies is that I keep trying to hold them all to the same standard as Finding Nemo, Cars, The Incredibles, etc, yet, rarely does a children's movie meet those standards. I get it, not every movie can be as good as Finding Nemo, but man, I feel sorry for parents who have to sit through these movies over and over and over again. They are cute for seeing once, maybe twice, but they would be insufferable to watch as much as I'm sure a child would.
Like I said, I feel like this is today's version of Toy Story. All of the children now are playing video games, computer games, cellphone/ipod games, and this movie brings them to life outside of the game. That is a cool idea, and it could have been a great movie. It just wasn't. The story was moving along very well, Ralph was sad, he was moving from game to game and causing problems. Jane Lynch got involved and had a pretty terrible back story. It was kind of cute. Then it stalled on one super sweet, high pitched whiny story. That's where things kind of fell apart.
They tried to fix it by having the bugs be a continuous under current (no pun intended for those of you who have seen the movie, hehe), and connecting the original evil to the end, but it still just fell short.
In the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. It was cute, just not up to snuff.
Part of the disappointment might stem from my intense hatred of Sarah Silverman. She is the worst. But I don't think that is entirely it. However, she is one of the stars by being a fellow outcast that leads to the defeat of the true evil character in this story, so it definitely relates to the movie as a whole.
This was a cute movie, don't mistake me, I enjoyed it. But, it was not what I was expecting. My problem with children's movies is that I keep trying to hold them all to the same standard as Finding Nemo, Cars, The Incredibles, etc, yet, rarely does a children's movie meet those standards. I get it, not every movie can be as good as Finding Nemo, but man, I feel sorry for parents who have to sit through these movies over and over and over again. They are cute for seeing once, maybe twice, but they would be insufferable to watch as much as I'm sure a child would.
Like I said, I feel like this is today's version of Toy Story. All of the children now are playing video games, computer games, cellphone/ipod games, and this movie brings them to life outside of the game. That is a cool idea, and it could have been a great movie. It just wasn't. The story was moving along very well, Ralph was sad, he was moving from game to game and causing problems. Jane Lynch got involved and had a pretty terrible back story. It was kind of cute. Then it stalled on one super sweet, high pitched whiny story. That's where things kind of fell apart.
They tried to fix it by having the bugs be a continuous under current (no pun intended for those of you who have seen the movie, hehe), and connecting the original evil to the end, but it still just fell short.
In the end, I give this a 6 out of 10. It was cute, just not up to snuff.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Zero Dark Thirty
Kathryn Bigelow really likes her war movies. And why not? She's pretty good and them. The Hurt Locker was a pretty powerful movie. This one is a close second. There is a flaw, it is about 20 to 30 minutes too long. She moves along pretty well by covering 10 years in about 1 hour and 45 minutes. Then she ends by covering about 20 to 30 minutes in about 45. It is the climax of the movie, so lots of attention needs to focus on the details, I get it, but man, I was simply exhausted and this ending really made me remember that.
I also did not appreciate the ending very much because it kind of ruined Osama Bin Laden's death for me. My understanding of what happened at the compound was that the Navy SEALs had no choice but to kill the people there, included Osama Bin Laden, however, that is not how the movie portrayed the events. Yes, they had to kill some people because they started shooting first, but they did not have to kill everyone there, and they certainly did not have to kill Osama. I'm going to leave it at that and not soap box. Be proud of me.
Jessica Chastain did a great job. She was haggard, she was a bitch, a lot of bad things happened to her and her friends. She was obsessed. She was everything you'd expect a badass CIA woman who found Bin Laden to be. That being said, I definitely liked Jennifer Lawrence better, but that might be just because I liked her character more. I felt like Jason Clarke was truly the unsung hero of the film. He was fantastic. He played a completely detached CIA operative turned Washington suit excellently and really stole the whole show for me. He was the only character I actually liked in the whole film.
Like I said, Jessica Chastain was a bitch. She was obsessed with finding Bin Laden, so I was not particularly surprised she did. I was not cheering for her to win, but I was interested in seeing how the whole story played out. Not because I wanted justice to be done, not because I empathized with her, not because I wanted her to get redeemed and find success. I was interested in the story, not the characters involved in it. Aside from Jason Clarke, I really liked him.
On the whole, this was well done. And the fact that I did not care about a majority of the characters, but still enjoyed the movie should speak volumes for this movie. Thinking about how that played out, I'm not sure that has ever happened to me before. It really was a good story that was done well under Kathryn Bigelow's proven direction.
In the end, I give this an 8.5 out of 10. I'm glad I watched it; I will probably watch it again at some point and more than once; I will not own it.
Saturday, January 19, 2013
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
This is the Unexpected Journey portion of the book turned trilogy series, as such, it is appropriately named. I loved the Hobbit, and I was kind of excited when I heard Peter Jackson was dividing the book into more than one movie. Despite what some of the critics say, there is A LOT in the Hobbit, so it needs to be separated into more than one movie to do it justice. However, I draw the line at two. This does not need to be a trilogy, as evidenced by this movie.
Normally, I dislike movies from books that I have read because the movie never really seems to do the book justice. There isn't enough attention to detail, things are left out, things are completely changed, etc. This movie did not have that fault. It has been a while since I read The Hobbit, about 13 years I believe, but I'm pretty sure this hit every single line in the book so far. So, you would think I would have LOVED it. But alas, it still fell short. I appreciate that when you turn a book into a movie, you're going to have to leave something out to make it a good movie. This movie proves that.
I know I seem overly harsh because on the one side I hate it when they take too much out, but then on the other hand I also don't enjoy it when they leave too much in. However, this is because there is a reason to read the book and a reason to see the movie. One is more for entertainment than the other. A movie is not supposed to be 9 hours long, then it's a mini-series. It is supposed to be a quick fix. I brings the book to life in a way that most people can't. It's a companion, not a replacement. Turning The Hobbit into a trilogy makes the movie replace the book, not accompany it.
There is not THAT much entertainment value in almost 3 hours of setting up all of the things that are going to happen in the next movies. Yes, I enjoyed it, to some extent, but I was also bored to some extent. I want to see the next installment now, not in a year. However, that desire is because I want to see the truly exciting parts of the story that I already know, not because this movie left me wanting that much more.
Sorry for the diatribe on books to movies, but I felt like this was the best way to explain my feelings about the movie. It was boring, not because I wasn't invested, but because I got lost in the bark when Mr. Jackson should have been loosing me in the forest. (Sorry for the over-used forest for the trees analogy we law school kids have heard too often these last almost 3 years!) The acting was good, the story-line is, obviously good, the connections to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, that I missed when reading this prequel before LOTR, is fascinating, and I do look forward to seeing the other two films. I was just underwhelmed with this movie standing alone.
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. If I didn't love the story so much it would be worse.
Normally, I dislike movies from books that I have read because the movie never really seems to do the book justice. There isn't enough attention to detail, things are left out, things are completely changed, etc. This movie did not have that fault. It has been a while since I read The Hobbit, about 13 years I believe, but I'm pretty sure this hit every single line in the book so far. So, you would think I would have LOVED it. But alas, it still fell short. I appreciate that when you turn a book into a movie, you're going to have to leave something out to make it a good movie. This movie proves that.
I know I seem overly harsh because on the one side I hate it when they take too much out, but then on the other hand I also don't enjoy it when they leave too much in. However, this is because there is a reason to read the book and a reason to see the movie. One is more for entertainment than the other. A movie is not supposed to be 9 hours long, then it's a mini-series. It is supposed to be a quick fix. I brings the book to life in a way that most people can't. It's a companion, not a replacement. Turning The Hobbit into a trilogy makes the movie replace the book, not accompany it.
There is not THAT much entertainment value in almost 3 hours of setting up all of the things that are going to happen in the next movies. Yes, I enjoyed it, to some extent, but I was also bored to some extent. I want to see the next installment now, not in a year. However, that desire is because I want to see the truly exciting parts of the story that I already know, not because this movie left me wanting that much more.
Sorry for the diatribe on books to movies, but I felt like this was the best way to explain my feelings about the movie. It was boring, not because I wasn't invested, but because I got lost in the bark when Mr. Jackson should have been loosing me in the forest. (Sorry for the over-used forest for the trees analogy we law school kids have heard too often these last almost 3 years!) The acting was good, the story-line is, obviously good, the connections to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, that I missed when reading this prequel before LOTR, is fascinating, and I do look forward to seeing the other two films. I was just underwhelmed with this movie standing alone.
In the end, I give this a 6.5 out of 10. If I didn't love the story so much it would be worse.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Django Unchained
In a word, overrated. Now, don't write this off as a reflection of how I simply don't like or appreciate the true genius of Quentin Tarantino. I absolutely loved Inglorious Basterds, I really liked Kill Bill Vol.1 and 2, I loved Pulp Fiction, etc. I genuinely do like Quentin Tarantino's work and do not begrudge him his taste for excessive violence. In fact, I generally find his violence horribly hilarious.
That being said, I was disappointed by this movie. I don't mean I didn't like it, though a horrendously bad mood caused me to think so immediately after watching it. I just meant that I wanted something better. The Academy seems to agree since they "snubbed" him in not nominating him for Best Director, though his film did receive many other nominations. My bone to pick is not with individual scenes, not with violence, not with the psuedo mockery of slavery, slave owners, and the entire slave culture. My bone to pick is with the disconnectedness of the whole film/story and Samuel L. Jackson.
It starts with Christolph Waltz only wanting Jamie Foxx because he knows what a couple bounties look like. One bounty, and done. However, because Jamie Foxx's "wife" is a slave named Broomhilda. The name is from a German fairy tale and purports to set the plot for the rest of the movie. For a while it does, and I guess in the end it does, but not in the best way. The problem comes in when Samuel L. Jackson fucks shit up and acts like a crazy. I usually appreciate his crass and stupidity, but here I did not. I especially disliked his moderately useless soliloquy towards the end of the film. Though I guess it does make it a little more fun when he does ultimately die.
There are some really funny moments in this movie. Jamie Foxx gets to pick his own outfit, and it's excellent. There is a whole wanna-be KKK scene that severely mocks the entire organization that is also excellent. Quentin Tarantino gets blown up, and a woman gets blown into oblivion, which are also funny. Chistolph Waltz and Leonardo DiCaprio were both excellent, and Jamie Foxx was predictably good.
So in the end, I give this movie a 7.5 out of 10. It's no Inglorious Basterds, yet it wasn't bad.
That being said, I was disappointed by this movie. I don't mean I didn't like it, though a horrendously bad mood caused me to think so immediately after watching it. I just meant that I wanted something better. The Academy seems to agree since they "snubbed" him in not nominating him for Best Director, though his film did receive many other nominations. My bone to pick is not with individual scenes, not with violence, not with the psuedo mockery of slavery, slave owners, and the entire slave culture. My bone to pick is with the disconnectedness of the whole film/story and Samuel L. Jackson.
It starts with Christolph Waltz only wanting Jamie Foxx because he knows what a couple bounties look like. One bounty, and done. However, because Jamie Foxx's "wife" is a slave named Broomhilda. The name is from a German fairy tale and purports to set the plot for the rest of the movie. For a while it does, and I guess in the end it does, but not in the best way. The problem comes in when Samuel L. Jackson fucks shit up and acts like a crazy. I usually appreciate his crass and stupidity, but here I did not. I especially disliked his moderately useless soliloquy towards the end of the film. Though I guess it does make it a little more fun when he does ultimately die.
There are some really funny moments in this movie. Jamie Foxx gets to pick his own outfit, and it's excellent. There is a whole wanna-be KKK scene that severely mocks the entire organization that is also excellent. Quentin Tarantino gets blown up, and a woman gets blown into oblivion, which are also funny. Chistolph Waltz and Leonardo DiCaprio were both excellent, and Jamie Foxx was predictably good.
So in the end, I give this movie a 7.5 out of 10. It's no Inglorious Basterds, yet it wasn't bad.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Les Miserables
I'm still not quite sure how I ultimately feel about this, but I will hopefully have that figured out at the end of this post. There has been a lot of talk about how disappointing most of the voices were, but that wasn't really my problem. Yes, I was a little disappointed in Russell Crowe, I wanted his voice to be stronger, and I was disappointed in Amanda Seyfried, I wanted her voice to be less sharp. However, they were not bad. Hugh Jackman was good, Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter were good, and the chorus was always good. Eddie Redmayne, Marius, and Anne Hathaway were absolutely amazing, with Eddie Redmayne completely blowing me away (I think I found a new person to fall in love with!). So, the voices were not my problem.
The acting was also well done, but, considering the cast, how could it not be? In fact, I think many people's problems with the voices have to do with the way this particular musical was done. They did not record the songs and then lip-sing while filming. Instead, they did it all together. And remember, this is a movie, not a broadway musical. It's not all about the singing and the dancing, it's about the emotions, the feeling, the drama, the characters. So, filming live singing is going to be more emotional and heart-felt. It's going to be rough.
I think my problem comes in with a related aspect of the new style of filming a musical. Yes, it's theoretically good in that you get raw acting emotion behind the music that is absent otherwise, but you also get a lot of face time because the focus is capturing that raw singing, not making a movie. When I go to a movie I want to see scenes, interactions, movement, etc. I want the story in my head brought to life, when it is a movie based on a book in particular. I don't want to see a HUGE theater screen version of Hugh Jackman's face. He is beautiful, yes, but I want to see the church he's in, the towns he's traveling, the people he's meeting, not his face with his messed up prison teeth. When Anne Hathaway is doing her beautiful rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream," I want to see her life falling apart in a way that does not have me zooming in on her face every 30 seconds. In some ways, that much movement is nauseating, in other ways I just want more. Either way, it's less than satisfying.
The faces left a poor taste in my mouth. There is a benefit to watching a musical movie instead of going to a Broadway musical. That difference is that you can show more, you can do more, you can bring the entire setting to life more because you are only as limited as your budget, not your small stage. And here, the budget appeared to be huge! So, why not make a movie that is a movie, not a series of faces with some scenes thrown in when there just happen to be more than one person singing.
In the end, I think I generally liked the singing, I liked the acting, I fell in love with Marius, I liked the story (yes, despite this being 60% facetime, there was still a story). I did not like the facetime. So, I give this movie a 6 out of 10 as a movie and an 9 out of 10 as a filmed musical.
The acting was also well done, but, considering the cast, how could it not be? In fact, I think many people's problems with the voices have to do with the way this particular musical was done. They did not record the songs and then lip-sing while filming. Instead, they did it all together. And remember, this is a movie, not a broadway musical. It's not all about the singing and the dancing, it's about the emotions, the feeling, the drama, the characters. So, filming live singing is going to be more emotional and heart-felt. It's going to be rough.
I think my problem comes in with a related aspect of the new style of filming a musical. Yes, it's theoretically good in that you get raw acting emotion behind the music that is absent otherwise, but you also get a lot of face time because the focus is capturing that raw singing, not making a movie. When I go to a movie I want to see scenes, interactions, movement, etc. I want the story in my head brought to life, when it is a movie based on a book in particular. I don't want to see a HUGE theater screen version of Hugh Jackman's face. He is beautiful, yes, but I want to see the church he's in, the towns he's traveling, the people he's meeting, not his face with his messed up prison teeth. When Anne Hathaway is doing her beautiful rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream," I want to see her life falling apart in a way that does not have me zooming in on her face every 30 seconds. In some ways, that much movement is nauseating, in other ways I just want more. Either way, it's less than satisfying.
The faces left a poor taste in my mouth. There is a benefit to watching a musical movie instead of going to a Broadway musical. That difference is that you can show more, you can do more, you can bring the entire setting to life more because you are only as limited as your budget, not your small stage. And here, the budget appeared to be huge! So, why not make a movie that is a movie, not a series of faces with some scenes thrown in when there just happen to be more than one person singing.
In the end, I think I generally liked the singing, I liked the acting, I fell in love with Marius, I liked the story (yes, despite this being 60% facetime, there was still a story). I did not like the facetime. So, I give this movie a 6 out of 10 as a movie and an 9 out of 10 as a filmed musical.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Lincoln
Probably the best movie I have seen since starting this blog. I was going to say it was the best movie I have this year, but seeing as how we are only 3 days into the year, that would seem kind of silly. This is another one that was different than what I was expecting, but I loved it even more! Instead of being about Lincoln from beginning to end, or through the Civil War, or anything like it, it was all about the enactment of the 13th Amendment. It was awesome and fascinating.
Daniel Day Lewis was fantastic. So was Tommy Lee Jones, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Sally Field, David Strathairnvid, James Spader, etc. This movie was chock full of awesome actors, and they all did well. All of the Golden Globe Nominations - Sally Field, Daniel Day Lewis, Tommy Lee Jones, Stephen Spielberg - are all well deserved.
As I said, this movie focuses on the final fight to get the 13th Amendment passed before the end of the war. It starts at the end of 1864, when Lincoln secured his second term, and ends with Lincoln's assassination in April, 1865. So, 2 hours and 50 minutes is spent on about 4 months of time. Lincoln needs the 13th Amendment to pass before the end of the war because otherwise it might never have happened. More than once, he explains why he is pursuing what his party thinks is both too much and too little at the same time so emphatically it is truly moving. I got goosebumps more than once when Daniel Day Lewis and Tommy Lee Jones were speaking.
As far as I know, and from what I am told, this movie is almost entirely accurate, which makes it just that much better. It really is fascinating to see not only the methods used to get votes (some of which would end in a suit/conviction today), but also the response to those methods. What I originally thought was Honest Abe, the most honest person in the world, was proven to be more human and more important than I ever realized. You definitely should not show this to children because they cannot truly comprehend the importance of this man. However, this could be a great teaching tool for high school and maybe even college level history classes.
In the end, I give this movie a 10 out of 10. It really was excellent.
Daniel Day Lewis was fantastic. So was Tommy Lee Jones, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Sally Field, David Strathairnvid, James Spader, etc. This movie was chock full of awesome actors, and they all did well. All of the Golden Globe Nominations - Sally Field, Daniel Day Lewis, Tommy Lee Jones, Stephen Spielberg - are all well deserved.
As I said, this movie focuses on the final fight to get the 13th Amendment passed before the end of the war. It starts at the end of 1864, when Lincoln secured his second term, and ends with Lincoln's assassination in April, 1865. So, 2 hours and 50 minutes is spent on about 4 months of time. Lincoln needs the 13th Amendment to pass before the end of the war because otherwise it might never have happened. More than once, he explains why he is pursuing what his party thinks is both too much and too little at the same time so emphatically it is truly moving. I got goosebumps more than once when Daniel Day Lewis and Tommy Lee Jones were speaking.
As far as I know, and from what I am told, this movie is almost entirely accurate, which makes it just that much better. It really is fascinating to see not only the methods used to get votes (some of which would end in a suit/conviction today), but also the response to those methods. What I originally thought was Honest Abe, the most honest person in the world, was proven to be more human and more important than I ever realized. You definitely should not show this to children because they cannot truly comprehend the importance of this man. However, this could be a great teaching tool for high school and maybe even college level history classes.
In the end, I give this movie a 10 out of 10. It really was excellent.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Jack Reacher
Love Tom Cruise, or hate him, but he does know how to make a good/fun action film. However, if you don't like Tom Cruise, you will not like this movie, so don't bother. He plays his typical action self, sarcastic, self-righteous, all-around-badass. It's entirely unbelievable, but fun nonetheless.
That being said, this is a little different from some of his other action films. There is a little more meat to the story line, which makes this more enjoyable than most. I was not expecting the kind of depth and twists I got, which left me very pleasantly surprised.
There's not really a lot to say. There is action, there is drama, there is law, and there is a creepy bad guy who makes people chew off their fingers to prove their worth and stay alive. What more could you want?
In the end, I give this a 7 out of 10. I reserve the right to write more later :)
That being said, this is a little different from some of his other action films. There is a little more meat to the story line, which makes this more enjoyable than most. I was not expecting the kind of depth and twists I got, which left me very pleasantly surprised.
There's not really a lot to say. There is action, there is drama, there is law, and there is a creepy bad guy who makes people chew off their fingers to prove their worth and stay alive. What more could you want?
In the end, I give this a 7 out of 10. I reserve the right to write more later :)
Life of Pi
I will start this by saying that I have not read the book. I think that makes a difference because reading the book gives you an interest in wanting to see it acted out. Since I didn't have that interest driving me through the movie, I didn't really find it all that interesting.
It was beautifully done. The scenes were pretty cool, the ocean was beautiful, especially with the glowy things and the whale. If all I was interested in was cinematography, I would have loved this movie. However, as far as story, intrigue, etc., it was severely lacking. I don't want to be too mean, because the "twist" at the end made it all a little more interesting. As a book, I think I would have loved it, the "twist", but for a movie, it did not have the desired effect.
The majority of this movie is an Indian boy trying to survive on a boat in the middle of the ocean with only a tiger for a companion. There is lots of back and forth between the boy and the tiger. There is a little development, but not enough to really keep me for wanting to fall asleep. Like I said, if I had read the book, I think I would have been much more interested. Otherwise, it really was kind of a bore.
In the end, I give this a 5 out of 10. Don't go see it unless you have read the book, or just like pretty movies.
It was beautifully done. The scenes were pretty cool, the ocean was beautiful, especially with the glowy things and the whale. If all I was interested in was cinematography, I would have loved this movie. However, as far as story, intrigue, etc., it was severely lacking. I don't want to be too mean, because the "twist" at the end made it all a little more interesting. As a book, I think I would have loved it, the "twist", but for a movie, it did not have the desired effect.
The majority of this movie is an Indian boy trying to survive on a boat in the middle of the ocean with only a tiger for a companion. There is lots of back and forth between the boy and the tiger. There is a little development, but not enough to really keep me for wanting to fall asleep. Like I said, if I had read the book, I think I would have been much more interested. Otherwise, it really was kind of a bore.
In the end, I give this a 5 out of 10. Don't go see it unless you have read the book, or just like pretty movies.
Silver Linings Playbook
This was really well done! It was completely different than what I was expecting, but I still really liked it. I went in thinking that it was going to be a love story with the girl and the guy just kind of falling into one another while both being crazy. That's not exactly different than what actually happened, but it was done a little differently.
Bradley Cooper's character is bipolar and had a breakdown when he found his wife cheating on him. So, he is pretty crazy. Jennifer Lawrence's character is a little crazy/reckless since her husband died unexpectedly. They find each other and end up falling in love. However, it isn't as much accidental as I thought, and it was much more about their craziness as it was about their developing love story.
Both Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence did a great job. I love them. Robert De Niro was also awesome. He played the neurotic, OCD father who is trying hard to make up for mistreating his son and passing along his craziness.
The movie kind of moves both slow and fast at any given time. For a while it moves hour by hour, then skips ahead a few weeks, then slows down again, and finally speeds up to get to the climactic ending. There are also a couple of flash-backs to explain Bradley Cooper's breakdown. So, it can be a little hard to follow as far as trying to figure out what happened when. It also takes about a quarter of the movie to get to the bottom of why Bradley Cooper had to go to a mental hospital in the first place.
I think this seemingly hodge-podge plot line is why my mom did not like this as much. However, I think it's part of why I liked it so much. It kept me riveted to figure out what everyone's issues were, who all the players were, and where exactly the story was going to go. In the end, it did end up being the story I expected, but getting there was completely different. The getting there is what makes this more than just a RomCom, which is why I liked it a lot. I went in for a cheesy romance movie and was surprised with a fascinating romance story.
In the end I give this an 8 out of 10. It was intriguing, entertaining, and left me with a good feeling.
Bradley Cooper's character is bipolar and had a breakdown when he found his wife cheating on him. So, he is pretty crazy. Jennifer Lawrence's character is a little crazy/reckless since her husband died unexpectedly. They find each other and end up falling in love. However, it isn't as much accidental as I thought, and it was much more about their craziness as it was about their developing love story.
Both Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence did a great job. I love them. Robert De Niro was also awesome. He played the neurotic, OCD father who is trying hard to make up for mistreating his son and passing along his craziness.
The movie kind of moves both slow and fast at any given time. For a while it moves hour by hour, then skips ahead a few weeks, then slows down again, and finally speeds up to get to the climactic ending. There are also a couple of flash-backs to explain Bradley Cooper's breakdown. So, it can be a little hard to follow as far as trying to figure out what happened when. It also takes about a quarter of the movie to get to the bottom of why Bradley Cooper had to go to a mental hospital in the first place.
I think this seemingly hodge-podge plot line is why my mom did not like this as much. However, I think it's part of why I liked it so much. It kept me riveted to figure out what everyone's issues were, who all the players were, and where exactly the story was going to go. In the end, it did end up being the story I expected, but getting there was completely different. The getting there is what makes this more than just a RomCom, which is why I liked it a lot. I went in for a cheesy romance movie and was surprised with a fascinating romance story.
In the end I give this an 8 out of 10. It was intriguing, entertaining, and left me with a good feeling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)