Brooks Hatlen's Library

Review - Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

2012-01-11T22:21:00.000-05:00

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011), R, 127 minutes - I've been looking forward to this film for a couple months now (ever since first seeing the trailer online), looking forward to it for a couple of reasons: 1) Gary Oldman and Colin Firth are on my 'must see' list, and 2) Tom Hardy is quickly racking up a resume worthy of being on said 'must see' list. It also doesn't hurt when you throw in John Hurt and Mark Strong for good measure.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is, as one might expect, a spy flick. I have not read the source material (John Le Carre's novel) so I cannot compare how the film lives up to the story, but in my opinion it is a very well made 'thriller' at that. I use quotes when I say thriller because it is actually a fairly slow moving film. There really aren't any action sequences to speak of (unless you count one scene in which Tom Hardy's character gets punched). It is a much more cerebral story than your typical thriller. It is slowly paced, but director Thomas Alfredson (Let the Right One In) uses the pace to his advantage as he is able to cast doubt and suspicion on each of the story's suspects because of it. Of course, he's helped with this by an outstanding cast led by Oldman and Hardy, but also including Firth, Hurt, Strong, Toby Jones, and Ciaran Hinds.

Set in the offices of 1970's British Intelligence during the Cold War, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy sees intelligence director Control (Hurt) step down after an operation in Budapest goes horribly wrong. Agent George Smiley (Oldman) is forced into retirement by Control's departure, but is reinstated in order investigate the possibility of a Russian mole in the British Intelligence's upper echelon. It is believed that Smiley is in a unique position to head the investigation as it is believed that the mole is one of four agents that he formerly worked with (Firth, Jones, Hinds, and David Dencik). Smiley's investigation gets a boost when a lower ranking British agent (Hardy), who had been thought to have been a Russian double agent himself (accused by the real Russian mole to cast doubt on his intel), makes contact claiming to have information about the Russian mole. His information casts more suspicion on the group of high ranking agents, and eventually leads to the apprehension of the true mole.

I felt that Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was a bit different than your standard spy film in that it doesn't really focus on the suspects themselves. Thomas Alfredson does a great job of shifting doubt and suspicion between characters by following Smiley's investigation and interviews of tertiary characters and the intel that they provide.

If you enjoy spy thrillers, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is well worth looking into. It is definitely a slow burn, but that is actually one of its strengths. And no, it may not be filled with action shots, but the strong cast more than makes up for that. Just be sure to get comfortable and pay close attention so that you can properly enjoy this well made espionage film.

Review - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

2011-12-24T11:33:00.000-05:00

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011), R, 158 minutes - About a year and a half ago, just after I had seen the Swedish adaptation of this best selling first installment to late author Stieg Larsson's Millennium trilogy I read the news that an American adaptation was going to be made. My first reaction was 'why bother?'. The novel was excellent, was equaled by the Swedish film starring Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist, and at the time was only a year old (my original review can be found here). I generally adhere to the belief that film remakes aren't necessary. Every once in a while they can be worth it if they are far enough removed from the original (i.e. the Cohen brothers' True Grit last year). The key to remember in this case though is that David Fincher did not set out to remake the Swedish film but to provide an English language adaptation that would be more widely distributed here in the States. The fact that Fincher was named the director for this film really intrigued me. If there's one thing that he knows how to do, its making films with a serial killer element (Se7en, Zodiac).

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is primarily a murder mystery, and towards the end of the film begins to make a turn towards a story of political corruption and conspiracy. Those plotlines are explored in the second and third books of Larsson's trilogy and, with a little luck, will be completed on the big screen by Fincher and his excellent cast. The story revolves around two main characters: Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) and Michael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig). Blomkvist is a political journalist who is hired by Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) to investigate the disappearance of his niece nearly 40 years earlier. Salander is a ward of the state and a hacker that does investigative/background work for a security firm. The two don't even meet until almost half way through the movie, so if you find yourself asking 'how the heck do these two story lines connect?' just keep watching. It's a very unique way in which the two come to work together to solve Harriet Vanger's death.

The novel has sold so well globally that there's a good chance that many of you already know the story and what to expect from the film's R rating. But for those that have not (or for those who may think 'they wouldn't show that on film'), I feel obligated to provide fair warning of three graphic/disturbing scenes. Two involving rape, and one revenge. As brutal as they are, they really are integral to showing us how and why Lisbeth is the extremely unique character that she is.

I am a huge fan of Noomi Rapace's portrayal of Lisbeth in the Swedish film, and quite honestly, didn't think that anyone would be able to match the emotion and intensity of her performance. That being said, Rooney Mara plays a pretty convincing Lisbeth Salander. Mara may not be quite as intense in places, but she handles the character's social awkwardness and interactions quite well. I still prefer Rapace's turn personally, but that may be because that was the embodiment of Lisbeth that I saw first. I will be interested to hear what you all think.

Mara's and Craig's performances are strong and lead a solid cast that includes the aforementioned Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgard, Steven Berkoff, Robin Wright, Yorick van Wageningen, Joely Richardson, and Goran Visnjic.

David Fincher's adaptation is excellent in my opinion. He shifted a couple of story beats around and tweaked one or two things (discussed below in the spoiler section), but the essence of the story is all there. He also brought in Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross to score the film (as he did on The Social Network) and it sets the tone of the film perfectly.

I highly recommend seeing The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but it is probably best to save it for another weekend as the content isn't exactly family friendly holiday fare (although it does take place around the holidays). It also pushes two hours and forty minutes in length, so be prepared to sit!

*****SPOILERS*****
Just a couple of differences that I noticed in this interpretation:
- They added more of a physical relationship between Lisbeth and Mikael. I'm sure this was to further drive home how devastated Lisbeth was at the end when she saw Mikael with Erika. It would also set up her ongoing apprehension over accepting Mikael's help in the sequels.

- Lisbeth's attempted murder of her father isn't brought up until the last few minutes of the movie. In the books and the Swedish adaptation, it was at least flashed back to at an earlier point in the story.

- Harriet Vanger ends up having been in London living under her cousin's name, not running a sheep farm in Australia as in the book.

- The visual of the opening credits felt kind of odd with the rest of the movie. They sort of reminded me of the music video-like lead ins on the James Bond films (slightly ironic since Daniel Craig is the current Bond). The musical choice was great though, using the full version of the Rezner/Karen O cover of Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song.

Review - The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

2011-11-20T14:11:00.001-05:00

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 (2011), PG-13, 117 minutes - ...

...

...now that you've had a few moments to get over the shock of my taking the time to review the latest installment of the Twilight series, please allow me a brief moment of explanation. The reason for my blog has always been to share thoughts and opinions of newly released films with friends because I quite often get the question 'was such and such a movie any good?'. When I'm in the habit of posting, I also try to post something about any new release I have seen. And since I ended quite a long stretch of inactivity here on my blog last weekend, I feel that it's only fair that I continue what little momentum I built by writing about this weekend's movie viewing.

Some of you who are more familiar with my movie tastes may know that a couple years ago I had rented the first Twilight movie from NetFlix. I knew that I was by no means part of the film's target audience, but I was curious as to what the big deal was about this love story involving vampires and werewolves. Boy was I terribly disappointed. I could see the potential in the story, but the poor script, bad effects, and awful acting destroyed that potential. In short, I felt that they rushed the film adaptation into production in order to capitalize on the popularity of the books (which I believe at that time were still being released). I didn't bother watching the later releases because the first installment killed any curiosity in the series that I may have had. Fast forward to now. My girlfriend had read (and loved) the Twilight books, so naturally she has seen, and wanted to see, this first part of Breaking Dawn. I still havn't read the books, but I did do my homework and played catch up by watching both New Moon and Eclipse so I would know what was going on. It may not have been my first choice of a movie to see in the theater, but I found myself watching it on this opening weekend. And oddly enough, it wasn't too bad.

Having caught up on the series (of movies), I feel that each installment was better than the one before it. That goes for just about every aspect of the films across the board. Luckily that trend continues in Breaking Dawn - Part 1. There were still a couple of hiccups, but in general, it is a pretty watchable film.

I am still a firm believer that Kristen Stewart is an awful actress, but compared to the previous films, her performance was much improved. The only problem is, I'm not sure if it is actually because of her acting, or because of extra help from the effects used to wither her away during her pregnancy. There were really only two things that I had a real problem with:

1) The wolves communicating via telepathy when Jacob stands up to and breaks away from Sam and the pack. It was just poorly executed - poor scripting and voice acting - and was laughably cheesy.

2) The scene in which the pack attacks the Cullen household after Bella has the baby was extremely dark visually. I know that the scene was in the woods at night, but it was very difficult to follow what was going on.

Taylor Lautner has finally grown up enough for Jacob to seem like an actual player in the story. Whether that's as a threat to Edward (Robert Pattinson) for Bella's affections, or a character who is strong enough to stand firm in his opinion that differs from that of his pack. He's still not the greatest actor, but he at least fits the role better and makes the Jacob/Bella/Edward dynamic much more believable. After all, that's the main theme of the story right?

Having not read the books, I felt the ending to this first half of the Breaking Dawn adaptation was a bit cliche and predictable. But that comes strictly from the point of view of someone who has probably seen too many movies. All in all Breaking Dawn - Part 1 is probably the best installment in the franchise yet. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm actually curious as to how it all ends up. Ladies, I'm sure you'll love it just as much as you've loved the other Twilight Saga films. And fellas, believe me, there are a lot worse movies that you could be 'forced' to see because it's your girl's turn to pick the movie.

Review - J. Edgar

2011-11-13T17:01:00.001-05:00

J. Edgar (2011), R, 137 minutes - It has been a while since I last updated the good old blog here (about 3 months as I was so kindly reminded by a former co-worker/blog follower), and as anyone who knows my taste in films, what better way to return to posting than by reviewing Clint Eastwood's most recent directorial effort?

J. Edgar is Eastwood's biopic about J. Edgar Hoover, long time Director of the FBI (and architect of the FBI as we know it today). While the film covers Hoover's life from shortly before he took the position with the FBI up until his death, it really is more of a character study of his relationships with family and co-workers as well as how he viewed himself. If you are looking for an action filled story about major crime busts that Hoover oversaw during his years in office, you won't find it here. What you will find is a film that shows how his own paranoia about just about anyone and everyone led to trailblazing improvements in how the FBI operated (including forensic studies of crimes), even if they were ethically questionable at times. That same paranoia caused him to trust only a select few that he allowed into his inner circle, and made him quite difficult to deal with at that.

Of course, this is a biopic about a man who died in 1972, so one can only guess at how accurate the portrayal is. Along with Hoover's nature of keeping personal secret files on just about anyone that he thought could one day threaten his position make you wonder if we'll ever know what truly happened. That being said, the performances put forth by both Leonardo DiCaprio (as Hoover) and Armie Hammer (as Clyde Tolson, Hoover's long time right hand man...and lover?) are excellent. Naomi Watts has an increasingly diminishing (but quite important) role as Hoover's personal secretary and early romantic interest, Helen Gandy. There are also nice cameos by Dame Judi Dench (J. Edgar's mother Annie Hoover), Burn Notice's Jeffrey Donovan (Robert F. Kennedy), Josh Lucas (Charles Lindbergh), and Christopher Shyer (Richard Nixon).

Because it focuses more on Hoover's personal relationships than it does cracking down on crime (aside from the portrayal of the Lindbergh baby kidnapping case), it has a tendency to be a slow moving film. That isn't to say that it isn't worth checking out - just a warning for anyone like myself who may have tried to avoid spoilers and are expecting at least a little bit more action. J. Edgar isn't Clint Eastwood's strongest directorial outing, but it does give us about as good a look into the live of J. Edgar Hoover as anyone could expect to get, and the performances by DiCaprio and Hammer make it worth the price of admission and may even garner Oscar attention.

Review - Cowboys & Aliens

2011-07-30T18:41:00.002-04:00

Cowboys & Aliens (2011), PG-13, 118 minutes - #5 on my Most Anticipated Films of 2011 list, Cowboys & Aliens is a Sci-Fi/Western mash-up directed by Jon Favreau that boasts a pretty hefty cast led by Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford.

The movie takes place in Arizona back in 1873, when Jake Lonergan (Craig) comes to out in the desert with no recollection of what came before. He works his way into town where he has a scuffle with Percy Dolarhyde (Paul Dano), the arrogant, free-loading son of local tough guy prospector Woodrow Dolarhyde (Ford). Both are tossed in prison and are set to get shipped out of town courtesy of the U.S. Marshalls. Just as the carriage is about to take them out of town, the elder Dolarhyde arrives looking for his son. Then all hell breaks loose: alien ships buzz the main drag of the western town, shooting lasers, blowing things up, and abducting people. It's at this time that a bracelet-like object on Lonergan's wrist comes to life. He realizes that it allows him to zero in on a target and fire. With his new-found weapon, Lonergan drives the alien ships off. With the help of Ella Swenson (Olivia Wilde), Doc (Sam Rockwell), Nat Colorado (Adam Beach), and Meacham (Clancy Brown), Lonergan and Dolarhyde set out to track the aliens in an effort to rescue those who were abducted. On the journey, Lonergan begins to remember who he was and what happened in his past while everyone learns that Ella isn't quite what she seems.

Despite being a sci-fi/western mash-up, Cowboys & Aliens doesn't really bring anything new to either genre. It actually manages to fit into stereotypical molds of both genres at different points throughout. If you don't like either genre, it's probably safe to say that you should steer clear. But if you do, or you like either Craig or Ford in particular, I think you'd be entertained. I was.

*****SPOILERS*****

- I didn't think that Olivia Wilde's character being an alien herself really did much for the movie. It just seemed like a really convenient way to provide a character that knows more about the aliens than they should.

- Gold digging aliens does seem a little weird, but it gets a pass considering the time in which the film takes place. It's not as crazy as aliens from other films (i.e. water fearing aliens in Signs that chose to invade a planet covered in the stuff).

- I thought that the creature design for the aliens was unique.

- Noah Ringer is another face in the film that may look familiar to folks. He was also Aang in 2010's The Last Airbender.

- I did not have a chance to read the graphic novel that this was based upon before seeing the movie, but I am curious to read it to see how this compares.

- I still love the fact that they didn't try and get cute with the movie title. There's just something I like about it being blatantly straight forward. It's a movie about Cowboys & Aliens...so what else would you call it!?

Review - Captain America: The First Avenger

2011-07-30T15:27:00.005-04:00

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011), PG-13, 124 minutes - This new Captain America movie (there was a terrible one made back in 1990) checked in at #3 on my personal Most Anticipated Films of 2011 list. Cap also happens to be one of my favorite comic book characters so my hopes for this movie were pretty high. Much like Thor, I was quite satisfied with the end result.

Captain America: The First Avenger, as one would expect, tells the origin story behind the character. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is a scrawny young American who attempts to enlist in the Army repeatedly in 1942. He keeps getting rejected due to his size and medical history. During one attempt, he is checked out by Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci). Dr. Erskine is a German scientist who defected to the United States and is overseeing the Super Soldier Project in an attempt to help the U.S. fight Hitler's Nazi's. He offers Rogers the one thing he wants: an opportunity to join the Army and fight for his country. After showing many beneficial qualities above and beyond his physical size during boot camp, Erskine selects Rogers over more physically qualified soldiers to be the Super Soldier Program's test subject. As you could probably guess, the Super Soldier Project is a success and Steve Rogers is transformed into the perfect physical specimen. Just as the procedure ends, a Hydra spy (a splinter Nazi group) assassinates Dr. Erskine and destroys all of the equipment used causing Rogers to be the only successful test subject. Rogers chases down the spy and apprehends him, becoming a media sensation in the process. Thinking that he is just one man and not an entire army, Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) assigns Rogers and his new Captain America persona to touring the country hawking war bonds. After getting fed up that he is not able to contribute the way Dr. Erskine had promised before his death, Rogers eventually gets the chance to prove his worth on the front lines. That opportunity leads to his hunting down the Red Skull and the Cosmic Cube powering Hydra's weapons.

When it was announced that Chris Evans would be bringing Steve Rogers to life on the big screen, I wasn't sure what to think. More often than not he has been entertaining in his previous films. What worried me was that his characters tend to be sarcastic and comedic, neither of which are traits of good ole Captain America. Then it was announced that Hugo Weaving would portray Cap's greatest villain, the Red Skull. Any trepidation I had about casting pretty much went out the window with that news. Shortly thereafter, more names like Tommy Lee Jones and Stanley Tucci were added and a pretty solid cast was assembled. As it turns out, Chris Evans makes a pretty darn good Steve Rogers. And just as expected, Hugo Weaving's Red Skull was great. Lesser characters help round out the feel of the film with good performances from Hayley Atwell (Peggy Carter), Sebastian Stan (Bucky Barnes), Dominic Cooper (Howard Stark), Toby Jones (Dr. Arnim Zola), and Neal McDonough (Dum Dum Dugan).

Captain America: The First Avenger is a solid movie whether or not you're a comic book fan or a fan of the movies based upon them. The story may be a little bit cliche (the rise of the little guy), but hey, this is America and that story never gets old. It also doesn't hurt when you use a Nazi splinter cell as your antagonist. Cap is yet another solo adventure in the Marvel Universe (Iron Man, Thor) that leads into The Avengers next summer. It will be interesting to see if they can all fit into one movie. Which reminds me...be sure to wait for Marvel's usual post-credits scene. Not only is there a scene but there's also a quick teaser trailer for The Avengers.

*****SPOILERS*****

- There are a couple of cheesy moments, but they are obviously meant to be that way (primarily Cap's war bond selling tour). The best part of this campy stretch of the film is the ridiculous costume that Steve Rogers has to wear on tour, a nice nod to the original, classic, comic book design of Captain America.

- Stan Lee makes his standard Marvel cameo.

- While both were portrayed differently in the movie than the comics, I liked how the 'deaths' of both Bucky and Cap were handled. Cap obviously comes back at the end of the film and for The Avengers, but the way Bucky's death was shot leaves the possibility for him to return down the road as the Winter Soldier (as Ed Brubaker brought him back in the comics) and that would kick all kinds of ass.

- Speaking of deaths. It's obvious that the Red Skull didn't die, but was teleported elsewhere by the Cosmic Cube. Will he pop back up in The Avengers as it appears Loki (from Thor) will?

- Between the Cosmic Cube and the inclusion Nick Fury and a younger Howard Stark, they did an excellent job tying Cap into the Marvel Universe that was previously established in the Iron Man and Thor films (although I kind of wish that they had gone into the powers of the Cosmic Cube more. I guess that may be explored in The Avengers as it was part of the post credits teaser scene on Thor.)

- I really enjoyed the inclusion of Dum Dum Dugan, the Howling Comandos, and Dr. Arnim Zola. Nice nods to the comics.

- It will be interesting to see if Hayley Atwell is brought back in future installments to play Sharon Carter, Peggy Carter's niece. For those who don't know, in the comics years later, after being thawed out, Steve Rogers falls in love with Sharon who strongly reminds him of Peggy, his first love.

- I liked how they portrayed the relationship between Bucky and Steve: Steve being the scrawny friend who couldn't join the Army and Bucky being the best friend who was completely opposite in just about every way (in the comics, they don't meet until after Steve becomes Cap and Bucky is introduced as a sidekick).

Review - Transformers: Dark of the Moon

2011-07-02T19:09:00.008-04:00

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011), PG-13, 157 minutes - I'm just going to go ahead and get this out of the way: Dark of the Moon was much better than anticipated and those of you who told me as much were right. I'd also like to point out that I never said this looked bad, just that I wasn't wicked excited about it after the disappointment that was Revenge of the Fallen.

Dark of the Moon might be the best of the three Transformers films. The origin story is out of the way and the plot gets back to story aspects from the original Generation 1 cartoon from the 1980's. Megatron is the plotting/scheming villain that he was always meant to be, and the soldier side of Optimus Prime comes out (this time believably), after he no longer feels he can trust the intel provided by his human allies. The short version of the plot: the space race of the 1960's was fueled by the crash landing of an Autobot ship known as The Arc on the moon. Lost in the wreckage was Sentinal Prime (the Autobot leader who preceded Optimus Prime) and the tech to create a 'space bridge' that could transport anything across time and space. When Optimus finds out that the humans had this information and didn't share it with him, he feels betrayed. The Decepticons manipulate events in order to uncover the pieces necessary to build the space bridge in an effort to bring their war-torn home world of Cybertron to Earth and to enslave the human population to help rebuild it.

Most of the main characters from the first two films return, with the exception of Megan Fox. Her place as Sam's (Shia LeBeouf) love interest is filled by Victoria's Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whitely who plays Carly (Sam's love interest in the G1 cartoon). The chemistry between she and LeBeouf is much better than the chemistry between LeBeouf and Fox ever was. The rest of the human cast is pretty solid, with Frances McDormand and Patrick Dempsey playing fairly large roles. There are also a few great cameo's (John Malkovich, Ken Jeong, Alan Tudyk, and Buzz Aldrin).

On the robot side of things, the inclusion of Shockwave, Soundwave (both voiced by Frank Welker as he did in the G1 cartoon), and Laserbeak was great. Hugo Weaving voices Megatron and Peter Cullen voices Optimus Prime (as they did previously). And the addition of Leonard Nimoy (voicing Sentinal Prime) was fantastic. I wasn't a big fan of the two mini-Autobots that were living with Sam and Carly, but at least they made themselves useful.

About the last forty minutes play out as one gigantic action sequence, which is cool, but makes for a long running movie. I felt that about 20-30 minutes could have been trimmed out in small chunks here or there and it wouldn't have lost much. The again, it is a Michael Bay film. Bigger is better right? (read: sarcasm)

So outside of it running a tad long, and a couple obnoxious 'bots, Dark of the Moon was pleasantly surprising. If you liked either of the first two Transformers films, you should enjoy this one as well. And if not, it's worth checking out as a big, summer time, popcorn action flick. I did not see it in 3D so I cannot speak for how that turned out.

*****Spoilers/Random Thoughts/Trivia*****

- People will probably ask me why I didn't have any issues with Optimus Prime offing both Megatron and Sentinal Prime. Especially since one of my primary problems with Revenge of the Fallen was Optimus capping a Decepticon point blank at the beginning of that film. I argue that Optimus is much more diplomatic than needlessly killing an uncooperative Decepticon. It was out of character. By the time he takes out Megatron and Sentinal Prime he has realized that his diplomacy alone will no longer get the job done. He's also been beat on by Sentinal and gotten an arm chopped off. Optimus goes berserk and takes out two primary threats to the planet Earth. Makes sense to me.

- Speaking of Sentinal Prime. His betrayal of the Autobots was a nice twist I thought.

- Shockwave was just as big of a threat in this movie as he was in the G1 cartoon, but in a different way. Here he had a tremendous, devastating physical presence, where as in the cartoon he was much more cerebral.

- I was a little disappointed that Laserbeak actually spoke. In the G1 toons, he transformed into a cassette and relayed any spy intel by being played in Soundwave. I realize that would be pretty outdated for this movie, but they could have made him play back his intel as opposed to actually speaking.

- When Soundwave spoke, the speakers from his car mode that are visible in his robot mode thumped with each word. I nice nod to his roots in the G1 cartoon as a boombox.

- There was a smaller, round Decepticon running around the desert with Megtron that reminded me of the Sharkticons (another G1 reference). I have no idea if it was meant to be, but that's what it looked like.

- The Wreckers, the three Autobots prepping the space shuttle for the Autobot deportation, were a nice nod to a comic book mini-series produced by Dreamwave a few years back.

- It wouldn't have fit in with how this story turned out, but while watching, I thought it would have been pretty bad ass had the space shuttle been Omega Supreme.

- In the first car chase, I enjoyed the scene where Sam was riding in Bumblebee and was thrown out as Bumblebee transformed to robot mode to avoid the Decepticon attack. Sam was then caught and placed back in Bumblebee's passenger seat as he returned to vehicle mode. This made me laugh because that was always the question in the cartoon: what happens to the people riding along when the robots transform?

- What have we learned from movies so far this summer kids? That the Cuban Missile Crisis was averted by the X-Men and our desire to put a man on the moon was expedited by Transformers crashing landing on it.

- How many United States memorials/landmarks has Bay destroyed in movies now? I've lost count.

From the Archives: Review - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

2011-06-27T21:48:00.004-04:00

Over the past couple of weeks I have been asked on numerous occasions whether or not I plan on seeing Transformers: Dark of the Moon in theaters. Any given day my answer seems to drift between 'after Revenge of the Fallen? Are you serious!?' and 'there's a good chance I'll get talked into it.'

I had not yet started this blog two years ago when Revenge of the Fallen came out, but I did post the below review on the Flixster app on facebook. I figured that since I have been getting so many questions about Dark of the Moon that I should re-post this review so those who have not heard my rant about Fallen can see why I'm so leery about Dark of the Moon despite the trailer making it look quite intriguing. The review below is a straight copy/paste. I have not edited any of the content from the original post (which wasn't my best edited work by a long shot).

I do have every intention of seeing Dark of the Moon eventually. Whether or not that happens in the theater is yet to be seen. So here it is, my review for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen in Pro/Con format. And as you will see, I was grasping at straws for some of the Pros.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009), PG-13, 150 minutes - Ok. Wow. I'm not even sure where to start. I suppose I'd be best served to begin like this: I can understand why this film has already made a s#!t ton of money and why a lot of people like it - it's a typical Michael Bay 'blow everything sky high' summer time action flick. Unfortunately that doesn't even come close to saving this sequel.

I saw this last Wednesday night and have been out of town since, so I've had a little time to think about how I feel about the movie. I'm sad to say that after 5 days my outlook hasn't changed at all. I grew up with Transformers - the original G1 cartoon, the toys, the lunchboxes, everything. I even thoroughly enjoyed the first live action adaptation. Part of me was scared that this would turn into the typical Michael Bay summertime action flick cannon fodder (which it did) and part of me really really hoped it would do the franchise justice - or at least be close to the first film.

The only thing that sitting around for 5 days before writing this allowed me to do was come to this conclusion: there are 3 categories of people who will see this movie. Their like/dislike will result SOLELY on their falling into one of these three categories:

Group 1: people who have absolutely no or very little prior knowledge of Transformers. (these people are more than likely going to love this movie)

Group 2: people who have a passing to possibly even above average appreciation of Transformers and its mythos. (these people will also either love this movie or enjoy it for the most part)

Group 3: people who would fall into the 'fanboy' category of the Transformers mythos and have an above average knowledge of characters and their personalities/actions. (these people will tear this movie a new one).

You can probably already guess which category I fall under.

I started to make a list of pros and cons during some down time this afternoon at work and this is what I came up with:

Pros:

- Frank Welker was the voice of Soundwave (as he was in the original G1 cartoon.

- Peter Cullen was once again the voice of Optimus Prime (as he was in the original G1 cartoon).

- The outline of the super basic story. I actually like the whole 'one of the ancient Primes broke off from the rest and tried to take over everything himself' idea (too bad they screwed it up).

- They introduced more robots than in the first movie (also a con as described below).

- The Rainn Wilson cameo. Once again, Wilson plays his stereotypical character but manages to be entertaining.

And here's the list that just hurts so very much being a G1 fanboy...

Cons:

- 5 minutes into the movie, Optimus Prime blows a whole through a captured Decepticon's head. JUST BECAUSE. This is so ridiculously out of character I was instantly worried about the movie the moment it happened.

- The Autobot 'Twins' - these two characters are (as Billy said it) the two most racially insensitive and stereotypical characters this side of Jar Jar Binks (and we all know how he single handedly killed Star Wars). Guess what Michael Bay? You already had your (and G1 Transformers') token African American character in the first movie (Jazz) and you killed him off like he was the 'token black guy' in some B rate horror flick.

- Megatron would NEVER kiss 'The Fallen's' @$$ the way he did. Even if Megatron did have to report to a higher authority, his M.O. has always been to be the dominant Decepticon and to take over the universe. No way he grovels the way he did throughout 'Revenge of the Fallen'.

- They introduced more robots than in the first movie - which is great except that for the exception of the twins, none of them get any face time and come major battle sequences, you can't tell who is who. What's the point of introducing Sideswipe and Arcee when they're on screen for 4 minutes? Which leads me to...

- How do you NOT make Sideswipe red? They made him silver which basically makes him a stand in for Jazz in this movie. Also, Arcee was ONE motorcycle, not three. And before you tell me that she was part of some elite unit (which she was along with Elita One and a couple of others), they were all separate entities. They even butchered Jetfire (one of the coolest G1 characters ever). How do you make him a crotchety old Spock-like robot? The only thing about Jetfire they got right was that he was a researcher and flip flopped between the Autobot and Decepticon factions.

- Speaking of Jetfire, last time I checked (which coincidentally was this past weekend when I was there) the Smithsonian doesn't open up to a desert airfield filled with aircraft of various types.

- The blonde chic named Alice. Even if you try to say that she's a nod back to the G2 Pretenders, she really doesn't work. She had an entire scene with Sam inside of Bumblebee. How does Bumblebee not tell she's a Decepticon or vice versa? Also, in robot form, she's a total ripoff of Danger from Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-Men run.

- Too much of the cast is used (too often) for comedic relief. I really enjoyed Sam's parents and John Turturro in the first movie. They are horribly over played in 'Revenge of the Fallen'. Not only that, but they throw in Sam's college roommate and the Autobot twins into the mix as if there wasn't enough comic relief to begin with. Drop all of these under the 'going to the well one too many times' category.

- Devastator is killed way too easily. I understand that they blast him with a rail gun, but please. Devastator is comprised of 6 smaller robots. Even a direct hit on Devastator would have taken out one maybe two of his smaller pieces leaving the other four to battle on. This is because they never came together as one mind, they were always in constant battle over who the dominant personality would be.

- Outside of the rail gun, human firepower is exponentially greater in the second movie over the first without any leaps and bounds in technological advancement. They even go out of their way to state that the Autobots haven't shared Cybertronian technology with the humans for fear of its abuse.

- Megan Fox's finally pronouncing her love for Sam. Never in a million years would I think that I'd be placing her/her character on the Con list. Don't get me wrong, I still have a pathetic fanboy crush as I stated in my original Tranformers review, but when her exclamation brings Sam back (or at least partially does - the deceased Primes had a little bit to do with it too) it was so terribly cliche I don't know what to say. Yeah that one is on the writers, but still. Other than still being a nice distraction, her character does nothing for the film.

Now I'm the first to admit that I'm probably a bit nit-picky here because I am and always will be such a Transformers geek. Some of the problems are less important than others, but complete disregard for characters that have been around for 20+ yrs is unforgivable. I am also aware that I probably didn't help myself out by getting my hopes up despite the reviews and comments others had made. Over the past 5 days I've had quite a few people ask me why I thought this installment was a 'debacle'. Well, it's all in the list above. I'm not trying to tell anyone what they should think about the movie, or convince them that it is crap, it's just my opinion. So, anyway, there it is. Hopefully you made it this far. If not, I understand...I probably wouldn't have made it through all of the cons either.

Review - Green Lantern

2011-06-18T08:16:00.007-04:00

Green Lantern (2011), PG-13, 105 minutes - Over the past 6 years, Green Lantern, under the watchful eye of writer Geoff Johns has become one of my favorite comic books. So, as one could imagine, I've been looking forward to this pretty much since the day that it was announced. The first teaser trailer from late last year come off pretty cheesy and I started to worry a bit. Later trailers were cut differently and looked much more promising. Then, this week, initial reviews started coming out and Green Lantern was getting absolutely crushed. So last night when I went out with a few friends to see it, I wasn't sure what to expect. Could it possibly be that bad? I had a hard time believing that. Geoff Johns didn't pen the script, but he did Co-Produce the film (Marc Guggenheim, another comic author helped with the screenplay). And anyone who has read even a couple of issues of his run can tell that he cares deeply about the character. Surely Warner Brothers would listen to someone who has such an expert understanding of the universe being portrayed. Right? It was directed by Martin Campbell, who brought us 007 classics Golden Eye and Casino Royale. So it couldn't be that bad right? Right?

Like other initial comic book character movie offerings, Green Lantern is an origin story. Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) is a test pilot for Ferris Air, a company trying to land a military contract with a new unmanned plane. After a simulation goes horribly wrong (because Jordan refuses to lose to a drone) Reynolds is whisked away by a green light and brought to the side of the dying Abin Sur, a member of the Green Lantern Corps. Abin Sur passes his ring to Jordan, tells him that the ring chose him for a reason, and passes away. You see, when a Green Lantern dies, their ring searches for and chooses a replacement. Someone that has the ability to overcome fear. The ring allows the wearer to create anything they can imagine with the energy of the power of will. Until now a ring has never chosen a human. The ring causes Jordan to learn about the Green Lantern Corps (an intergalactic police force), the vast galaxies that it protects, his fellow corps members who are all aliens, and most importantly about himself.

Along with Reynolds, there's a pretty decent cast. Led by Mark Strong (Sinestro, the greatest living Green Lantern now that Abin Sur has passed), and supported by Blake Lively (Carol Ferris), Peter Sarsgaard (Hector Hammond), Tim Robbins (Senator Hammond), Michael Clarke Duncan (voice of Kilowog), Geoffrey Rush (voice Tomar-Re), and Clancy Brown (voice of Parallax).

Overall, I was pleasantly surprised. The story line did receive a few tweaks compared to the comics, but they work well for the big screen adaptation. Walking out of the theater, I wondered if it played well for me because of my previous Green Lantern knowledge and whether or not that might have allowed me to connect the dots and make more sense of things. I'm happy to report that the five friends that I saw it with also enjoyed it. And their knowledge of the comics ranged from having read a few issues to none at all. They were also confused by all of the negative reviews. I'm not saying that Green Lantern is an absolute must see or that it will change your life, but if you're a fan of comic book movies I don't think you'll be disappointed. We did see it in 3D and that aspect of it was above average compared to most 3D movies, but I don't think it would lose anything if you were to see it without.

Quite a bit of continuity has built up over the years in the comics (especially in the last 6 years that Geoff Johns has been writing). Considering that, I thought that they did a pretty good job fitting the basics in. Be sure to stay at least part way through the credits as there is a teaser scene for what would be a potential sequel. A sequel that, if kept fairly similar to the source material from the comics, could be even better than this movie.

I'm definitely curious to see how it plays to others (especially those who don't have previous comic book knowledge), so let me know what you think!

*****SPOILERS*****

Just a few random thoughts:

- The scene in which Hal first visits Carol after becoming the Green Lantern was a little too reminiscent of Superman visiting Lois Lane on her balcony. That is until she saw right through the weak attempt the mask makes at concealing one's identity. 'I've seen you naked, you think I couldn't tell it was you because I can't see your cheek bones?' Nice poke at comic book absurdity.

- While flying in the simulation, Carol's helmet has her code name 'Saphire' on one side and the Star Saphire logo on the other. Comic folk know that Carol has her own ties to the Star Saphires (another corps from the emotional spectrum that wields the power of love).

- In the movie, Sinestro forges a yellow ring with the consent of the Guardians. In the comics, he forges one on his own and builds up his own fear wielding Sinestro Corps. Sinestro's having a yellow ring looks to be the basis for a sequel thanks to a mid-credits teaser scene.

Sinestro Corps War here we come!

- In the movie, Parallax is a rogue Guardian who has been overtaken by the power of Fear and becomes the fear entity. In the comics Parallax is the fear entity that powers the yellow rings of the Sinestro Corps, but is not one of the Guardians.

- Abin Sur was played by Temuera Morrison who also played Jengo Fett in the Star Wars prequels and Doctore in Spartacus: Gods of the Arena.

- In the movie, Parallax mortally injures Abin Sur. In the comics an alien named Atrocitus (who later becomes the leader of the Red Lanterns) inflicts the killing wound. Although the planet Ryut in the lost sector is the same.

- Nice Toy Story and He-Man and the Masters of the Universe references when Hal first tries to charge the ring.

- It was cool to see cameos of various Corps members on Oa. They may not have had speaking roles, but they were a nice nod to the comics and helped flesh out the Corps. Off the top of my head I remember seeing Salaak, Bzzd, Boodikka and Stel. I'm sure that upon multiple viewings, I would pick out even more recognizable members.

Review - Super 8

2011-06-12T07:31:00.004-04:00

Super 8 (2011), PG-13, 112 minutes - Super 8 is yet another movie that made my Most Anticipated Films of 2011 list. Come to think of it, there are only 3 movies from that list yet to be released. Maybe I should have made it for the first half of the year. Oh well, that's a conversation for another time. Anyway, Super 8 is brought to us by the minds of JJ Abrams and Steven Spielberg, so it must be good right?

Abrams tells his story through the eyes of Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) and his friends, a group of teenagers making a zombie movie over their summer vacation back in 1979. While filming one late night at a local train station in an attempt to add more 'production value' to their film, the group witnesses and survives a horrendous train derailment. Ordinarily such an incident would be bad enough for a small town, but this train was carrying top secret Air Force cargo, something that escaped the crash. After the incident the Air Force takes over the crime scene, blocking out local law enforcement (including Joe's dad, a deputy). Around the same time, the town experiences strange occurrences like random power outages, neighborhood dogs running away, and missing persons. While they continue working on their movie, Joe and his friends - Charles (Riley Griffiths), Alice (Elle Fanning), Cary (Ryan Lee), Preston (Zach Mills), Martin (Gabriel Basso) - start making connections between the odd events and begin to investigate themselves.

Super 8 is a throwback to the movies of our youth (read: anyone near my age). Films about childhood friends and the trouble they manage to get into over summer break. Films of the 'coming of age' genre before they all started trying to one up each other with more and more raunchy/gross out humor. Films about aliens that aren't trying to annihilate the planet. It isn't nearly as classic as ET or The Goonies, but Super 8 does have the same feel to it (no surprise considering Spielberg's participation). I thoroughly enjoyed it. I will be curious to see how it plays with the younger generation though, as I'm not sure that they'll connect with the time period in which it is set. If any of you take your kids, please let me know how they liked it.

Review - Kung Fu Panda 2

2011-06-12T06:48:00.004-04:00

Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011), PG, 90 minutes - Three years ago, Kung Fu Panda was a pleasant surprise. It was an extremely well animated, well told, ridiculous story of a fat slob of a panda becoming part of a team of Kung Fu masters. Luckily, this follow up provides more of the same fun.

Jack Black returns as Kung Fu Panda Po, and the Furious 5 are also back with their original voice actors (Angelina Jolie, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen, Lucy Liu, and David Cross). The best addition to this sequel is the character of Lord Shen, voiced by Gary Oldman. Shen is a peacock who is the overzealous heir to the ruling family of Gongmen City. After having been banished for years, he returns not only to take his rightful place on the throne, but to expand his rule across all of China. Po and the Furious 5 battle Lord Shen and his army of wolves (led by Wolf Boss voiced by Danny McBride) in an attempt to keep China free of Shen's rule.

Kung Fu Panda 2 is a good follow up and builds on the character development of the first film (we find out just how a panda becomes the son of a duck). The animation is beautiful, the action scenes are entertaining, and the voice acting is top notch. If you saw the first one you'll definitely want to check this one out. And if you didn't, well, go out and see both.

First Impressions - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011): First Trailer

2011-06-05T08:17:00.009-04:00

The first trailer for David Fincher's version of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo has been released, and while it is only a minutes and forty seconds long, I am both encouraged and discouraged by it.

Anyone that has followed this blog over the past year knows how much I enjoyed the original Swedish versions of the movies based on the late author Stieg Larsson's 'Millennium' Trilogy. I won't re-hash my love for the films here, you can see my reviews for the Swedish films at these links: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl Who Played With Fire, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest.

I am encouraged by a couple things. Even though the trailer is a collection of many short clips, it appears as though Fincher has kept the most disturbing scenes which is really the foundation for the Lisbeth Salander character. What will be interesting to see will be how those scenes are shot and cut. They were pretty graphic in the Swedish film and I remember thinking 'I'm not sure they could do that in mainstream American cinema' when I first saw it. I'm really looking forward to the score by Trent Reznor. I think his sound is a great fit for the feel of the story. I also think that the cast looks the part as well. It's definitely a solid lineup with Daniel Craig, Stellan Skarsgard, Christopher Plummer, Robin Wright, and Rooney Mara. Unfortunately for Mara, no matter how well she does portraying Lisbeth Salander, she will forever be compared to Noomi Rapace, who's portrayal in the Swedish films was definitive.

I'm a little discouraged by the fact that all of the clips that are included show scenes that took place in the Swedish version. I really hope that the final product isn't a straight rehash of what has already been done. Otherwise, why bother?

I've been anticipating this film pretty much since it was announced. They've got a great director and a solid cast. With a little luck, Fincher's version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo will succeed similarly to Matt Reeves' Let Me In, an American version of a film based upon a Swedish novel that manages to be just as unique and entertaining as its Swedish counterpart.

Review - X-Men: First Class

2011-06-04T11:37:00.008-04:00

X-Men: First Class (2011), PG-13, 132 minutes - Each summer I take a day trip down to Charlotte, NC with some friends to wander around HeroesCon (a comic book convention put on by Charlotte based comic shop Heroes Aren't Hard to Find). Part of the trip has always been stopping on the way home to get dinner and to take in a movie. The film selection tends to be comic or game based depending on what is in theaters at the time. Over the six years that I've been a part of these trips, we've seen some absolute wrecks (Prince of Persia: Sands of Time), and some half way decent flicks (The Incredible Hulk). This year's obvious choice, since it was just released, was X-Men: First Class.

After Fox has done their best to completely ruin the X-Men franchise since X-2 (I am referring specifically to X-Men: The Last Stand and Wolverine: Origins), none of us had very high hopes going in. Just over two hours later, we all agreed that not only was this easily the best Charlotte trip movie we had seen in recent years, but it may even be the best X-Men film made to date (although I personally think that title still belongs to X-2).

First Class is a prequel story that goes back to the early 1960's to tell the story of how the X-Men first came together. It does a wonderful job of portraying how Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender) become friends and work together to stop the machinations put in motion by another mutant, Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon). In their efforts, they begin to bring together a group of young mutants trying to find their place in the world. This 'First Class' includes Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), Beast (Nicholas Hoult), Havok (Lucas Till), Banshee (Caleb Landry Jones), Darwin (Edi Gathegi), and Angel (Zoe Kravitz). This isn't the Warren Worthington, III Angel from The Last Stand. This Angel is a female that has no comic basis that I know of.

Originally, Bryan Singer (director of the first two X-Men films) was going to return to the franchise and direct this First Class. After he had put the initial drafts of the story together there were some scheduling conflicts and the studio decided to proceed with the film instead of waiting for Singer to be available. In his place, Matthew Vaughn does a pretty darn good job of weaving an origin story centered on the Xavier/Magneto relationship into the previously existing X-Men franchise continuity (I will discuss this a bit more in the spoiler section below the trailer). Vaughn, McAvoy and Fassbender do an excellent job of portraying Xavier and Magneto growing together, then apart as their views of the mutant race in the world diverge.

X-Men: First Class is definitely worth checking out, especially if you enjoy comic book based movies. It's well made and very character driven. For those with youngsters, there is one F-bomb (specifics in the spoiler section), but other than that it's pretty clean. If First Class is a sign of what's to come for the X-Men film franchise, then things are looking up.

*****SPOILERS*****

- First things first, ratings wary readers, the F-bomb: There is a collection of scenes part way through the movie in which Xavier and Magneto are traveling around the world recruiting mutants that were located when using Cerebro. In one of these quick scenes, they walk into a bar where Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) is sitting. They don't even get a chance to say anything to him and he growls 'Fuck off', and they walk out. It's a pretty funny, very in character cameo by the world's most recognizable mutant.

- There are three scenes in particular that really tie First Class back to the X-Men movies that came before it: the scene in which Magneto pulls apart the gate while struggling to get back to his parents, the Wolverine cameo, and a scene in which Mystique attempts to seduce Magneto and shape shifts into looking like Rebecca Romijn (who played Mystique in the first three films). There are other character developments that set up the previous movies, but those three are major nods to the previous films.

- I really only have a couple issues with the movie, and honestly, they are a bit nit-picky and comic book nerdy. Most of which revolve around continuity inconsistencies:

1) They used Emma Frost (January Jones) properly, but she's definitely older than she was portrayed in the events of Wolverine: Origins. The fact that she could have joined the X-Men by that time fits comic book continuity, but how do you explain the change in age? Of course, I have about a million issues with Wolverine: Origins so if they just chose to ignore it for continuity sake, then I have absolutely no problem with that and this becomes a non-issue.

2) Beast also appears in X-2 as Dr Hank McCoy...before his mutation, which he pops up in The Last Stand having already had. This shows how he became blue and furry and occurs years earlier. Slight disconnect.

3) The use of Alex (Havok) as the first Summers brother to study under Professor Xavier is a little weird, but off the top of my head I can't remember previous films stating that Scott (Cyclops) was the first (which is how it happened in the comics)...so this may also be a non-issue.

4) In the first X-Men film, they treated Magneto's helmet as though Xavier had never encountered it before (when the two are much older). Here, Xavier is obviously aware of what it does.

* These continuity glitches could be explained away if this was a reboot. But if it is to be considered was a reboot (which I have not read about anywhere), then why try so hard to link it to the others?

5) My biggest problem though is with the use of Azazel (Jason Flemyng), Riptide (Alex Gonzalez), and Angel. Azazel never had anything to do with the Shaw or the X-Men (he turned out to be Nightcrawler's father, but had no other affiliation). They toyed with Riptide's abilities a bit, but the whirlwind/tornadoes weren't too far off. And can someone please explain to me why it was necessary to use yet another Angel? All three of these characters have maybe 10 (short) lines in the entire movie, if they speak at all. They're only real contribution to the film are some cool abilities based special effects.

Review - The Hangover Part II

2011-06-01T18:18:00.004-04:00

The Hangover Part II (2011), R, 102 minutes - A few months ago when I first heard that a sequel to The Hangover was being made, I was very leery. How would they follow up the original? It was a classic adult comedy that told a fairly stand alone story. As teasers and trailers for the new film were released, I became less leery and even began looking forward to the follow up.

Well, the answer to my question was answered. The answer? You follow up The Hangover by making the sequel in almost exactly the same way. The story beats are virtually identical. The only difference is that Part II sports some even more adult, more crude humor than the first one.

Don't get me wrong, The Hangover Part II is a fun hour and forty minutes, it just doesn't bring anything new to the table. Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis are up to more of their old shenanigans and those looking for more Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) will be pleased. There is a humorous look into how Alan sees the world and that might be just as entertaining as any of the other hi-jinx that ensues.

Review: Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

2011-05-22T14:25:00.004-04:00

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011), PG-13, 137 minutes - From what I have read online, the creators of the latest Pirates installment wanted 'dumb' down the plot. That isn't meant in a bad way, there was just so much going on in the second and third films (who was two timing who) it really took away some of the fun. This time around they were definitely successful in providing a plot that isn't so convoluted, but it dragged on a bit.

On Stranger Tides marks the first film in the franchise that isn't directed by Gore Verbinski. Instead Rob Marshall (Memoirs of a Geisha, Chicago) was at the helm. Of course Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow returns. After all, there wouldn't be a Pirates of the Caribbean franchise if not for him. The rest of the cast is comprised of a nice mixture of familiar faces (Geoffrey Rush, and Kevin McNally) and new characters (Penelope Cruz, Ian McShane).

The story does include a little two timing - or at least characters not revealing their entire hands - but is pretty straightforward. The Spanish are said to be in search of the Fountain of Youth. The British join in the search as they can't bear to have such power fall into the hands of the Spaniards. It is rumored that Captain Jack knows the location of the fountain and he gets pulled into the race by Black Beard (McShane) and his daughter (Cruz). Wait, Black Beard is neither Spanish or British you say? Well, he to is looking for the fountain as he needs to drink from it in order to break the prophecy that he will be killed by the one legged man. The funny thing in all of this? Jack could care less about the fountain. He has other motives. But is that really surprising?

On Stranger Tides is another fun entry into the Pirates franchise, but at almost two hours and twenty minutes, it probably could have been trimmed down a touch. It slows down in a couple different places because scenes seem to be drawn out unnecessarily. If you liked the previous Pirates movies it is definitely worth checking out, just make sure you hit the restroom before hand.

Review - Fast Five

2011-05-08T09:19:00.003-04:00

Fast Five (2011), PG-13, 130 minutes - The fifth installment in the Fast and the Furious franchise has been out for a couple weeks now and seeing as though I was talked into checking it out in the theater by multiple friends who had already seen it, I'm going to keep this short because quite honestly, I think I'm about the last person to see it amongst the folks that tune in to this blog.

Fast Five takes a page from the Ocean's movies. It really is a heist flick that happens to have a couple car related scenes in it. The commercials tout it as having many chase sequences, but there's really only one at the climax of the film. This isn't necessarily a bad thing though as the banter between members of the crew while planning the heist is really what carries the movie.

Stars from the first four movies come back to pull off a heist to retire off of. All while jumping to the top of America's Most Wanted list (mostly for crimes they didn't actually commit). I'm not a Fast and the Furious franchise continuity buff, but as far as I know at least one character that died in a previous installment showed up. I've been told that this film takes place somewhere in between the previous four continuity-wise, but I don't know where for sure.

When it comes right down to it, Fast Five is a great summer popcorn flick. The action scenes are huge and entertaining, if not completely laughable. I must admit that it was nice to see Dwayne Johnson (The Rock) in a knock down, drag out fight with Vin Diesel. Seeing a character played by The Rock being challenged physically was a breath of fresh air.

I must admit, Fast Five played out much better than I had anticipated. It wasn't something that I was going out of my way to see, but I'm glad I tagged along yesterday evening. It definitely falls under the guilty pleasure category. For those who have not yet seen it, there's a post credits sequence that teases yet another installment to come. I didn't see it myself, but two of my friends did.

Review - Thor

2011-05-08T06:50:00.009-04:00

Thor (2011), PG-13, 114 minutes - May is upon us and with it the release of the first wave of big summer blockbuster releases, and with that renewed enthusiasm for someone such as myself to share my opinions with the masses (otherwise known as the five people who regularly check in). This marks a nice 'return to form' so to speak as I've been tied up watching more NBA and NHL playoff games than movies over the past few weeks.

Thor has been one of the films that I've been most anticipating for quite a while now and I am pleased to report that it did not disappoint. Kenneth Branagh succeeded in bringing the magical/mythical side of the Marvel Universe to the big screen with the help of a well selected cast that ranges from Oscar winners (Anthony Hopkins as Odin and Natalie Portman as Jane Foster), to relative new comers (Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Tom Hiddleston as Loki).

Thor is the God of Thunder and resides in the realm of Asgard (one of nine realms connected by the world tree Yggdrasil). He is one of two heirs (along with Loki) to Odin's throne. Thor's coronation is actually interrupted by a small group of Frost Giants breaking into the vault of artifacts in Asgard. Thor believes this intrusion is an act of war and leads a small party including the Warriors Three - Volstagg, Hogun, and Fandral (Ray Stevenson, Tadanobu Asano, and Josh Dallas respectively), the Lady Sif (Jaime Alexander), and Loki to confront the Frost Giants in their realm. As all hell breaks loose, Odin intervenes and returns the group to Asgard where he strips Thor of his powers and banishes him to Midgard (Earth) as punishment for his actions. Odin also sends Thor's hammer Mjolnir to Earth with an enchantment. Now Mjolnir can only be picked up by those who are 'worthy' and with it, they shall have the power of Thor.

Thor's interactions on Earth are primarily with astrophysicist Jane Foster and her small research team (Stellan Skarsgard, Kat Dennings). As Thor tries to adapt to Earth and American society, he has some contact with Marvel movie staple Agent Coulsen of S.H.I.E.L.D. (Clark Gregg). As one could imagine, a God learning to fit in in the American west provides quite a few humorous situations. This is possibly one of the film's stronger aspects - there's a very good balance of drama and humor throughout. The experience helps Thor to grow as an individual and realize the consequences of his actions. When he needs it most, Mjolnir returns to Thor and he regains the powers of the God of Thunder. Don't worry, that's not a spoiler. There's still plenty for Thor to do after this point. And honestly, what's a superhero movie with a hero without any powers anyway?

From a comic book nerd's point of view, I felt that this was a great adaptation. Branagh neatly wedged origin stories for Thor and Loki as well as many nods to Thor's comic history into 114 minutes. The casting for all of the Asgardians was excellent. Especially for the roles of Odin, Loki, and Thor himself. This is a breakout role for Hemsworth who's most well known role prior to this was as Captain Kirk's father at the beginning of the JJ Abrams Star Trek reboot a couple of years ago.

If you have enjoyed earlier Marvel films, or enjoy the fantasy/adventure genre, Thor is a must see. I happened to see it in 3D, which was well done (most noticeably in Asgard and the realm of the Frost Giants), but it's not a deal breaker. Seeing Thor in standard 2D won't diminish it any. As with all other Marvel flicks, be sure to wait through the end credits for a teaser scene. The end credits state that Thor will return in The Avengers next summer. I for one truly hope that this film does well enough to warrant future solo Thor adventures.

*****SPOILERS/Trivia*****

As a fan of the most recent volume of Thor that began with J Michael Straczynski's re-launch in 2007, I really enjoyed the inclusion of multiple nods to that run in the movie.

The way they used the name of Dr Donald Blake was amusing. I felt that the decision to make Jane Foster an astrophysicist instead of a medical doctor worked well for the film. Especially as they added some science behind the workings of the rainbow bridge by explaining it as functioning as a worm hole.

There was one glaring omission from the roster of Asgardians - Balder. His inclusion would have been difficult to fit in as he brings even more continuity into the mix (see previously mentioned Straczynski run). Kelda is another Asgardian who has gotten a good deal of use in recent comic continuity. It would be great to see both she and Balder included in future films.

As is becoming the standard in Marvel films, there was a nice teaser for next summer's The Avengers with the inclusion of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye as part of S.H.I.E.L.D.'s security around the crash site of Mjolnir.

Rene Russo's inclusion as Thor's mother Frigga was a nice touch even for such a small role.

Add Ray Stevenson to the list of actors/actresses who have portrayed multiple characters from the Marvel Universe in the movies. He was also Frank Castle in Punisher: War Zone. The other two? Rebecca Romijn (X-Men films, Punisher - 2004) and Chris Evans (Fantastic Four films, Captain America: The First Avenger). Idris Elba, who played the Asgardian Heimdall, will join this list next summer as he is set to appear in Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance.

If Hogun looked familiar, it may be because he has starred in many foreign films including Mongol: The Rise of Genghis Khan and Ichi the Killer.

My theory as to who the friend that Skarsgard's character e-mailed is: Hank Pym. He's a Marvel Universe genius who has been an Avenger and has dealt with S.H.I.E.L.D.

Being the Foo Fighters fan that I am, I enjoyed the inclusion of their song 'Walk' from their new album 'Wasting Light' in both the bar scene and during the end credits.

All I will say about the post credits scene is this: Cosmic Cube!!!

Review - Sucker Punch

2011-03-28T18:31:00.003-04:00

Sucker Punch (2011), PG-13, 109 minutes - Much like Battle: Los Angeles, my opinion of Sucker Punch has shifted a bit after having a little time to reflect on it. Originally, I was quite disappointed in Zack Snyder's latest directorial effort. Now I think I'm only sort of disappointed.

After 300 and Watchmen, Sucker Punch is definitely a letdown story wise. That may be because this wasn't just directed by Zack Snyder, but written by him as well whereas his previous films have been adaptations of other writer's works (and highly regarded writers at that). Visually, it more than holds it's own. It looks and feels like a Zack Snyder film and that's the best thing that it has going for it.

The majority of the story takes place in the mind of a single character and doesn't quite tie together when it is all said and done. Baby Doll (Emily Browning) is admitted to an insane asylum after she attacks her stepfather in the aftermath of her mother's death. Once in the asylum, events play out in Baby Doll's mind as she fantasizes in order to cope with further indignities that she experiences at the hands of the asylum's staff. Other girls in the asylum - Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish), Rocket (Jena Malone), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens) and Amber (Jamie Chung) - help play out different scenarios in Baby Doll's fantasies, which play out her efforts to escape. Carla Gugino, Scott Glenn, and Jon Hamm add some familiar faces to the sci-fi/action/fantasy mash up.

Sucker Punch succeeds in being another digitally mastered piece of artwork from Snyder as well as being a fan boy's dream brought to the big screen. Unfortunately the story tries to be a little bit Shutter Island and a little bit Inception and just doesn't live up to those lofty aspirations. I would relegate Sucker Punch to a potential rental for those who have not yet seen it. I don't believe that it is as bad as many of the reviews that I have read make it out to be, but it probably isn't worth a $10 movie ticket either.

*****SPOILERS*****
I can piece together most of the storyline so that it makes some semblance of sense, but there's one big thing that stands out in my mind. Everything takes place in Baby Doll's head. Everyone that appears in her fantasies are people that she comes in contact with during her time in the asylum with the exception of the Wise Man (Scott Glenn's character). He's not only the guy that provides Baby Doll and the other girls their various missions to collect the map, fire, and knife, but also the bus driver who helps Sweet Pea at the very end of the movie. So if he hasn't come in contact with Baby Doll at any point, then how does he manifest in her fantasies?

Combo Review - Rango/Battle: Los Angeles/Limitless/Paul

2011-03-28T17:39:00.004-04:00

In an effort to get caught up after my lack of posts over the last couple of weeks (you can thank the NCAA tournament for that), I'm going to provide real quick thoughts of the movies I have seen as opposed to my usual longer posts.

Rango (2011), PG, 107 minutes - Rango is a fun animated film carried by Johnny Depp voicing the main character - an acting chameleon trying to find his way in the world. There are a couple nice references to previous films including Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and a very convincing Clint Eastwood impersonation by Timothy Olyphant in the form of 'The Spirit of the West'.

Battle: Los Angeles (2011), PG-13, 116 minutes - Immediately after watching Battle: Los Angeles, I didn't think very highly of it. Now that I've had time to reflect, I realize that feeling was primarily because the people in the theater that I saw it in felt the need to clap and cheer when it ended. Battle: Los Angeles isn't nearly that good (although it isn't all that awful either), so it rubbed me the wrong way. The effects are pretty good and Aaron Eckhart is believable as Sgt. Michael Nantz, a career military man who gets sucked back into duty by an alien invasion just as he's been approved to retire.

Limitless (2011), PG-13 - 105 minutes - Bradley Cooper shows that he has the star power to carry a movie, and Robert DeNiro has a nice little part in this action flick about an underachieving writer who takes a newly developed drug that allows the taker to access their entire brain. The only problem is that there are some pretty hefty side effects to be worked around. I felt the ending was a little weak (I won't spoil it here), otherwise it was a pretty decent movie.

Paul (2011), R, 104 minutes - Paul is the latest Simon Pegg/Nick Frost collaboration. This time around they are directed by Greg Mottola and not Edgar Wright, but because of its stars, Paul has much the same feel as Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz. This time around Pegg and Frost play Sci-Fi/Comic nerds from England who have traveled to the US for the San Diego Comic Con followed by a tour of all of the alien related spots in the States. During their tour, they cross paths with Paul, an alien trying to make his way home (voiced by Seth Rogen). Shenanigans ensue with many nods to previous alien related flicks. There are other nice roles/cameos by Jeffrey Tambor, Jane Lynch, Jason Bateman, Bill Hader, Kristen Wiig, Steven Spielberg and Sigourney Weaver. There is quite a bit of language and some religious lampooning so keep that in mind.

Review - The Adjustment Bureau

2011-03-05T05:10:00.008-05:00

The Adjustment Bureau (2011), PG-12, 105 minutes - For those that read my '10 Most Anticipated Films of 2011' post, The Adjustment Bureau should look familiar (as it topped the list). For those that haven't, take a look here.

The Adjustment Bureau is based on a Philip K. Dick short story titled 'Adjustment Team' (which I have not read). I actually didn't realize this until I read it in the end credits - one more thing to add to my 'to read' list. It centers around David Norris (Matt Damon), a young, rising political star who is running for the U.S. Senate and seemingly has a lock on the seat. After a story breaks about some class reunion shenanigans, he gets steamrolled in the election. On his way to deliver his concession speech, he has a chance encounter with Elise Sellas (Emily Blunt). There's an instant attraction and after their talk he completely ditches the speech that he had planned on making and instead goes with a much more matter of fact speech that regains his popularity and vaults his name to the top of the heap for the next election.

Three months later David and Elise have another chance encounter on a city bus. Only this time around they were never supposed to have seen each other. This is where we are introduced to the Adjustment Bureau - a group that oversees everything that everyone does and makes sure that their lives stay on the 'correct' path. David's 'correct' path was supposed to see him spill coffee on himself, gone back home to change, miss the bus, and been late for a meeting. Instead, one of the Adjusters, Harry Mitchell (Anthony Mackie) misses his assignment and not only does David run into Elise again, but he shows up on time for his meeting where he walks into the world of the Adjustment Bureau as they are correcting the path of his friend/co-worker/one time campaign manager.

Having seen 'the man behind the curtain', David is sat down by Richardson (John Slattery) and told about the Bureau and their purpose. He is also given a stern warning never to mention their existence, or to try and see Elise again. If he does so they will be forced to 'reset' (think lobotomize) him. David goes on for three years as Richardson said until he has yet another chance encounter with Elise. This is when the two of them begin making life a nightmare for the Bureau as according to the plan, they are never supposed to end up together. Mitchell and Richardson are unable to fix the problem so they call in the big gun, an agent named Thompson (Terence Stamp) who, in his time as a field agent was called 'The Hammer' for his ruthlessness in dealing with course corrections. The movie plays out from there in a battle of fate vs. free will.

Coming in at an hour and forty fives minutes, The Adjustment Bureau is a pretty well paced movie. It jumps right into the story and only slows in a couple places to help show how downtrodden David is in between encounters with Elise. The ending is a little predictable, but there are a couple nice little twists along the way. The chemistry between Damon and Blunt on screen really helps sell the relationship growing between David and Elise despite their limited encounters.

The Adjustment Bureau is an entertaining sci-fi/romance (how's that for a genre mash-up?). It may have been able to explore certain themes in a little more depth, but only at the cost of extending it into a two plus hour epic. Overall, I was quite pleased with the film. I had worried that I might have raised my expectations too high as I anticipated its release, but luckily there was no such let down. I also hadn't seen much of Emily Blunt's previous work, but after The Adjustment Bureau, let's just say that I'm a fan.

*****SPOILERS*****
- Different parts of the film reminded me of previous sci-fi films/tv shows. The scene in which David walks in on the Bureau 'adjusting' his friend reminded me quite a bit of Dark City - a 'big brother' entity messing with someone's thoughts and memories. The doors connecting the entire city used by the Bureau to pop up just about anywhere made me think of the paradoxes built into the dreams in Inception in order to help the inhabitants move more freely. And maybe it is just because I just finished a week and a half long Doctor Who marathon, but the Bureau's explanation of certain events being manipulated and others still being a natural coincidence reminded me of the Doctor's belief that certain points in time are fixed and must always happen, where as others can be tweaked.

- Just in case you have no intention of seeing the film, the predictability that I mentioned earlier? Harry becomes the stereotypical rogue unit that helps David fight back against the Bureau. David and Elise fight so hard to be together, their paths are re-written so that they do end up together.

2011 Oscars - 83rd Academy Awards

2011-02-27T13:17:00.000-05:00

It's that time of year again. Time for me (and my friend Chris Wieder) to take a stab at predicting the turnout of this year's Academy Awards. The format below is basically the same as my picks were from last year (see previous blog post): the categories, the nominees, which nominees from that category that Wieder and I have seen, and our thoughts about that category. We've picked the seven most well known categories, and with a little luck we'll disagree somewhere (I did not read Wieder's picks prior to making my own). Otherwise, what's the fun in having multiple opinions?

Wieder is a friend and former co-worker who, I must say, has pretty decent taste in movies. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't have seen Winter's Bone as early as I did. Knowing that he and I have many of the same interests when it comes to movies, I will apologize in advance on the off chance that he and I have similar rants concerning the Best Lead Actress category.

So here are a few words from him then on to the picks!

Hello there. While I can safely say I've not seen as many of the nominees as the host of this fine blog (and really, who among us can?), I think I can hang with Timmy B because I have seen a good number of them. Couple that with the fact that as a Patriots fan, Tim's opinions are obviously a little shaky, and who knows. So let's go to the tape, or maybe the DVD/BluRay disc, and get this thing started...

Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published:
Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy (127 Hours), Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network), Michael Arndt; story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, Lee Unkrich (Toy Story 3), Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (True Grit), Debra Grankik and Anne Rosellini (Winter's Bone)

I've seen: All Nominees

My Pick: Last year I didn't do so hot picking the screenplay awards. I can't say as I have any more knowledge in the way of these categories this year, but I'm going to go with The Social Network here. Who knows just how true to events the movie really was, but the story was excellent as was the dialog. For a film that was once considered a front runner in just about every category, I think this is about as close to a lock as The Social Network has for taking home the prize.

Wieder has seen: The Social Network, True Grit, Winter's Bone

Wieder's Pick: 127 Hours and Toy Story 3, I didn't see. True Grit was a delightfully spare story, and apparently far truer to the original novel than the somewhat hammy original, which was designed as a John Wayne vehicle. Then again, that worked for him, and I worry that too many people remember that fondly. Oh, I so want to give this one to Winter's Bone. It is really it's best shot of the night, and a worthy contender. But, since it's an award that I don't truly know what the voters look at, I'll cheat a bit and take The Social Network because that's what all the projections say will happen.

Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen: Mike Leigh (Another Year), Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson; story by Keith Dorrington Paul Tamasy Eric Johnson (The Fighter), Christopher Nolan (Inception), Lisa Cholodenko and Stuart Blumberg (The Kids Are All Right), David Seidler (The King's Speech)

I've seen: The Fighter, Inception, The King's Speech, part of The Kids Are All Right

My Pick: I can't speak for Another Year, but the rest of these films were excellent. I know that the Academy doesn't often use the 'such and such won this, this and this so another film/person should win here' logic, but for that reason, I'm picking Inception over the other nominees. I'm still trying to figure out how Christopher Nolan was passed over in the Best Director category. That was most likely the biggest snub of this year's awards. If Nolan can't be recognized in the Directing category, let him take home a statue here. You won't find a more imaginative and original script.

Wieder has seen: The Fighter, Inception, The King's Speech

Wieder's Pick: Haven't seen Another Year. And was not a fan of The Kids Are All Right. And I'm getting tired of picking between The Fighter and The King's Speech. So, since he got jobbed for a Best Director nomination, let's give Christopher Nolan the award for Best Original Screenplay for Inception.

Best Achievement in Directing: Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan), David O. Russell (The Fighter), Tom Hooper (The King's Speech), David Fincher (The Social Network), Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (True Grit)

I've seen: All nominees

My Pick: This is a tough category as far as I'm concerned. Not only have I seen all of the nominated films, but I really enjoyed all of them as well. As I mentioned before, I'm baffled as to how Christopher Nolan wasn't nominated in this category. However, I can't argue against any one of the six directors nominated. For this category, my pick comes from the earliest released film of the bunch: David Fincher for The Social Network.

Wieder has seen: All nominees

Wieder's Pick: Can I say that I am generally a Coen Brothers fan, but I wouldn't have nominated them with Christopher Nolan standing there with Inception? Sorry. So I remove them first. Darren Aronofsky has been making trippy movies for a while now, and I am happy to see him break through with a nomination, but I had a problem or two with Black Swan overall. Tom Hooper had a job to deal with the scenes with some not-quite-as-stuffy as you think British dialogue, but I don't feel like he needs this much credit. David O. Russell delivers a powerful story, but he had a lot of help. The Social Network has been racking up nominations, and I need to throw it a bone. Further, I can consider this my personal thank you to David Fincher for Seven and Fight Club, as well as use this opportunity to tell him that he BETTER not screw up the American remake of Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, not that we needed it... *deep breath* let's move on before I have an aneurysm.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role: Amy Adams (The Fighter), Helena Bonham Carter (The King's Speech), Melissa Leo (The Fighter), Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit), Jacki Weaver (Animal Kingdom)

I've seen: The Fighter, The King's Speech, True Grit

My Pick: Ordinarily, I am generally of the opinion that two actors/actresses, teammates, co-workers, or what have you are nominated for the same award, they will end up splitting the vote and neither will win. But this year I'm not sure that holds true. I really enjoyed Hailee Steinfeld in True Grit. It was a great showing from a newcomer, and even though she shared major screen time with Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon, you would have a hard time convincing me that her character Mattie Ross doesn't qualify as a leading role (she easily took over scenes including both Bridges and Damon on multiple occasions). If she were to win here I'd be happy, I just think that she's in the wrong category. Helena Bonham Carter was quite good as the loving and supportive wife in The King's Speech, but I think one of the two ladies from The Fighter will beat her out. Amy Adams' character was just as supportive and much fiercer than Carter's, but when it is all said and done, I think Melissa Leo takes this category. The emotion of her character along with the blindness that emotion caused as to what was best for her son was truly believable and frustrating as hell all at the same time.

Wieder has seen: The Fighter, The King's Speech, True Grit

Wieder's Pick: Maybe it's because I haven't seen the movie, or because it was the only nomination for the movie, but I'm dismissing Jacki Weaver in Animal Kingdom right off the bat. Next, though I have enjoyed Helena Bonham-Carter and admire her choices of eclectic movie roles, I don't think she will win, either. That leaves a three-way, which would be salacious if it didn't include a fourteen year-old girl. Ewww. Anyway, I'm wondering whether two nominated actresses from the same movie will open up just enough room for the newcomer. But I'm also irritated that the Academy shooed Hailee Steinfeld into this category anyway, when she's the freaking main character/narrator of True Grit. So, I can totally see her winning, but not gonna pick her. I will be honest, the whole Melissa Leo mini-scandal about her taking out ads does not influence this pick. I saw her build this momentum and lose it, but even when I saw the movie, I thought the go-to actress performance that captured the movie belonged to Amy Adams. The crush I developed on her during the movie might be influencing me here, but as The Fighter goes along, in my opinion Leo recedes while Adams ascends. And since you must ascend onto the stage to accept the award, my pick is Adams. Yeah, that was lame, wasn't it? *shrug* moving along...

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role: Christian Bale (The Fighter), John Hawkes (Winter's Bone), Jeremy Renner (The Town), Mark Ruffalo (The Kids Are All Right), Geoffrey Rush (The King's Speech)

I've seen: All nominees

My Pick: It's great to see John Hawkes get some recognition for his role in Winter's Bone. It's also nice to see Mark Ruffalo get a little love from the Academy. Can anyone honestly say they don't like that guy? Anyone who read my picks from last year (or spoke to me in person over the last year and a half) knows that I am a huge fan of The Hurt Locker, so I am pleased to see Jeremy Renner snag another nomination this year. It's good to see that he wasn't just a flash in the pan. Prior to seeing The King's Speech a month or so ago, I had pretty much already made up my mind in this category (before the actual nominations had been released). Geoffrey Rush made it a more difficult choice with his speech therapist role. But when I think back over the past year, the one role that really stands out to me is Christian Bale's turn as Dickey Eklund, crack addict, brother and trainer to boxing champion Mickey Ward. Say what you will about his grumbling as Batman, but this guy drops a sickly amount of weight for roles so well it is almost disturbing. And he put that ability to good use for The Fighter.

Wieder has seen: The Fighter, The King's Speech, The Town, Winter's Bone, part of The Kids Are All Right

Wieder's Pick: I honestly figured that Matt Damon would have nabbed a nom for True Grit, but this is already a tough choice for me, so perhaps it's better this way. Mark Ruffalo, I couldn't make it through your movie, sorry. Jeremy Renner has been coming on strong the last few years and is fine actor, but as the only major nod for The Town (how many Boston-area movies are they gonna make, geez), the nomination is the award for him. I LOVE that John Hawkes got a nomination here. Besides making me continue to miss Deadwood on HBO (*sigh*), it makes me think that the Academy is waking up a bit. Would this performance have ever gotten nominated 15-20 years ago? I think not. I walked out of the theater when I saw the film saying "it would be great if he got nominated." He can't win, though, not this year. Geoffrey Rush and Christian Bale are taking their films to another toe-to-toe fight in my eyes, and this time, the performance about boxing wins. Rush was sublime in The King's Speech, but Bale was excellent in The Fighter, disappearing into the role of Dicky Eklund. Plus, he also did the physical transformation thing to convincingly play a crack addict.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role: Annette Bening (The Kids Are All Right), Nicole Kidman (Rabbit Hole), Jennifer Lawrence (Winter's Bone), Natalie Portman (Black Swan), Michelle Williams (Blue Valentine)

I've seen: All nominees

My Pick: As far as I'm concerned, this category is responsible for the second biggest snubbing of this year's awards. Friends of mine know that this year's small/indie/foreign film that I talked up the most this year was The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. Due to the timing of its original release in Sweden it is not eligible in the foreign film category this year (it was released there in 2009, after Sweden's entry for last year's Oscars had already been named). As it was released here stateside in March of 2010, it was eligible for individual awards this year. You will not find a more powerful performance over the past year than that of Lisbeth Salander by Noomi Rapace. I am convinced that the fact that her film was released so early in the year kept it from truly being considered along with the more recent releases. Much like the directing category though, I can understand why the actresses nominated were. If it had been up to me, I would have given Rapace a nomination in this category over Nicole Kidman. This is an absolutely packed category this year but I think Natalie Portman takes home the statue for her ambitious turned paranoid ballerina in Black Swan. On a side note, seeing Jennifer Lawrence nominated for Winter's Bone was nice and well deserved.

Wieder has seen: Black Swan, Winter's Bone, part of The Kids Are All Right

Wieder's Pick: I have honestly have boycotted a couple of the lower-tier nominations in this category, not because Nicole Kidman and Michelle Williams aren't fine actress who allegedly gave very good performances, but because the Academy is (soapbox alert, here I go!) MORONIC for not nominating Noomi Rapace for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Did you see this movie? If not, you missed out on what might be the best acting performance of the year, regardless of category, and I'm mildly disappointed in you. They can't tell me that it's because it was a foreign film, because they put one up in the Best Actor category. This is a LUDICROUS slight from these short-sighted, cliquish, you-scrub-my-back-and-I'll nominate-your-film-and-I'll-throw-in-a-blowjob Hollywood attitude that has me, well, mildly upset. Anyway, I very much enjoyed Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone and while I have been a fan of Annette Bening for years, I didn't think this was her best work. Her nomination takes away from the performance of Julianne Moore, who I thought was just as good. This is Bening's 4th nomination, and she easily could have gotten others (The American President, in particular), so if this becomes one of those "career" awards, it wouldn't surprise me. However, I'll take Natalie Portman in Black Swan, because I've at least seen this one, and she's scary good. I might have said "wicked good" but this is still the South, as someone keeps forgetting. Anyway, The Academy seems to like actors who are willing to undergo significant physical changes. No, she didn't gain 30 pounds like DeNiro in Raging Bull, but it would have been hard to do any of that ballet dancing if she had, right?

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role: Javier Bardem (Biutiful), Jeff Bridges (True Grit), Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network), Colin Firth (The King's Speech), James Franco (127 Hours)

I've seen: True Grit, The Social Network, The King's Speech, 127 Hours

My Pick: If you had asked me at the beginning of winter who the front runner for this category was, I would have said Jesse Eisenberg hands down. That was before I saw The King's Speech. Colin Firth followed up last year's Best Actor nomination for A Single Man with an even more worthy portrayal of King George VI. Jeff Bridges, Eisenberg, and James Franco (who is a host at this year's awards) were all quite good. I have yet to see Biutiful but hope to sometime later in the week. I'm sure Bardem is worthy of the nomination but I have a hard time seeing a leading role from a foreign film beating out such a strong performance by Firth. In other years, all of these nominees might have a chance, but Firth is just head and shoulders above the pack.

Wieder has seen: The King's Speech, The Social Network, True Grit

Wieder's Pick: I'm hurting in this category, having seen only three of the performances, but I'll rationalize my way home here. James Franco, they let host the show. No way he wins. Javier Bardem, for a non-English film? A previous Oscar winner, a fine actor, but I'd like his chances better if Biutiful had gotten more nominations. Jeff Bridges just won last year, and I don't see a repeat coming here. Jesse Eisenberg has the best chance for an upset, but until this year he was getting more nominations for Teen Choice and MTV Movie awards than the big boys. Which brings me to this year's winner-to-be, Colin Firth. He's been delivering high-profile performances in Oscar-fare movies for at least 15 years (The English Patient, Shakespeare In Love, A Single Man, etc.). Plus, he's peripherally attached to the Blackadder series, and that's enough for me.

Best Motion Picture of the Year: 127 Hours, Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The Kids Are All Right, The King's Speech, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit, Winter's Bone

I've seen: All nominees

My Pick: This is the second year that the Academy has used the expanded nominee list in the Best Picture category. It is also the second time ever that I have seen all of the nominees. When the nominees were announced, I was surprised to see that all ten in this category were all films that I actually had a desire to see. Last year I had to struggle through a couple just to be able to say that I had the whole category covered. Not only did I want to see all of these nominees, I enjoyed all of them - with the exception of a few minutes worth of 127 Hours, I've never felt so sick watching a movie before in my life. Even though I liked all of these films, the choice isn't very difficult. The big winner this year is The King's Speech. What's that? Those of you that read my blog are saying 'but Tim, what about your favorite movie of 2010????'. Well, Inception was my favorite film of the year, however, I realize that just because I enjoyed it the most doesn't mean that it is the best film. The Social Network has been a front runner along with The King's Speech throughout awards season, and gets a nice shout out as the runner up in my book. The King's Speech is just too strong this year. It's a great, inspiring, heartwarming story that just so happens to include three of the best performances of the year.

Wieder has seen: Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The King's Speech, The Social Network, True Grit, Winter's Bone, part of The Kids Are All Right

Wieder's pick: I don't know if moving to 10 films helps or hurts the Oscars, honestly. It is nice to take films from genres that were previously overlooked repeatedly (like animated films, so welcome to the longer short list, Toy Story 3), but when you know they have no shot at winning, what's the point? If there is a big bonus, it's that a small, powerful movie like Winter's Bone can find itself discussed and drawing attention to itself. It was the first of this group I saw, and I'd love to say that I think it will win. But, no. I didn't make the 2 hours to see 127 Hours, so that can't be a good sign. The Kids Are All Right, I tried to get into, but couldn't get through it. So no vote there. The Social Network was an interesting movie, but I only got around to seeing it this week. That only impacts my choice inasmuch as if I didn't want to see a movie about Facebook, as much as I read Tim's posts on Facebook, there must be something to my decision. Black Swan, a nice head-trip of a film about the madness of brilliance, or maybe the other way around, but not rich enough. True Grit, a pleasant surprise of a remake, but not gonna get there. When I saw Inception in the theater, I was blown away by the visuals, and not slowed down by the story. That's hardly a great endorsement, so we move to the two I had to chose between. I thought The Fighter was great, with excellent performances from all the lead actors, a gritty tale of real-life triumph. I thought The King's Speech was great, with excellent performances from all the lead actors, an elegant tale of real-life triumph. You'd like to think that someone beating the crap out of someone is more powerful than learning to talk without stuttering, but it was a British king during WWII. The Academy loves its period piece dramas, British accents over Bahston accents, and gave The King's Speech more nominations than any other movie this year. It's the pick.

So there are our picks. It looks like we pretty much agree (I won't argue with anyone trying to give Amy Adams an Oscar as I share Wieder's admiration of her), and what do you know? We did have similar rants in a couple of the categories (but seriously, go watch The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo and tell me Noomi Rapace didn't deserve a nomination). It'll be interesting to see how well we picked. Who would you pick for this year's awards?

Archive - 2010 Oscar Picks (82nd Annual Academy Awards)

2011-02-26T11:20:00.003-05:00

As promised earlier in the week, here is an archive post of my picks for last year's Oscars. This was originally posted in a note on facebook because I had not started this blog yet. Picks for this year's Oscars will be posted either later tonight or tomorrow morning. The 83rd Annual Academy Awards will be held tomorrow night. Just in case anyone is counting, 5 of my 7 picks were correct (I botched the scripting categories).

So I did this a couple of years ago in a blog on myspace and apparently skipped doing it last year for whatever reason, but these are my picks for who/what films should win at tonight's Oscars.

I'm only going over the biggest categories as I really haven't seen any of the foreign films, documentaries, or short films. I'm also going to skip the editing/art direction/music because, to be perfectly honest, I just don't have the technical knowledge to really be able to make a decision. At this point, they are all excellent or they would not have been nominated right?

The categories and nominees are listed below with my pick for the winner and a quick thought about my pick. I'm not going to get into TOO much detail here. I've already left reviews for most everything I've seen on here through flixster.

Here we go!

Best Motion Picture of the Year: Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Basterds, Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire, A Serious Man, Up, Up in the Air

I've seen: All of them

My Pick: The Hurt Locker - This probably doesn't surprise anyone. The Hurt Locker has been my pick since I saw it over the summer. And it continues to be my pick after seeing all ten nominated films. How a movie like The Blind Side gets a nomination in this category over a film like Invictus or even Star Trek beats the hell out of me.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role: Jeff Bridges (Crazy Heart), George Clooney (Up in the Air), Colin Firth (A Single Man), Morgan Freeman (Invictus), Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker)

I've seen: All of them

My Pick: Jeff Bridges - After seeing Up in the Air, I was ready to go with Clooney here, but then I saw Crazy Heart. Clooney's going to win one of these bad boys eventually.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role: Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side), Helen Mirren (The Last Station), Carey Mulligan (An Education), Gabourey Sidibe (Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire), Meryl Streep (Julie & Julia)

I've seen: The Blind Side, An Education, Precious (I'm not going to continue typing that lengthy title, we all know who wrote the novel by now).

My Pick: Sandra Bullock - I've never been a big Sandra Bullock fan, and despite hearing great things about her performance, she's the reason it took me so long to finally see The Blind Side. Excellent performance that has somehow managed to get the film nominated for Best Picture. Watch out for Carey Mulligan in the future though.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role: Matt Damon (Invictus), Woody Harrelson (The Messenger), Christopher Plummer (The Last Station), Stanley Tucci (The Lovely Bones), Cristoph Waltz (Inglorious Basterds)

I've seen: Invictus, Inglorious Basterds, The Messenger

My Pick: Cristoph Waltz - This might be as close to a lock in my mind as you can get. Waltz's turn in Inglorious Basterds was scary good. Maybe one of the best villains ever. I'm Not sure how Best Supporting Actor ends up being the category that I've seen the fewest films from though.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role: Penelope Cruz (Nine), Vera Farmiga (Up in the Air), Maggie Gyllenhaal (Crazy Heart), Anna Kendrick (Up in the Air), Mo'Nique (Precious)

I've seen: Up in the Air, Crazy Heart, Precious

My Pick: Mo'Nique - when I saw Precious, I kept looking and waiting for the great performance I had read all about. As the film went on, all I could think was 'she's just playing an angry woman, nothing special here'. Then you get to the last ten minutes and the sit down meeting with the social worker. That's when this performance pays off.

Best Achievement in Directing: Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker), James Cameron (Avatar), Lee Daniels (Precious), Jason Reitman (Up in the Air), Quentin Tarantino (Inglorious Basterds)

I've seen: All of them

My Pick: Kathryn Bigelow - If she could take this home and The Hurt Locker can't snag Best Picture, I'd probably still be happy - it would make her the first female to win the award for best director.

Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen: Mark Boal (The Hurt Locker), Quentin Tarantino (Inglorious Basterds), Oren Moverman, Alessandro Camon (The Messenger), Joel and Ethan Coen (A Serious Man), Bob Peterson, Pete Doctor (Up)

I've seen: The Hurt Locker, Inglorious Basterds, The Messenger, A Serious Man, Up

My Pick: Quentin Tarantino - Got to get in a little Tarantino love.

Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published: Neill Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell (District 9), Nick Hornby (An Education), Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche (In the Loop), Geoffrey Fletcher (Precious), Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner (Up in the Air)

I've seen: District 9, An Education, Precious, Up in the Air

My Pick: Up in the Air - I admit, I'm picking solely on which film of the batch I thought was the best. I haven't read any of the source material for any of these films (and have only seen the short that District 9 was based on).

And that gets us into all of the technical/sound/documentary/animated/short awards that I either don't know much of anything about and/or haven't even seen. Avatar is easily my pick for Best Achievement in Visual Effects and the same can be said for Up in the Best Animated Feature Film of the Year category.

As much as I enjoyed Avatar, I'm a little scared that it is going to dominate tonight based upon it's otherworldly success at the box office. What James Cameron achieved with that film is nothing short of amazing. It's looks and sounds great, but haven't we seen that story a hundred times in the sci-fi/fantasy genre? That is why I can't go with it for something as large as Best Picture.

Recent/Future Updates - Keep an Eye Out

2011-02-19T18:58:00.003-05:00

In an attempt to add some (hopefully) fun content other than my usual movie reviews, I've posted a couple of different updates this week. The first was my list of films that I am most looking forward to in 2011. The second follows this brief introduction. It is the first of what I hope I will be able to turn into a somewhat regular feature (well, somewhat regular in relation to my own ability to keep up with regular posts): the guest review. Also, keep your eyes open later this week for my Oscar picks for this year. I'd hate to boast, but I did pretty well with the picks last year. I also hope to have one or two guests make their picks as well. I may even post last year's picks here just for the heck of it, as they occurred before I started this blog.

Thanks for checking in. I hope you enjoy what you've read. As always, feel free to leave feedback!

Guest Review - Unknown

2011-02-19T18:47:00.004-05:00

The inaugural guest review was submitted by a friend and co-worker who, quite possibly, 'wastes' as much time on movies as I do. Ladies and Gentlemen, without further ado, a review for Unknown by one Mr. Scott Abbott:

WARNING: Scott was able to stay pretty spoiler free in regards to the specifics of Unknown's plot. He does however, manage to completely blow Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince out of the water. I'm not sure that between the book, the movie, and the internet that there is anyone that this warning really applies to, but you've been warned just in case.

Unknown (2011), PG-13, 113 minutes - I just got back from seeing Unknown with my good friend - that dude that someone needs to check his brain - and let me tell you, I should have checked mine before I even took my seat in the theater. If there was a time that I wish I could have gone to see a movie with a blank mind, this was it. Here is why: if you have seen the previews, you have basically seen the movie. This is a case once again in which the marketing morons couldn't figure out how to promote a movie without spoiling the whole entire film. Not only that, but they managed to put together all of the action scenes in the entire movie in the preview. The more I think about it the more I ccould compare the marketing people for this movie to Twilight fan girls squealing over spoilers just because they've already read the book, or more accurately, the viral video of the one guy yelling out from his car window "Snape kills Dumbledore!". It just spoiled the movie that much for me.

I will admit, I fell for marketing's scheme and went to see the movie, so on that note good work, but in this case I really want to call out "False Advertising!!". Most of us, after seeing the preview, were easily deceived into believing this movie was going to have some elements of Liam's past action movie known as Taken. Sadly that is not the case with Unknown. Instead you get your typical "Who am I?" mystery in which the character isn't Person A, or Person B, but Person C. So after seeing the action packed trailer and coming back from seeing the movie I can tell you there is just one car chase and two fight scenes. Going back to the topic of the preview spoiling the entire movie for me, had I not seen the previews for the movie it probably would have had a slight twist at the end but after a few scenes in the middle of the movie you probably would have figured out the twist that was offered.

Overall, I have to say this movie is right in the middle. It's not great but it isn't horrible. If the previews didn't spoil the movie it probably would have received a little more praise. Unknown, in my opinion, was only good enough to see once, where as I still watch Taken regularly on an almost religious basis. If you want a great Liam Neeson action flick, watch Taken or check out one of his older videos like Darkman. If you haven't seen previews for Unknown and have no clue what I'm talking about, then see this movie at your own risk. At the least, I can say it's an okay movie for the matinee price if you have nothing better to see or do, but that's pushing the envelope.

My 10 Most Anticipated Films of 2011

2011-02-17T19:04:00.008-05:00

I have little doubt that as the year goes on other films will make themselves known, but as of today, this is my list of the ten movies that I am most looking forward to this year (luckily none of them have been released yet so I'm not late with my list). I have provided trailer links where available and tentative release dates. Here we go, in reverse order:

10b. Super 8 (June 10) - Here's another film from the mind of JJ Abrams. And with it we get more classic Abrams secrecy. I chose this trailer because it gives us a little better idea of what's going on than the Super Bowl spot did.

10a. Green Lantern (June 17) - A couple months ago, Green Lantern would have been much higher on this list. The current Geoff Johns run on the Green Lantern comic has been amazing and the character has a ton of potential on the big screen, but the trailer comes off as a little more campy than I had anticipated. I hope the movie plays better. The cast is pretty solid with Mark Strong and Peter Sarsgaard (among others) joining Ryan Reynolds.

9. Battle: Los Angeles (March 11) - There's not much more fun than a good invasion flick, and it has been a while since we've had one. Here's hoping Battle: Los Angeles fills the void.

8. Sucker Punch (March 25) - Director Zack Snyder has masterminded two of the most visually stunning films of the past few years (300, Watchmen). This is his latest installment. How can you go wrong with a quest involving a dragon, robots, samurai, and ass kicking ladies all stemming from an insane asylum in Vermont? My hope is that you can't. At the very least, Sucker Punch will look amazing.

7. Paul (March 18) - The latest buddy flick starring the dynamic duo of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost + an Alien voiced by Seth Rogan? Sign me up!

6. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows: Part 2 (July 15) - The final installment in the Harry Potter franchise, Deathly Hollows: Part 2 has been set up to be epic (says the guy who still has not read any of the books).

5. Cowboys & Aliens (July 29) - I love the concept. With all of the genre mash ups that there have been over the years, how have we not gotten cowboys and aliens together before? I also love how straight forward the title is. They're saying 'we've got cowboys and we've got aliens and we're not going to try and be cute about it'. Oh by the way, it stars Daniel Craig, Harrison Ford, and Olivia Wilde and is directed by John Favreau (the guy who wrote Swingers and directed the Iron Man movies).

4. Thor (May 6) - Marvel has two potentially huge movies coming out this summer. Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger (I'll get to that in a minute). When this was first announced, as much as I loved the thought, I wondered how well Gods and Asgard would play on screen (even considering the amazing technology available for effects these days). Well, take a look at the trailer. I'd say it plays pretty well.

3. Captain America: The First Avenger (July 22) - Cap gets a slight nod over Thor on this list as I have only gotten into Thor by way of the comics over the last couple of years. Some balked at the announcement that Chris Evans would bring Steve Rogers to life in the Cap movie. After all, hadn't he already been Johnny Storm (the Human Torch) in the Fantastic Four movies? Personally, I think he's a great choice. He's always been quite entertaining in all of his movies. The role of Steve Rogers will require a little less sarcasm and humor than Evans usually portrays, but this is his chance to really hit the big time. I also don't believe there could have been a more perfect casting for the Red Skull than Hugo Weaving. I really wish there was a full length trailer, but all we have for now is the teaser from the Super Bowl.

2. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (December 21) - Anyone who has paid any attention to this blog or my rantings over the past year know that I loved not only Stieg Larsson's Millennium trilogy, but the Swedish films that followed. I still haven't quite figured out how I feel about an American adaptation (of the novels, David Fincher has made it clear he is adapting the novels, not the Swedish films). Considering how well done the Swedish films were, is it really necessary? I do however understand that a Hollywood version will reach far more people in this country than the foreign films could ever hope to (unfortunately). That being said, I have great respect for Fincher's previous works and the cast he has put together has the potential to be great. I am very intrigued to see how it turns out. Especially how Rooney Mara portrays Lisbeth Salandar. For that reason alone, it jumps all the way to number two on my list.

1. The Adjustment Bureau (March 4) - It's a good thing that The Adjustment Bureau hits theaters in just a couple of weeks because I look forward to it more and more every time I see an ad for it. Matt Damon as about as 'go to' of an actor as it gets in my book. I'm not sure I've ever seen a movie he has been in and not liked it. On top of that, it's a good old fate vs free will story and one scene in the trailer is reminiscent of Dark City (although obviously not nearly as sci-fi-ish). At this point I really hope that it lives up to expectations and that I haven't over-hyped it in my own mind. We'll find out soon enough!

There they are, the ten movies I'm most looking forward to in 2011. An old roommate (or at least his son) will probably give me all kinds of hell for Cars 2 not making the cut. It is definitely right there on the outskirts of the list though (probably a solid number eleven). What films are you anticipating the most this year?

Review - The Eagle

2011-02-17T18:03:00.006-05:00

The Eagle (2011), PG-13, 114 minutes - I wasn't really sure what to expect going into The Eagle. On one hand, it is a Roman epic, which is generally the type of film I jump all over. On the other hand, The Eagle's star is Channing Tatum. And in the past, the only movie that he starred in that I enjoyed was Stop-Loss. He tends to headline 'chick flicks' (not that that's a bad thing, they just don't interest me at all) but definitely has the potential to be a leading action man. So, walking out of the theater with a couple friends after watching The Eagle, I was pleasantly surprised with what I had just seen.

Tatum plays Marcus Aquila a young Roman Centurian who strives to find out what happened to Rome's storied Ninth Legion, and as a result, what happened to his father (the commander of the Ninth) so that he can clear the family's name. He is joined in his quest by his British slave Esca (Jamie Bell). The relationship between Marcus and Esca is not what one would expect from a master/slave relationship, especially considering the time frame in which the film takes place (140 AD). It also takes a couple twists that make for interesting sequences throughout the movie.

Donald Sutherland and Mark Strong lend a veteran hand to the cast as Marcus' uncle and Guern (one of Marcus' father's fellow Ninth Legionnaires) respectively. Jamie Bell may look familiar as well. He was the youngest Bielski brother in Defiance (a very good movie, if you haven't seen it).

While it can be a little slow paced here and there, The Eagle is a pretty decent Roman epic. The action sequences are tightly shot and chaotic. Almost a little too much so, but they lend themselves well to the feel of the film. The portrayal of the Marcus/Esca relationship and it's twists and turns by Tatum and Bell really drives The Eagle. Going forward, I won't be quite so leery of checking out a Tatum-lead film...as long as it's not a chick flick!

*****SPOILERS*****
I really enjoyed the twist of Esca presenting himself as the master and Marcus as the slave when they encounter the Seal people of the north. It introduced a very interesting dynamic, as at that point, there really wasn't anything that Marcus could do about it. What I liked even more was when Esca proved to have been helping Marcus's search after all, continuing to repay Marcus for turning the crowd and saving him from the arena.

Review - Rabbit Hole

2011-02-05T09:27:00.003-05:00

Rabbit Hole (2010), PG-13, 91 minutes - I have already seen all ten of this year's Oscar nominees for Best Picture, so I have also seen most of the Best Actor/Actress nominees. One nominee that I had not yet seen was Nicole Kidman's performance in Rabbit Hole. It came to the Grandin a week or so ago so I jumped on the chance to knock another nominee off of the 'need to see before the Oscars' list.

Rabbit Hole shows us the story of a couple (Becca and Howie, played by Kidman and Aaron Eckhart) just eight months removed from the tragic death of their young son (he chased the family dog into the street and was hit by a car), and how they are - or more importantly in Becca's case, how she isn't - coping with their loss. You also see how this effects those around them - the neighbors who invite them to a neighborhood cookout, the younger sister who just found out that she's pregnant, the mother who has also experienced the loss of a son (albeit an older, not so innocent one), the friend's with kids who no longer know how to interact with Becca and Howie because of their loss, and other members of the support group.

Rabbit Hole is just a really good look at people and their varying stages of grief and how everyone's time line is different. For the most part, it's a straight forward drama, but there is one little twist that I found very interesting about mid-way through. Nicole Kidman's performance is definitely deserving of her Oscar nomination, and Aaron Eckhart's is pretty good in his own right. This is by no means a happy film, but it is definitely worth a look, it's just an interesting movie.

*****SPOILERS*****
For anyone interested, the twist mentioned above? The kid that Kidman was stalking turns out to be the driver of the car that killed her son. It's not just this revelation that's interesting, it's how her getting to know the kid really helped her come to terms with what happened.

Not so spoiler-ish: seeing Rabbit Hole whittled my 'need to see before the Oscars' list down to Biutiful and Blue Valentine.

Review - The Mechanic

2011-02-05T08:24:00.004-05:00

The Mechanic (2011), R, 93 minutes - The Mechanic is the latest entry into the Jason Statham library of action flicks as well as being a remake of the 1972 Charles Bronson film of the same name. I haven't seen Bronson's original so I won't be able to compare and contrast (although I am curious to see it now).

Statham plays Arthur Bishop, a hitman, an assassin, but prefers to be called a 'mechanic' because he 'fixes problems'. He works for an organization that employs many mechanics that carry out assignments that range anywhere from personal grudges to political gain.

After one job, Arthur takes his mentor's (Harry McKenna played by Donald Sutherland) lost and underachieving son Steve (Ben Foster) under his wing. He teaches Steve what it takes to be a mechanic and even let's Arthur carry out one of his assignments. Steve develops a taste for a mechanic's work and begins helping Arthur with jobs, which the organization that Arthur works for frowns upon. They then set their sights on Arthur and Steve and begin to find out just how good they are at what they do.

The Mechanic pulls you in pretty quickly, with a unique hit man sequence. Statham and Foster both turn in what could be chalked up as their 'usual' performances. Statham the bad-ass, action hero and Foster as an unhinged, wandering soul of a tough guy. When it's all said and done, The Mechanic is a pretty entertaining action flick. In my opinion it's Statham's best flick since 2008's The Bank Job (yes, The Expendables was great fun, but we all know that was Stallone's movie no matter who else helped out).

If you like Statham, Foster, or just a well done actioner, The Mechanic is worth checking out.

*****SPOILERS*****
Just a couple quick thoughts. I really enjoyed the scene where Arthur talks his mentor through his 'escape'. Even though it was pretty predictable in how it would end, it was believable that Arthur might try and tip Harry off.

What I enjoyed even more than that was the delay in the car bomb that Arthur set for Steve back at the house. While watching, as soon as the car sputtered when Steve tried to start it, I immediately thought 'car bomb!'. Nothing happened and just as I started thinking 'interesting, they're going to let him get away with it' - KABOOM!

There wasn't much doubt in my mind that Arthur didn't meet his demise in the gas station explosion. You don't tell a story showing how bad-ass and prepared for contingencies he is to have him fell prey to something like that.

I did have one problem with the movie, and I guess I can overlook it considering I really enjoyed the rest of it, but I have never seen so much assassin work in a film where the hitman/hitmen wear no gloves and leave fingerprints everywhere. There's really no way any of the crime scenes could have been left as anonymous as the story would make us believe.

Review - 127 Hours

2011-01-30T17:10:00.005-05:00

127 Hours (2010), R, 94 minutes - I'm going to get this out of the way right up front. Despite my recent attempts to format my reviews in a spoiler friendly way, there really isn't any way to do that with 127 Hours so if you're worried about that sort of thing just stop reading now.

Over the last few months, I have heard and read how great a performance James Franco turned in as canyoneer Aron Ralston in this film based on Ralston's experienced being trapped by a boulder in a Utah canyon. As a result, 127 Hours has been on my list of films to check out for quite a while.

I had also heard that the scene in which Ralston finally frees himself from the boulder that trapped him was vary graphic. Now I'm not going to talk big or anything, I don't do well with such material. I can watch war/battle scenes all day long, but as soon as a scene turns even remotely like a surgery (no matter how crude), my stomach turns. Knowing this, I convinced myself I could make it through the scene in question for two reasons: I had been looking forward to seeing this highly talked about performance for a while and it was the final film I needed to watch to have seen all ten 2011 Oscar nominations for Picture of the Year.

So, quick plot line overview: dude goes off canyoneering by himself without telling anyone where it was he was going. He comes across two girls who have managed to get lost on their hike. He delays his plans and plays tour guide for them, still not telling anyone where he was going himself. He parts ways with the ladies and begins his own trek again (descending Blue John Canyon). A boulder gives way beneath him and traps him by pinning his right arm to the canyon wall. After days of being trapped and running out of water, he severs his own arm in order to free himself.

Time for a little 'good news/bad news'. Good news: James Franco does in fact turn in an excellent performance. His transformation from light-hearted canyoneer who didn't panic when trapped and who was pretty damn organized and collected considering the situation to a desperate unhinged man is incredible to watch. 95% of the movie is excellent. Bad news: the 5% that isn't? The few minutes in which Ralston saws off his own arm in order to free himself. I have never felt so sick to my stomach watching a movie in my life. I first tried to just avert my eyes and look at the side of the screen. Then I tried looking at the floor. Finally I had to close my eyes completely. I'm writing this about an hour and fifteen minutes after the movie ended and just thinking about it is making me a bit sick.

Aron Rolstan's story is nothing short of amazing, and Franco's performance is more than worthy of the Best Actor Oscar nomination he received. If you have any interest in a film about the triumph of the human spirit, I recommend checking out 127 Hours. However, if you're even remotely squeamish (like me), do yourself a favor and rent it once it comes out on dvd/blu-ray. At least that way you can fast forward or skip self mutilation scene.

Now with a little luck, having gotten this review out of my system, maybe I'll be able to settle my stomach down enough to eat dinner.

Timmmaaaaay's Top 10 of 2010

2011-01-02T11:51:00.007-05:00

We're into the beginning of the New Year and there is a bit of a lull until the next wave of movies that I'm looking forward to seeing in theaters hit so there's not a much better time to drop my Top 10 list for the past year on you. Just a couple things to keep in mind as you take a look at the countdown:
1) As always, the list is an opinion and includes movies that I actually saw in the theater upon their release. There's a good chance you won't agree with some of the films, or their placement, but with a little luck, there may be something on here that sparks your interest.
2) These are the films that I enjoyed the most when I saw them in the theater not necessarily the best from an award winning potential standpoint.
3) Most of these films I had reviewed earlier in the year. If you have more interest than the bullet point I've listed here, click the movie title and follow the link to my previously posted review.

Movies from 2010 that I wanted to see, but didn't get to in the theater (I either did not have the chance, or they were not released locally): Monsters, 127 Hours, The King's Speech, Secretariat. From what I hear, these may have made the list in some capacity had I gotten them in.

Honorable Mention (in no particular order):
Shutter Island, The Book of Eli, The Expendables, Harry Brown, How to Train Your Dragon, Let Me In, Predators, Kick-Ass, Despicable Me.

10) Black Swan - A Darren Aronofsky directed psycho-drama, a great role from Natalie Portman, awards worthy, and taken in via The Grandin experience (the local artsy theatre), this film about a ballerina surprised me despite all of the hype it had received.

9) The Fighter - The best sports film of 2010 (that I saw), it's a real life Rocky-like story with very good to down right excellent performances by Mark Wahlberg, Christian Bale, Amy Adams, and Melissa Leo.

8) Toy Story 3 - This beats out How to Train Your Dragon as the best animated film of the year. It may even be my favorite of the trilogy. The 'moving off to college and leaving things behind' plot was one that I could relate to and hit close to home.

7) Winter's Bone - I had only heard of Winter's Bone because a friend was talking about trying to see it while he was in town (good looking out Wieder). Who would have thought that a movie built around Meth-lords in the Ozarks would be so captivating. Jennifer Lawrence should grab an Oscar nomination for her performance.

6) The Social Network - Probably an awards season front runner, The Social Network was the vehicle used by Jesse Eisenberg to break out of his typecasting funk of always playing the socially challenged nerd by portraying...wait for it...a socially challenged computer nerd who gave the world facebook.

5) The Town - Ben Affleck proved that his turn behind the camera with Gone Baby Gone wasn't a fluke. He also jumped back in front of the camera in this Boston (Charlestown) based heist flick in which he and Jeremy Renner knock off Fenway Park. Yeah, there was pretty much no way I wasn't going to enjoy this one.

4) Scott Pilgrim vs. The World - This definitely isn't a film for everyone, but if you have even the slightest bit of comic book/video game nerd in you and/or you grew up in the 8 bit game generation you will quickly realize why this is so high on my list.

3) The Millennium Trilogy (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, The Girl Who Played With Fire, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest) - You've heard of the books by the late Swedish author Stieg Larsson. These are the Swedish film adaptations from 2009 that were released here stateside in 2010. All 3 are quite good. I'm cheating and rolling them into one spot here on my list. Dragon Tattoo had the greatest impact and staying power in my mind, although that was the one film that I saw before reading the book (I finished reading the trilogy before the other two films were released so I already had an idea about was was coming). Noomi Rapace was unbelievable as the story's heroine Lisbeth Salander. Due to the timing of the releases (earilier in the year than most awards contenders), she may not snag an Oscar nomination, but she definitely deserves one. Be sure to check these out before the American adaptations coming from David Fincher in the not too distant future.

2) True Grit - Let's see...it's a western, by the Coen Brothers, starring Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon getting bossed around by a newcomer (Hailee Steinfeld), and is often times quite humorous. What's not to like?

1) Inception - Each year, there are usually a couple movies that I go out of my way to tell just about anyone who will listen that they need to go see. Usually they are smaller films or foreign films that are quite good and just deserve to be seen (this year those were the Millennium films and Winter's Bone). But this year the film that I found myself telling people to see over and over again was Inception. It didn't matter that it was a big budget film and everyone had at least heard of it. It's absolutely just worth a watch (or two). The story, the actors/actresses, the way it was shot, Christopher Nolan's dream scape film is a masterpiece. And a pretty good debate starter thanks to that top.

So there it is. Which films did you most enjoy this past year?

Review - True Grit

2010-12-31T14:27:00.005-05:00

True Grit (2010), PG-13, 110 minutes - It took a week longer than I had originally planned, but today I was finally able to see one of the movies I had been looking forward to the most this year. And it didn't disappoint.

The Coen Brothers add another excellent entry to their growing catalog of films with True Grit. The do so this time around by taking a classic western, and staying pretty true to form. There are only a couple relatively small differences between their new take and the John Wayne driven original. Having said that, this newer version stands on it's own. When watching, it doesn't play out like a complete re-hash. Credit the Coens for knowing better than to mess with the content and tone of a quality story, as well as for employing the proper cast to bring that story to life.

Excellent performances are prevalent throughout True Grit, with newcomer Hailee Steinfeld leading the way. She more than stands her ground and takes charge in many scenes. Something you wouldn't think would be very easy to do when working with the likes of Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon. Bridges is successful in bringing a Rooster Cogburn to the screen that breaks away from the tremendous shadow cast by John Wayne. I recently re-watched the original True Grit - or maybe I actually saw it for the first time? I had no recollection of seeing it previously, but I have a hard time believing I hadn't come across it at some point during of my youth knowing our house and westerns - and my first thought was how amazingly well the roles of Mattie Ross (Kim Darby) and Rooster Cogburn (Wayne) were (Wayne did win the Best Actor Oscar for the role after all) and how could Steinfeld and Bridges possibly live up to all of the hype they had been receiving? Luckily for us, they do. Not only that, but Matt Damon throws in as Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (pronounced LaBeef), and Josh Brolin (Tom Chaney) and Barry Pepper (Lucky Ned Pepper) join the fun with strong but short appearances.

If you're into westerns, or Coen Brothers films, or Jeff Bridges, or Matt Damon, or just appreciate an entertaining two hours of film, you owe it to yourself to take in True Grit. If you don't, then you probably wouldn't be reading this blog anyway.

*****SPOILERS*****
- Bridges' Cogburn wears his eye patch over his right eye instead of his left as Wayne's Cogburn did.

- I have not read the book that both films are based upon, so I do not know how the story originally ended. I do know that I felt the ending was a bit cheesy in the original from 1969. This version differs from the original film, and I think I prefer it.

- I think Bridges really sold the drunkard aspect of Cogburn. It may have been a little over the top, but I don't remember (even having seen it recently) Wayne's Cogburn really being impaired much besides a bit of a slur.

- Generally I find myself in the group of people that feels there really isn't a need to remake a film. Although, I must admit, it usually only bothers me when the film being remade is less than 20-25 years old. The Coen brothers did an excellent job of bringing True Grit to the screen for another generation of movie goers. I may even prefer their version if only because it is a different time and movies these days have a different tone than they did forty one years ago.

Review - The Fighter

2010-12-28T15:53:00.004-05:00

The Fighter (2010), R, 115 minutes - Another 'based on a true story' movie, The Fighter, while chronicling the trials and tribulations and the rise of Mickey Ward to the world light welterweight championship, is really more about one's family and the drama they can create.

Mickey Ward (Mark Wahlberg) is the younger half brother of Dickey Eklund (Christian Bale), who's 15 minutes of fame came when he knocked Sugar Ray Leonard down in a match. In the time since, Dickey has let fame go to his head and has become a washed up, strung out shell of his old self. He acts as Mickey's trainer and their mother Alice (played by Melissa Leo), Mickey's manager.

While claiming to help Mickey rise through the boxing ranks, the family is really still hung up on Dickey's previous exploits and his supposed come back. The entire family is even being followed around by HBO for a story about Dickey's come back (or so they think). After Dickey ends up in jail due to some shenanigans, and the HBO special airs Mickey decides to make another run while he still has the chance. He agrees to be managed and trained by others (not family) leading to quite a bit of infighting amongst family members who feel he is being taken advantage of. After going on a run of winning matches, he earns a chance to fight for the world light welterweight championship. It is about this time that Dickey is released from prison and wants to go back to training Mickey, causing even more familial strife when Mickey tells them he promised his new management that he wouldn't work with Dickey.

This is a Hollywood portrayal of a true story, so you can probably guess what happens from here. It is a bit predictable, but hey, that's how it happened right? The Fighter is easily the best sports related movie of 2010 (although it didn't have much competition in a slow year for sports flicks). It is also as close as one could get to a real life Rocky story, but with strong turns by Wahlberg, Bale, Leo, and Amy Adams (Charlene Fleming - Mickey's love interest), it is definitely worth taking a look at. Bale shouldn't have any trouble snagging a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Dickey. He eerily shed weight (a la The Machinist and Rescue Dawn) for the role, this time to bring a crackhead to life.

Review - Black Swan

2010-12-28T14:40:00.005-05:00

Black Swan (2010), R, 108 minutes - The latest film from Darren Aronofsky, Black Swan is driven by Natalie Portman's performance as a newly promoted ballerina and her relationship with her theater manager (Vincent Cassel) and a rival dancer (Mila Kunis).

Nina Sayers (Portman) is one of the ballerina's being considered for the lead role in a new staging of Swan Lake (taking over for Beth Macintyre, the long running lead played by Winona Ryder). The theater manager, Thomas Leroy, doesn't believe that Nina has it in her to portray both parts that he requires for this re-invisioning of Swan Lake. She confronts him about it and, after biting him when he makes a pass at her, lands the role as he sees the 'imperfection' in her that he was looking for for the part. Black Swan proceeds from there, exploring Nina's psychological transformation into the ballerina that she needs to become the lead.

Black Swan is full of strong performances. Not only out of Portman, but from Cassel, Kunis, and Ryder in her limited screen time as well. I had heard and read about how good Natalie Portman's role was online (and it is that good), but what really surprised me was Mila Kunis' part. Between The Book of Eli and Black Swan this year, she's come a long way from That 70's Show.

Much like he did with The Wrestler, Darren Aronofsky really opens a window into what it is like to be in his character's world. It is a strength his that really gives his films a distinct feel.

If you're into Aronofsky directed films, or like trippy, psycho-thrillers, be sure to check out Black Swan.

*****SPOILERS*****
There were two parallels that I really enjoyed throughout Black Swan:
1) Nina's transformation into the paranoid lead, the paranoid lead that she felt sorry for when it was Beth (Winona Ryder).
2) The final scene where Nina leaps to her death (both figuratively and literally), ending the same way that The Wrestler did. This is fitting as Aronofsky has gone on record as saying that at one point he wanted to make both films as one, exploring the relationship between a wrestler and a ballerina.

Review - The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest

2010-12-28T13:32:00.006-05:00

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest (2009), R, 147 minutes - The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest is the third and final installment in the Millennium trilogy based on the novels of the late Stieg Larsson. If you have not read the books or seen the previous two movies (my reviews can be found here and here), you'll definitely want to before jumping into this one. There are a handful of flashback sequences that touch on major plot points, but they really don't cover all that you need to know to fully understand what is going on this far into the story.

Hornet's Nest picks up immediately where The Girl Who Played With Fire ends - with Lisbeth being airlifted to the hospital after her confrontation with Zalachenko and Niedermann - and advances through Lisbeth's trial while Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) and the staff at Millennium magazine try to expose the government conspiracy against her.

Noomi Rapace continues her amazing portrayal of computer hacker and social misfit Lisbeth Salander over this series of films. Due to timing of the US releases and nominations, Rapace may not snag an Oscar nod but she is definitely deserving. Her portrayal of Lisbeth (especially in Dragon Tattoo) is one of the strongest in recent memory.

Like its literary counterpart, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest does an excellent job of tying up the loose ends left behind by the first two installments. If you've read the books or seen the previous movies, you owe it to yourself to check this out.

*****SPOILERS*****
Having read the novels, it has been quite interesting seeing what makes the cut in the movies and what doesn't, especially in this third installment. The threats made to Erica Berger are used in the movie, but not her going to work for the newspaper. They also don't even get into the relationship between Nyqvist and Figuerola, the special agent. The changes work out pretty well though, they actually help the pacing of the movie quite a bit.

I was a little worried about how the ending was going to be portrayed on film. I really enjoyed how Larsson ended the book, but I really wasn't sure how that could translate. I turned out to be relatively pleased though. The final scene didn't quite pull off the same feel as it did in written form, but they didn't decide to completely change it either, so that was nice.

Review - Tron: Legacy

2010-12-28T12:06:00.007-05:00

Tron: Legacy (2010), PG, 127 minutes - For the few people who don't know, Tron: Legacy is the sequel to Disney's cult classic about a programmer who gets stuck inside the computer system he is working on. I say 'cult classic' and not 'classic' because I re-watched the original Tron a couple months back and it doesn't really hold up at all. It looks cool considering the time at which it was made (1982), but that's about it. Anyway, this isn't about the original, it's about the sequel, which I feel is a better overall movie. It takes Tron's basic concept and builds upon it, taking place 20 years after the original.

Garrett Hedlund plays Sam Flynn, the son of Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges, retaining his role from Tron). After investigating a page that came from his father's old office, he is transported into The Grid, the same computer program world that his father has been trapped in for 20 years. He learns that his father not only discovered a way for the living to be digitized and part of the computer world, but also a way for a digital program to be translated into an entity in the real world. Because of this, he has been in hiding trying to keep this knowledge out of the hands of Clu (also played by Bridges, but digitally altered to look younger). Clu was the control program that Flynn created to police The Grid. He was also tasked with making The Grid 'perfect'. As a result, he has become a tyrannical leader, eliminating any program from The Grid that does not comply. With the help from a program named Quorra (Olivia Wilde), Sam finds his father and from that point on, Tron: Legacy follows your basic sci-fi/fantasy flick archetypes - young hero, with the help of a small group finds a way to save the world.

Tron: Legacy, like it's predecessor, looks amazing. I saw it in 3D, although, looking back, I'm not sure that it really jumped out at me. Although I am the first to admit that Avatar may have ruined 3D for me so I may not be the best judge. Not only does Tron: Legacy look amazing, but it also sounds great as well. Daft Punk supplied the soundtrack and it really helps establish the feel of the computer world that is The Grid.

If you liked the original Tron on any level, Tron: Legacy is definitely worth checking out. If not, or if you don't remember the original, Legacy does a pretty good job of filling in the back story so you won't be lost. The story is fairly basic, but it is helped by what might be the best eye candy of the year at the movies.

*****SPOILERS*****
I almost forgot to mention that one of my favorite actors, Michael Sheen, has a small but fun part as Zuse, the good old 'supposedly trustworthy ally who turns out to really be working for the bad guy only to get double crossed by the bad guy' role.

On a spoilery side note, I always thought that it was kind of odd that the original movie was named after a secondary character (Tron, the security program on The Grid). His inclusion in the sequel seemed to fit into the storyline fine (as he was the security program working for Clu), but I did feel that his flip flop from bad to good towards the end happened a little too quickly and easily.

It's Been A While...

2010-12-20T19:29:00.002-05:00

...and I'm not referring to one of Staind's more popular songs. I have somehow managed to not update my blog here in a hair under two months. I'd love to claim that I've been wicked busy and/or just hadn't seen any movies to review. The truth is more along the lines of pure laziness and just not getting excited enough about a movie to sit down and type up a review that same day.

So, since I have no real excuse(s), and I really have no idea who (if anyone) checks in to this blog on an even somewhat regular basis, let me mention the couple of upcoming updates that I do have planned in an effort to get back in the habit of regular review posting:

1) This past weekend was a pretty successful new movie viewing weekend, so reviews of Tron: Legacy, The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest, and Black Swan will be forthcoming. I had originally planned on banging those out this evening, but work was work and it sucked all of the motivation out of me.

2) As the end of the year quickly approaches, I have begun tossing around possibilities for my Top 10 Movies of 2010 list. There are still a handful of flicks being released over these last two weeks that I'd like to try and check out so this update will probably be closer to New Year's. I'm also still considering what criteria I will use for said list.

3) With the help of some feedback from a couple of friends and co-workers, I have decided to tweak the format of my reviews. They will continue to begin with basic film info (including a link to their page on www.imdb.com), and will then begin with an as spoiler free review as I can muster. This will be followed in some order by the embedded trailer and a new spoilerific section. This spoiler section will be well labeled and will go into more detail on certain things that I may have liked or disliked about the film. I decided to add this section to provide more info for those people that are looking for such a thing as well as to hopefully help encourage discussion on the blog.

As always, any feedback is more than welcome. Keep a look out this week for the new updates (notifications will be posted on facebook as well)!

Review - Hereafter

2010-10-23T08:48:00.008-04:00

Hereafter (PG-13), 2010, 129 minutes - Anyone who has followed any of my reviews in the various locations they have been posted on the web over the last couple of years knows by now that I'm a big Clint Eastwood fan. I was raised that way, blame the parents! So it should come as no surprise that I would be making a point to see his latest film on opening night.

Hereafter follows three diverging story lines while asking the question of what happens to us when we die? The film gets off to a quick start as Marie LeLay (a reporter/journalist played by Cecile De France) gets swept away in a tsunami. She becomes pinned on a fallen tree and a car smashes into her from behind as it is washed away. Two local men pull her from the water and try to resuscitate her with no luck. As they are distracted by a fire breaking out nearby, she comes to, not really sure of what she has just experienced.

The two other story lines follow Marcus and his twin brother Jason (played by Frankie and George McLaren) and George Lonegan (Matt Damon) respectively. Marcus and Jason live with their junkie mother and are constantly trying to deceive social services so that they are not taken away from her. Jason (the older brother by twelve minutes) is hit by a car as he trying to escape some neighborhood bullies while running an errand for their mom and dies. Marcus is lost without his older brother and ends up being put into foster care by social services.

George Lonegan is a psychic. Not a television or gimmicky psychic like Madame Cleo, but the real thing. He had a condition as a child and was lost and brought back a handful of times during the eight hour surgery he underwent. Since that time, he has had the ability to communicate with the dead. His brother (Jay Mohr) thinks that it is a gift and that George has an obligation to help people. What he doesn't see, is the dark, painful side of George's ability. Which is illustrated when he performs a reading for Melanie (Bryce Dallas Howard), whom he met through the cooking class he is taking.

The plot device that pulls these three main characters (Mary, Marcus, George) together is a little convenient, but not too far fetched. Despite the focus on death and what may happen after we die, the real theme of the film is finding and doing what we need in order to be happy in life.

After the quick start, there are a couple pretty slow scenes, but they are included primarily in the name of character building and are worth it in the end. If you are like me and like just about anything that Clint Eastwood has his hands in, then definitely check this out. On the surface it appears quite a bit different from you typical Eastwood-directed fair, but at its core Hereafter is an excellently made, well acted film that makes you think.

Review - Red

2010-10-23T08:02:00.003-04:00

Red (PG-13), 2010, 111 minutes - What do you get when a handful of older highly respected actors and actresses get together to make an action flick? Well, if it's done well, you get Red - an action/espionage flick based on the graphic novel by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner.

Red (Retired, extremely dangerous) is about Frank Moses (Bruce Willis), a retired black ops agent who is having a bit of a tough time adjusting to the retired life. Frank may be retired, but someone wants him dead. The attempt to take him out fails and he goes about trying to figure out who is behind the hit. No, this isn't the most original plot line in the world, but it works quite well with the characters, and more importantly, who plays them. While conducting his search, Frank brings together a group of also retired former associates (played by Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, and Helen Mirren) and a bank representative (Mary-Louise Parker). Richard Dreyfuss and Karl Urban provide some star power to the group hunting Moses down.

Red really had the potential to be a dud - hugely recognizable cast, fairly unoriginal plot - but it is well made and quite entertaining. Malkovich's neurotic character is just what the world has come to expect from him, and honestly, how is Helen Mirren running around shooting the hell out of things not a great idea? I haven't read the graphic novel, but I can only hope that the film is fairly faithful. If you're looking for a fun movie that doesn't take anything too seriously, Red is worth checking out.

Review - The Social Network

2010-10-06T17:19:00.005-04:00

The Social Network (2010), PG-13, 120 minutes – In The Social Network (the story of how facebook came to be) Jesse Eisenberg takes on yet another geek role. Only this time around he isn’t the quiet pushover, but instead a quick talking, driven, ‘I’m smarter than you and not afraid to show it’, Harvard student (facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. Just as I was afraid that the likeable Eisenberg was going to be stuck in a typecast rut, he shows us the other side of the coin. A geek who is typically socially challenged, but is highly confident in his knowledge and abilities and enjoys showing them off when he can. Eisenberg is easily the star of the film and not just because he’s the main character but because his portrayal commands attention.

The film kicks off with Zuckerberg conversing with his girlfriend Erica Albright (Rooney Mara) over a couple of beers. What should be a casual conversation about his attempts to join one of Harvard’s social clubs turns into an argument that leads to Erica dumping him. He doesn’t just go home, he runs, cracks open another beer and starts blogging. Not only does he degrade Erica, he starts hacking into school networks and programming a website he calls facesmash.com where people are shown two pictures of female students and can then pick which one they think is hotter. The site then randomly generates another pair of pictures. He does this with the help of one of his friends Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), whose algorithm he uses for part of the site. The site pulls an insane number of hits and crashing the Harvard servers. This gets the attention of the administration as well as a set of twins, the Winklevosses) who are in one of the social clubs the previous night’s argument started over. The Winklevosses try to recruit Zuckerberg to help them program/launch their idea for a social networking website that would be exclusive to Harvard students. Zuckerberg agrees and over the next couple of weeks he works night and day on the idea while ignoring and avoiding the Winklevosses whenever possible. With some financial backing from Saverin the site launches and begins its viral expansion across campus. That’s pretty much the basis for the film of this real life story – the Winklevosses sue Zuckerberg with stealing their idea, then later Saverin also sues as his ownership is diluted to virtually nothing. Thrown in for good measure is the advice and social influence of Napster creator Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake).

It’s really amazing that when the film is over, you find yourself feeling bad for Zuckerberg even after the things he has done (both justified and not) while becoming the world’s youngest billionaire. This is because of Eisenberg’s portrayal – insanely driven, not waiting for anyone, making his own way. It may have been another ‘nerdy’ role, but here’s hoping The Social Network opens up other challenging roles for Jesse Eisenberg in the future. The latest effort from David Fincher is definitely worth a watch.

Review - Let Me In

2010-10-02T07:52:00.005-04:00

Let Me In (2010), R, 115 minutes - Let Me In is the first in what seems to be a wave of American versions (remakes, adaptations, take your pick) of recently made excellent Swedish films (see the upcoming David Fincher versions of The Millennium Trilogy). Whether or not these American versions are necessary is an entirely different discussion/debate that I won't get into here. Having seen the original (highly acclaimed) Swedish version - Let The Right One In - I thought that Let Me In was quite good in its own right.

Set in the early 1980's, Let Me In is about the relationship between Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee), a twelve year old boy, and Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz) a seemingly twelve year old girl who moves in next door with who we believe to be her father (Richard Jenkins). After proclaiming 'I can't be your friend' when they first meet, she warms up to Owen, eventually encouraging him to fight back against the school yard bullies. After a few awkward conversations Owen puts two and two together and realizes that Abby isn't your typical twelve year old girl, but a vampire, and that her father isn't really her father. Despite this realization he continues associating with Abby. They have a lot more in common than other kids his age, which is odd since she has 'been twelve for quite a while'.

Let Me In is quite faithful to Let The Right One In. It is still dark and drab, despite having a bit of a Hollywood sheen to it compared to its Swedish counterpart. It also takes a deeper look at the relationship between Abby and her 'father', helping to illustrate a couple themes from the original that were left more to interpretation. There are a couple other fairly minor differences in how the directors of these films decided to bring the story to life, but both films work well. I'm still not sure that an American version was really necessary at this time, but Let Me In is a well done adaptation, that, worst case scenario, exposes a larger portion of the population to an excellent story.

If you're a fan of the vampire sub-genre of horror (I mean real vampire movies, not Twilight), this is definitely a must see. And if you have the time, I highly recommend taking in Let The Right One In as well (now available as a 'watch it now' on NetFlix). They are both based on the same source material - the book written by John Ajvide Lindqvist (who also wrote the Swedish screenplay) - and between the two add more depth to the story being shown on the screen. I have not read the novel, so I can't speak as to how faithful either film is in regard to it, but I'd like to think that if the author also wrote the screenplay that it's pretty close.

Bonus Trailer - Let The Right One In:

Review - Winter's Bone

2010-09-30T18:09:00.003-04:00

Winter’s Bone (2010), R, 100 minutes – Winter’s Bone is a dank and cold drama/thriller that I never would have checked out had my friend Chris not mentioned it one conversation over beers. So when he was back in town almost a month later we decided to give it a look down at the local art house theater, the one place in town that consistently screens such films. And I’m glad we did.

Winter’s Bone is based in the Ozark Mountain region and revolves around Ree (Jennifer Lawrence), a 17 year old girl who gets by day by day supporting her family (mother, two younger siblings) in the absence of her drug peddling father who has recently been arrested. Things get more complex when the local Sherriff (Garret Dillahunt) stops by to inform Ree that her father put up the family house and land in order to post bail. If he doesn’t show up at his hearing, they lose it all. Ree vows to make sure that her father shows up and begins hunting him down by contacting some not so nice family members and ‘business associates’ of her father’s. She meets resistance at every step, especially from her uncle, Teardrop (John Hawkes). As she continues her search, she learns that something more sinister is going on than a bunch of cons protecting their own by not talking.

Jennifer Lawrence turns in an excellent performance as Ree. I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if she gets strong consideration in the best actress categories come award season. John Hawkes is almost as good and is a large reason why the tension level in the film is so high throughout. There’s a lot more love in him for his brother’s family than we are led to believe after his first meeting with Ree.

There are two scene’s that really stand out in showing just how determined Ree is in her search so that her family does not get their house and land taken away. These scenes, as well as the change in her relationship with Teardrop are the strongest aspects of Winter’s Bone. The way the film is shot really conveys the feeling of a cold winter in a remote area as well as the ongoing high tension. After the sheriff’s initial visit, you really don’t feel a sense of safety for the rest of the film. It is a bit of a slow burn, Winter’s Bone makes up for that with Ree’s determination and story of corruption in the remote region of the Ozarks.

Review - The Town

2010-09-19T18:32:00.004-04:00

The Town (2010), R, 120 minutes - The Town is Ben Affleck's sophomore outing as a director and with it he proves that the ability he showed behind the camera on Gone Baby Gone was not a fluke.

Like Gone Baby Gone, The Town is a crime drama/thriller based in Affleck's hometown of Boston. This time around, Affleck focuses primarily on the criminals, their lives and their motives. Affleck joins Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker) as one of two primary characters who are both best friends and partners in crime.

Doug MacRay (Affleck) and James Coughlin (Renner) are residents of Charlestown, MA, which the opening of the film claims has the highest bank/armored car high jacking rate in the country. After one job, James takes a hostage (the bank's assistant manager - Claire Kessey, played by Rebecca Hall). He let's her go unhurt, but decides after wards that she may need to be 'taken care of' as it turns out she is a local resident. He's afraid that she may be able to recognize the crew around town and turn them in. The last thing that Doug wants is an innocent person being knocked off, especially because James has already done nine years in prison for a previous manslaughter conviction. He decides to look into it himself and ends up falling for Claire.

From there, The Town has a couple stereotypical plot points but it culminates in a very cool heist sequence involving Fenway Park which more than makes up for them. Jon Hamm and Chris Cooper add solid performances to the strong showings of Affleck, Renner and Hall.

The Town is easily the best heist flick in quite a while. Maybe the best since Heat (the only other one that comes to mind is 2006's Inside Man). With his second solid directorial effort, Ben Affleck is quickly making a name for himself behind the camera. He has taken an area he knows (Boston) and brought an great deal of authenticity to the stories involved.

If you like crime thrillers/heist flicks, you really shouldn't miss this one. Even if you don't, I'd say it is worth checking out. Yes, it's a heist flick, but the characters, their situations and emotions really carry the film.

Review - Machete

2010-09-15T23:17:00.005-04:00

Machete (2010), R, 105 minutes –

Remember that big B rate flick Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez dropped on us a couple of years ago called Grindhouse? Do you also remember how the best part of Grindhouse was the fake trailers? Well 3 years later, Rodriguez brings his fake trailer to life with a full length feature.

Danny Trejo retains the role of Machete, a former federale and overall badass Mexican who was left for dead by a drug lord named Torrez (Steven Seagal) after interfering in his affairs. After the film opens with that bit of back story, we find Machete in a small Texas town trying to get by as a day worker. He’s hired by Michael Benz (LOST’s Jeff Fahey), but not for the job he thinks. Benz offers him $150,000 to assassinate the corrupt local Senator McLaughlin (Robert DeNiro) who is running for re-election with an extremely tough immigration platform. The Senator also goes out on late night immigration hunts with an equally corrupt police squad led by Lt. Stillman (Don Johnson).

To move things along without being too spoilerific, the entire thing is a set up. Machete takes the job but doesn’t shoot the Senator. Now on the wrong end of a man hunt, he enlists the help of his brother – a local priest (Cheech Marin), an immigration officer (Jessica Alba), and the local underground leader (Michelle Rodriguez) to clear his name and exact revenge on those that set him up.

Machete almost gets too political for its own good but manages to be over the top enough with its characters to not be taken too seriously. It’s definitely your standard Robert Rodriguez fare. Well, at least as far as his adult targeted films go. It still kills me that the same guy that brought us From Dusk Till Dawn, Desperado, and Sin City also gave the world the Spy Kids films. It’s fun seeing Danny Trejo in a starring role, even if it is ridiculously stereotypical. But then again, Machete makes no qualms about being the type of film that it is – a fun, B rate, exploitation flick.

Review - The Girl Who Played With Fire

2010-09-05T20:03:00.005-04:00

The Girl Who Played With Fire (2009), R, 129 minutes - It's been a while since my last post due to the chaos of trying to get moved into the house. It has been a slow process, but I'm making headway. So after too much of a delay, here's my latest review:

I had been patiently waiting for The Girl Who Played With Fire to come to the Grandin Theatre back in Roanoke, but was pleasantly surprised this weekend in SC at my parent's house when I learned that it was playing at a theater about 30 minutes down the road. Not knowing when it will show up back home, I was able to sneak away this afternoon to check it out!

The Girl Who Played With Fire is the second installment in the Swedish film trilogy based on the Millennium trilogy of books (the first of which was The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo). If you have not either seen the first film or read the books then don't bother taking two hours out of your day checking this out because you will be completely lost.

If you have however, it continues the Millennium story on the big screen relatively well. The first half hour or so of The Girl Who Played With Fire deviates quite a bit from the beginning of the book. Mainly it skips some details that are much more easily read via the written word in favor of advancing to the meat of the plot.

Noomi Rapace, who does an amazing job once again bringing the character of Lisbeth Salander to life. Lisbeth speaks more in the first half hour than she did in the entire first film I think. More of her dark history is explored in this installment and sets up the upcoming third film (The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest - due out in the US later this fall). Michael Nyqvist is also strong again as the co-lead Mikael Blomkvist. If you thought it took quite a while for the two main characters to meet up in the first film, just wait until you see how long it takes this time around. I have been thoroughly amazed by both the books and the films in their ability to advance the story while having the two main characters no where near each other.

The Girl Who Played With Fire isn't quite as well edited as The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo which causes the film to seem a bit jumpy in some places. This isn't much of a problem if you have read the books (by Stieg Larsson) as you can fill in the gaps yourself. I think this can mostly be attributed to the change in directors between this and the first film.

Just as with Dragon Tattoo there are a couple of disturbing scenes as well as references to the previous film's graphic scenes. None of this should be a shock to those who have read the novels or seen the first film. This flick really is more of the same. I personally highly recommend both the films and the books (disclaimer - I still have about 200 pages left to read of The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest). The story is excellent and Noomi Rapace is amazing as the lead actress. For those interested, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is now available on blu-ray and DVD as well as a 'watch it now' on NetFlix.

Review: Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

2010-08-13T22:12:00.007-04:00

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010), PG-13, 112 minutes - Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is Edgar Wright's (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) film adaptation of Bryan Lee O'Malley's series of manga sized graphic novels (Oni Press). A couple of friends have been ranting and raving about the Scott Pilgrim books for a couple years but I had never read them myself until about two weeks ago. I highly recommend them (buy them here). Should you be any interested, I strongly encourage you to read them all (6 total) before seeing the movie as it covers the entire story. I know, I know, it sounds like a lot, but trust me - these bad boys read very quickly. I was able to knock each one out in about an hour and I'm not a very speedy reader.

Now that I've gotten that out of the way - Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is an absolutely fantastic adaptation of the source material. The film clocks in at just under two hours and covers all of the key points throughout the graphic novels. The trailer below does an excellent job of giving you the basic plot line so I won't waste time babbling about it here. The movie portrays Scott Pilgrim's life as though it were a video game/comic book just as it was in the graphic novels. And it wastes no time doing so as the Universal logo pops up all pixelated with classic 8-bit music right from the get-go (taking anyone my age back to the days when we'd waste all day playing Super Mario Bros. or Tecmo Super Bowl).

Michael Cera leads a fairly large cast as the titular character and Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Ramona, the source of all of Scott's boss battle problems. There are great cameo appearances by Anna Kendrick (Scott's sister Stacey), Chris Evans and Brandon Routh (Evil Exes), and even Thomas Jane and Clifton Collins, Jr. (the Vegan Police). Jason Schwartzman brings Gideon Gordon Graves to life (Scott's personal King Koopa) and Kieran Culkin really fits the part of Scott's gay roommate Wallace Wells.

I have just one minor complaint, and that is of the diminished role of Kim Pine (Alison Pill) in the movie as opposed to the graphic novels. I honestly have a hard time even mentioning that because the rest of the movie is so well done. Anyone who has read Bryan Lee O'Malley's works will love what Edgar Wright put together for the big screen. The story is fun, something that many people can relate to on some level, and visually entertaining so I'd say it's definitely worth a look-see for those of you who aren't video game/comic nerds. If you grew up in the days of 8-bit Nintendo or reading comics you'll definitely come across something that you appreciate while watching the 'epic of epic epicness' that is Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

And so it begins...

2010-08-13T21:33:00.007-04:00

As most of you already know, I joined the ranks of home owner yesterday. Southwest Virginia has been home since my freshman year at Virginia Tech (with the exception of about 6 months after graduation) and now it's quite a bit more permanent. I've wanted to make the jump from renting to owning for a while now but it just wasn't feasible. Getting student loans paid off in January helped some, but I never could have taken this step without a great deal of help from my Aunt Carol and Uncle Bob. A measly blog post can't even begin to express my gratitude so I will simply say 'thanks' and 'I miss you'.

It's been a hectic past 36 hours, but many of you have already been clamoring for pictures. Here are a handful to get the gist. It's located in the Raleigh Court region of the 'noke and was built in the 1950's. 2 real bedrooms, 1 bath, a den/study, full basement (1/2 finished, 1/2 garage). The finished half of the basement has another room that will most likely be another guest room. The plan is to paint a couple of the rooms upstairs (ground floor) so all of these pictures are 'before' shots.

I'll post 'in progress' pics and 'after' shots as things progress. The house warming shindig is beginning to be discussed, date TBA!

Enjoy!

Review - Inception

2010-07-16T15:16:00.009-04:00

Inception (2010), PG-13, 148 minutes - Inception is the latest drama/mystery/thriller from the mind of Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, The Prestige, Memento) and deals primarily with security and the dream state of the human mind.

The basis for Inception is that our subconscious is more susceptible in a dream state than if we are awake. The idea being that if someone could enter your dreams that they could extract information from you that you wouldn't normally give up willingly. This is where Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his team (Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Dileep Rao) come in. Cobb, according to himself, is the best there is at extraction (entering the minds of others and stealing thoughts and ideas). He is hired by Saito (Ken Watanabe) to plant an idea into Robert Fischer, Jr's (Cillian Murphy) head. This is known as inception. Cobb's associate Arthur (Gordon-Levitt) says that it's impossible but Cobb claims to have done it before and accepts the job after hearing what Saito offers as payment. Saito claims that he can clear Cobb's criminal record in the US so that he can return home and be with his children again (Cobb is a fugitive for a crime we learn about later in the film).

There are varying levels of complexity in dreams in the world of Inception. And that is where the art and skill of extraction/inception lies. Not only are Cobb and his team entering someone else's dream, they are creating the landscape of the dream for the dreamer. It is explained as creating a maze that the dreamer's subconscious fills with 'constructs', otherwise known as how the dreamer sees themselves or others that they know interacting within that maze. For more complex jobs Cobb relies on layering dreams within dreams. As more layers are added to a dream, the rate at which time passes slows down. 5 minutes in the real world may be an hour in the first level of a dream state, and so on.

The amazing thing about Inception is how Christopher Nolan structures the film so that you can follow what is happening without being completely lost. This is quite a feat considering the layering of dreams that is required for Cobb and his team to carry out their job. As they do, we learn more about Cobb's history and family - Mal (Marion Cotillard), his wife and Miles (Michael Caine), who taught Cobb how to navigate the human mind.

I've tried to explain the basics behind Inception without getting into too many specifics about the plot in an attempt to stay relatively spoiler-free. I can say this: Inception will leave you thinking quite a bit about what you just saw. It will also most likely leave you with the feeling that you need to watch it again. I know that's how I felt when I walked out of the theater. The ideas behind it are intriguing and the visuals are excellent. It is, in my opinion, the best movie of the summer thus far. It is definitely a must see.

Review - Predators

2010-07-11T19:16:00.004-04:00

Predators (2010), R, 106 minutes - I've been a little torn over the past couple of months leading up to this week's release of Predators. When I had first heard that another installment in franchise was going to be made (and produced by Robert Rodriguez) I was pretty excited. Then I saw the first teaser trailer and my hopes dropped as it was obvious that Adrien Brody was going to be the primary character. It wasn't that I don't like Brody as an actor, I just don't think 'alpha dog, ex-military badass' when I hear his name. That feeling sort of wore off as I began to get excited about the fact that Predators was getting back to the basics of the original classic: following a group of elite killers through the jungle as they faced off with this alien race of superior hunters.

Predators opens with Adrien Brody and a handful of other extremely dangerous individuals being air dropped into a jungle in an undisclosed location. There's an initial 'getting to know you phase' amongst this group that is relatively entertaining. It is during this exchange when my worries about Brody's character disappeared. He stepped up right away and took charge, wanting to 'find out who threw me out of a fucking plane'. Alice Braga (I Am Legend) becomes the default 2nd in command and the rest of the group is comprised of Walter Goggins, Topher Grace, Oleg Taktarov, Danny Trejo, Louis Ozawa Changchien, and Mahershalalhashbaz Ali. They eventually meet up with a survivor from a previous drop who has gone crazy as he has survived on his own for quite some time (Laurence Fishburne).

The plot is pretty basic - the Predators have collected some of Earth's deadliest humans and dropped them on another planet that they use as a game preserve for hunting. They hunt/kill and learn and adapt from their experiences. As always, the human story becomes survival of the fittest. There are a couple story point references to the original Predator that help connect this installment to the existing franchise continuity that I enjoyed.

Predators is, in my opinion, the best installment to either of the Predator or Alien franchises in quite some time. The Alien vs Predator films were a complete letdown so it was nice to see Predator get a decent treatment.

Review - Despicable Me

2010-07-09T16:19:00.003-04:00

Despicable Me (2010), PG, 95 minutes - I was a little worried when 15 minutes into the movie I had already seen about 3/4 of the footage from the trailers that had been released for Despicable Me (including the teaser that first hit theaters last summer). Luckily though, it manages to be pretty entertaining.

Despicable Me tells the story of Gru (Steve Carell), a 'super' villain who has stolen many 'famous' landmarks in his career. He is outdone by a young up and coming villain named Vector (Jason Segal) who managed to steal one of the great pyramids, leaving in it's place an inflatable replica. Vector interferes with one of Gru's plots by stealing the shrink ray that he is after. Gru quickly realizes that he will not be able to infiltrate Vector's hideout without help. He enlists the help of 3 girls by way of adoption after he sees them gain entrance to Vector's lair by selling cookies.

From there the Despicable Me shows us Gru's attempts at regaining the shrink ray and carrying out the greatest heist ever (stealing the moon) while the adopted girls wear the cranky loner out of him. It's sort of The Grinch meets early Bond.

Steve Carell and Jason Segal are joined by a long list of recognizable actors/actresses, most notably Julie Andrews, Will Arnett, Kristen Wiig, and Russell Brand.

The funniest parts we've already seen in the various trailers for the movie, but there is enough emotion and shenanigans in between to make it a worthwhile watch. I did see Despicable Me in 3D - I've found that the animated titles generally seem to make better use of the technology in general. I was a little disappointed in that regard. There were really only 2 scenes that really did a good job with the 3D. If you have the option, it probably wouldn't hurt to go for the cheaper 2D version.

Double Shot Reivew - The Last Airbender and Toy Story 3

2010-07-03T07:57:00.008-04:00

It's been a few weeks since I last posted. As some followers of this blog may know, I'm buying a house and have been wicked busy going through that whole process. As a result, I haven't had much free time for movies until the last few days. So anyway, the reviews return today with a double shot:

The Last Airbender (2010), PG, 103 minutes - I've been looking forward to this pretty much since it was first announced. Even more so when the teasers and trailers started to be released. So I was worried at the beginning of the week when every advance review I saw or heard about absolutely thrashed this movie. One of the largest complaints was that inexplicably, a large portion of the cast was Caucasian, which was odd because they were all playing Inuit characters in the Nickelodeon cartoon (Avatar: The Last Airbender) that this movie is based upon.

I decided to just accept this oddity going into the movie. It happened, nothing could be done about it, I was going to try to appreciate the story, effects, etc. Despite trying to ignore the casting snafu, and having my expectations lowered by the sheer number of negative reviews, I wasn't able to walk away with much of anything positive to say about The Last Airbender.
The script is bad, the acting is even worse. There were only two performances that didn't come across as terribly forced or that successfully conveyed the least bit of emotion (Dev Patel as Prince Zuko, and Shaun Toub as Uncle Iroh).

While the acting was pretty poor throughout the film, the script was sub par as well. I know the movie is based on a children's cartoon, but I've seen some of that series and it's not written for two year olds. I became even more disappointed when I found out that director M Night Shyamalan was also the writer. I've always been an M Night fan, even when some of his other films didn't live up to the insanely high expectations that have followed his films since he burst onto the scene with The Sixth Sense. He hasn't ever been known for great dialogue in his scripts, but he has made entertaining films.

If you have a youngster that has been looking forward to this, that might not be so bad. The movie's shortcomings probably wouldn't bee so blatantly obvious to a younger crowd. If you're like me, and thought it could be an (at least) somewhat epic tale, don't bother. The tale (like the animated series) is epic. What made it to the big screen however, is not. Whatever you do, absolutely, positively DO NOT see this movie in 3D. I had to because it was the only format that it was showing in at the theater I went to. You can't even tell it's in 3D. This knocks off Clash of the Titans for the worst use of 3D technology.

After such a long delay, I can't leave everyone with such a dud! That brings me to:

Toy Story 3 (2010), G, 103 minutes - Speaking of expectations, how much higher could they possibly get for Disney/Pixar? Every time out, they deliver an absolutely amazing film that strikes a chord with children and adults alike. The stories cover a just about every emotion imaginable and are tales that most anyone can relate to, even on the smallest level.

With Toy Story 3 being the third installment in the franchise, one could think that maybe Disney/Pixar were dipping into the well too many times (no other Disney/Pixar film has even spawned a sequel...yet). This is not the case. The same cast that you've come to know and love from the Toy Story universe return, this time having to deal with the fact that young Andy has grown up and is about to move away to college.

As always the animation is amazing. The voice acting is top notch as we've come to expect. The heroic Tom Hanks (Woody) and Tim Allen (Buzz) are joined by the villainous Ned Beatty (Lotso) and Micheal Keaton (Ken). There's a secondary group of good toys in Toy Story 3 that have some familiar voices as well (Kristen Schaal from Flight of the Conchords, Jeff Garlin from Daddy Day Care). I'm leaving out a ton of names. They are all excellent in their roles, but there are really too many to list (the casting list can be seen at the imdb.com link above) and these were the ones that stood out as I was watching.

It doesn't matter how young or old you are, Toy Story 3 is a must see film for everyone this summer.

Side Note: I didn't see Toy Story 3 in 3D, but from what I hear from friends, it doesn't matter. Those that have seen it in 3D said it looked good but wasn't anything amazing in that regard. I enjoyed the heck out of it in 'boring old 2D'.

Review - The A-Team

2010-06-12T13:05:00.006-04:00

The A-Team (2010), PG-13 - Like many people my age, I grew up watching The A-Team on tv. It started in 1983 and ran for 5 seasons. Outside of a few random re-runs seen during my college years, I'm pretty sure I haven't re-watched any of those old episodes. Having said that, I was still fairly leery of this big screen adaptation going into it. Could a movie made almost 30 years later possibly hit on the same things that made the tv show so popular without destroying the fond memories of the show from my childhood? Quite surprisingly, the answer is yes.

The plot isn't anything ground breaking, but it does the job. The A-Team is comprised of 4 Rangers who complete special missions (quite often of the black-ops variety) for the Army. After an operation goes bad, they are wrongly accused, striped of their ranks and imprisoned. The movie then follows their shenanigans as they break out and proceed to attempt to clear their names by proving their innocence.

The casting turned out to be excellent. Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Sharlto Copley, and Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson all fill the roles of Hannibal, Faceman, Murdock, and BA to a tee. Copley's Murdock actually steals the show in my opinion, consistently reaching another level of insanity and resourcefulness to the mission at hand. Patrick Wilson's CIA Agent Lynch adds some additional humor, and Jessica Biel throws in some sex appeal as well.

There are completely over the top action sequences that defy reality on all levels (trying to fly a tank anyone?), but they fit the tone of the film and really don't seem all that out of place in a movie that succeeds primarily because of one thing: it's just a fun summer action flick. It helps that the original source material was never the most serious thing on television.

I seem to be having a bit of a hard time deciding just how much I actually liked the movie. My expectations were so low going in, I'm not sure if it was really that fun or if it was just so much better than I had anticipated that it seems that way. I can say this with certainty: everyone else that I know who has seen it also thinks that it was a fun and entertaining summer time movie.

If you do make your way to the theater to check out The A-Team, be sure to stay until the end of the credits. There's a nice little cameo from some of the original tv cast afterward.

Review - Splice

2010-06-06T17:15:00.005-04:00

Splice (2009), R, 104 minutes - Splice is the story of a pair of scientists, Clive and Elsa (Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley respectively) push the edge of accepted legal and ethical practices when they splice human DNA into their latest experiment.

They had previously made a scientific breakthrough when they spliced together DNA strands from a handful of species to create an entirely new species. The goal that they hoped to reach with the new species was to be able to synthesize it's genes to create vaccines for livestock. Clive and Elsa believe that with the inclusion of human DNA, they would be able to instead synthesize genes that could lead to cures for many human diseases. When their financial backers want to focus on the development of the genes for livestock vaccines as opposed to pushing ahead with the ethical question mark that would be working with human DNA, the pair decide to conduct an experiment including human DNA off the books. The result is a creature they come to call Dren.

Despite conflicting opinions on how far to proceed with the experiment (Clive wants to end it, Elsa wants to continue), the pair smuggle Dren out of their research facility so that no one discovers her. They set up shop on Elsa's old family farm, allowing Dren to live in the barn. Clive and Elsa then try to juggle keeping the experiment with Dren under wraps and continuing their gene research in order to keep their financiers happy.

Splice not only touches on some ethical questions, but it also gets into some dysfunctional family issues. These lead to a couple of scenes that are pretty out there even for a sci-fi/horror/thriller, and I'm still not sure how I feel about them. The second of which really sets up the end of the film.

Splice starts strong, then seems to loose it's direction a bit. Both Clive and Elsa flip flop a couple of times in their views of how to move forward with Dren - either as a continued experiment or to treat her more like a daughter. All in all it's pretty entertaining, it just makes a couple turns that I'm not sure it needed to.

Review - Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

2010-06-06T07:01:00.005-04:00

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010), PG-13, 106 minutes - Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time was the post HeroesCon movie this year joining the ranks of such classically mediocre films as Superman Returns, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Hulk (Edward Norton), and Terminator: Salvation. It also happens to be the latest video game property to be adapted to the big screen.

Jake Gyllenhaal plays the lead character Dastan, an orphan of the streets of Persia who became the adopted son of the King after the King witnessed Dastan stand up for a fellow orphan when the King's guard's caught him stealing. Dastan grows up to lead what is basically a special forces unit in the Persian Army. Dastan's unit is the group actually breaches the defenses of the holy city of Alamut when Dastan's brother Prince Tus decides to invade because he was told that Alamut had been supplying Persia's opposition with weapons. It is during this invasion that Dastan comes across a mystical dagger that allows it's user to release small amounts of the sands of time to turn back time. In the celebration of Persia's triumph over Alamut, the King is assassinated when he is burned to death by a poison laced prayer robe given to him as a gift by Dastan (which was supplied to him by his brother Tus). Dastan is instantly regarded as an enemy of the state and goes on the run in an attempt to clear his name.

Gemma Arterton plays Tamina, the princess of Alamut and current guardian of the dagger. She escapes Alamut along with Dastan in her attempt to reclaim the dagger from him. Tamina is at first a thorn in Dastan's side (why would she want to help someone that led the invasion of her city?), but as one would imagine, becomes a love interest as the film goes on.

Ben Kingsley pops up in a very Kingsley-ish role as Nizam, Dastan's uncle. The most entertaining character just may be Alfred Molina's Sheik Amar, a man of the desert who has his hands in many things not quite legal, including gambling on ostrich races.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time falls into the 'fun summer movie' category for me. It's an action flick with a bit of comedy. There are some nice action/fight sequences, and the dagger effect is well done. As video game movie adaptations go, it's pretty good, but that's not really saying much.

Bad News for The Hobbit Adaptation...

2010-05-31T06:09:00.003-04:00

This is some of the worst movie related news I've heard in quite a while. Due to continuing delays in the production, Guillermo del Toro has withdrawn from directing The Hobbit.

When it was officially announced that Peter Jackson would not be filming the LOTR prequel (or in the film version's case prequels) I was disappointed but not surprised considering all of the financial issues that arose post LOTR. Then I was excited when they announced that Guillermo del Toro would take Jackson's place at the helm of The Hobbit. His work on films such as Pan's Labyrith, the Hellboy films, and to a lesser extent Blade II really showed off his amazing imagination, style and design creation that made him a perfect fit to adapt further stories from J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle Earth.

The only good news that comes from this announcement is that del Toro will remain a co-writer of The Hobbit screenplays (along with Jackson, Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens). Here's hoping that The Hobbit doesn't fall into pre-production oblivion and that some semblance of del Toro's contribution makes it to the big screen.

Review - Shrek Forever After (3D)

2010-05-30T17:03:00.004-04:00

Shrek Forever After (2010), PG, 93 minutes - The fourth and supposedly final installment in the Shrek franchise focuses on Shrek's life after the events of Shrek the Third. On the day of his children's first birthday we find Shrek having a bit of a mid-life crisis. He loves his family but misses the days when he could do what he wanted, when he wanted, and not be interrupted or distracted. Enter Rumpelstiltskin. He offers to trade Shrek one day like the day he craves so much in exchange for one day from Shrek's childhood that he can't even remember. Shrek thinks this is a good deal and signs Rumpelstiltskin's contract. He then falls into an alternate universe where he never married Fiona, doesn't know Donkey, and can go about his life as a scary old ogre.

As one can imagine, Rumpelstiltskin's deal wasn't on the up and up. Shrek quickly learns that he's been duped and has until the end of the day to trigger the contract's exit clause or else the reality he finds himself in will become permanent and he will vanish.

I liked the idea of Shrek's mid-life crisis and Rumpelstiltskin being the villain this time around, but Shrek Forever After just doesn't hold up compared to the previous three installments. The animation and voice acting are great as always (it was OK in 3D but nothing amazing), but the script doesn't live up to expectations (which are admittedly high after the success of the first three films).

All of the main characters/voice actors return (Mike Myers, Cameron Diaz, Eddie Murphy, Antonio Banderas) and Shrek Forever After provides a nice end to the Shrek storyline, I just think that it could have been executed a bit better.

Review - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

2010-05-22T15:50:00.006-04:00

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009), NR, 152 minutes - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is based on Swedish author Stieg Larsson's first novel in his Millenium Trilogy titled 'Men Who Hate Women' (we silly Americans found it necessary to change the title). Many good things have been said about this trilogy, but I have yet to read it myself. I found myself having to decide whether to watch the movie then go back and read the book(s), or add the book(s) to my growing list of things to read and then watch the film at a later date. Two things helped me make my decision:

1) an old college friend Kerri (check out her book blog here) both highly recommended the book and thought I should go ahead and see the movie first (this was a good call, as I'm not the world's fastest reader).

2) the Grandin Theatre, which is about a mile down the road (and the only theater around that ever screens such foreign films) began showing it this weekend.

Suffice to say, everything I had heard and read about the film version was true. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is excellent. It focuses on an unlikely pair trying to solve a 40 year old missing persons/murder mystery. One being a nationally renowned journalist (Mikael Blomkvist played by Michael Nyqvist) who was recently given a prison sentence for libel (it is revealed later that he was set up), and and the other being a 24 year old computer hacker (Lisbeth Salander played by Noomi Rapace) with a tortured history and a sexually abusive legal guardian.

Nyqvist is hired to find out as much as he can about the disappearance from a family gathering of Harriet Vanger 40 years earlier. Her uncle (Henrik Vanger) suspects that she was murdered by someone within the family. The gathering took place on the family property (an island) with only one way on or off - a bridge - that was blocked that day by an accident between a car and a gas tanker. Nyqvist makes some progress on his own, then receives an e-mail providing him with the best clue to the case yet, an e-mail sent to him by Salander. Oddly enough, she had been previously hired (through her employer) to track Blomkvist for Henrik Vanger in order to gather background information on Blomkvist before deciding to hire him to look into Harriet's disappearance. Salander had continued hacking into Blomkvist's computer and discovered biblical references that really pointed him in the right direction.

Both Michael Nyqvist and Noomi Rapace are quite good in the film, but Rapace's portrayal of Lisbeth Salander is what really gives The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo it's emotional impact. There are two scenes in particular that are quite disturbing, but really drive home the emotional and physical traumas that she has been through and give the viewer insight into why she is the was she is.

I am now even more interested in reading the novel (and its sequels) as I am curious as to how similarly the stories play out. If you're a fan of mysteries/thrillers I highly recommend The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Just keep in mind that because this is a Swedish film, it did not go through the standard American rating process. The two scenes previously mentioned would most likely be shot or edited differently in an American version of the film and may be a bit more graphic than one would expect.

Side note: An American version is already in development with a tentative release date of sometime during 2012. It is set to be directed by David Fincher (Zodiac, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and has been rumored to have such names as Brad Pitt, Carey Mulligan, Johnny Depp, and George Clooney attached to it.

Rental Review - The Slammin' Salmon

2010-05-19T20:22:00.003-04:00

The Slammin' Salmon (2009), R, 90 minutes - The Slammin' Salmon is brought to us by Broken Lizard - the same group that provided us with Super Troopers and Beerfest. While not being as movie quote friendly as either of those two, it is a pretty entertaining restaurant based comedy.

The Slammin' Salmon an upscale seafood restaurant owned by Cleon 'Slammin' Salmon (Michael Clarke Duncan) the heavyweight champion boxer. He ran up a $20,000 gambling debt to the leader of the Yakuza on a recent trip to Japan and has to come up with the money by the next morning. He instructs his restaurant manager that the waitstaff must have a record night so that he can come up with the cash to pay off the Yakuza (the restaurant record is in the neighborhood of $15,000). After the waitstaff gets off to a slow start, he sweetens the deal by offering a $10,000 bonus to the waiter/waitress who brings in the most money. 'Isn't that counterproductive?' you ask? Well, yeah, it is. But this is a Broken Lizard comedy so that just compounds the shenanigans that ensue.

What we get is a comedy that's a combination of Super Troopers and Waiting with a little bit of Brick Tamland from Anchorman thrown in (thanks to Nuts played by Jay Chandrasekhar). There's even a pretty good (as in both disgusting and funny) gross out scene worthy of any restaurant based comedy.

If you have enjoyed, on any level, any previous Broken Lizard productions then you'll probably get a few laughs out of The Slammin' Salmon. Otherwise you'll probably want to steer clear.

Review - Robin Hood

2010-05-14T16:19:00.008-04:00

Robin Hood (2010), PG-13, 140 minutes - The latest Ridley Scott/Russell Crowe collaboration is not the Robin Hood story we've all grown up with. Instead it's an alt continuity story of how Robin Hood became the outlaw that robs from the rich and steals from the poor that we are all familiar with. When you get right down to it, Ridley Scott's version is a prequel that mixes up character's histories while they still filling the same roles within the story.

Russell Crowe stars as Robin Longstride. That's right, Longstride. Not Loxley as in previous incarnations. Longstride actually poses as Robert Loxley at Sir Walter Loxley's (Robert's father) request after Robert and his fellow knights were killed in an ambush as they attempted to return the recently deceased King Richard's crown back to the palace (he was killed in battle). It seems like an odd request, butSir Walter (Max von Sydow) knows that if news of his son's death reaches the public, there will be nothing to keep his land and wealth in his daughter in law's (Lady Marion played by Cate Blanchett) possession when he passes away. Longstride agrees to this as Sir Walter claims that he can hep Robin learn about his past (he lost his father at a young age and was an orphan).

At first Marion - who has the most drastic overhaul compared to the classic tale - is not happy with the situation, but realizes that Sir Walter law is right and that it is the best for the family estate. As Robin becomes part of Nottingham's community - he and his 'merry' men even hijack the church's shipment of seed to London so that the town can plant crops - she realizes that he is a good man in his own right and is posing as her dead husband for everyone's good, as opposed to his own personal gain. He and his men began as archers in King Richard's army and broke laws by posing as the knights that returned the crown to it's rightful home.

Robin's heritage, as relayed to him by Sir Walter, leads him to uniting the English under (the now) King John against the invading French. The French had been mounting a campaign to split England apart by ransacking villages in the name of King John. These French units are led by the duplicitous Sir Godfrey (King John's right hand man) who is played by jack of all villains Mark Strong.

The battle scenes, which aren't as frequent as I might have guessed, are very Gladiator-esque. Of course, this should come as no surprise given that Ridley Scott directs the film. Does anyone else do epic time pieces as well as he does?

Many of the reviews for Robin Hood that I have read over the past couple of days have complained about how this isn't the light hearted, 'merry' Robin Hood we all grew up with. Well, that's the point. Why tell the same story over and over again? Is it the best story ever? Probably not. Is it as campy and fun as some previous versions? No. But what this Robin Hood is, is an entertaining alternate take on the tale that leads it's characters in the direction of the forest dwelling, robbing from the rich, giving to the poor, merry men confounding a corrupted, tax hoarding King and Sheriff story that we all know and love.

Great Marvel Omnibus Link

2010-05-11T19:10:00.003-04:00

MarvelMasterworks.com - I came across this link today while I was trying to look up the actual release date for the Brubaker/Lark Daredevil Vol. 2 Omnibus (was 5/5/10, is now 6/3/10) and figured I'd share it with those of you who also have an inner comic book nerd.

It's not just a list of all of the Omnibus releases from Marvel, it's also a list of all of the printings and variants that have been available. It also provides links to various retail locations (i.e. Tales of Wonder and Amazon) from which these great collections can still be purchased.

Review - Iron Man 2

2010-05-06T22:06:00.009-04:00

Iron Man 2 (2010), PG-13, 124 minutes - Iron Man 2 kicks off the 2010 summer movie schedule with a bang. It's bigger, louder, wittier, and more action filled than the original. Version 1.0 however, is still the superior story.

Robert Downey Jr retains his role as Tony Stark/Iron Man in a film that sees the character struggle with even greater levels of fame (after his admission of being Iron Man at the end of the first film) and deteriorating health (his body has an adverse effect to the element powering the arc reactor in his chest), while trying to stave off a new threat to his 'privatized world peace'. Downey Jr continues to be the perfect embodiment of Tony Stark.

Mickey Rourke (Ivan Vanko) and Sam Rockwell (Justin Hammer) provide the villainous combo hellbent on tearing down Tony Stark and his legacy from the ground up by using variations on his own technology against him. If it sounds familiar, it's because it is. The decision to go with virtually the same type of threat for the second consecutive film is interesting, but it works out fairly well. In this version 2.0, Vanko is the son of one of Howard Stark's (Tony's father) earliest collaborators. When their visions for the use of the arc reactor technology differed, the elder Stark had his co-worker deported. Years later, Ivan uses his father's old blue-prints to create his own miniature arc reactor to attack Tony Stark with. Justin Hammer, a weapons manufacturer and competitor to Stark Industries (who has failed in the political arena to bring Iron Man down), is impressed by this show of power and enlists Vanko to build a mech army. Needless to say, things do not go as planned.

Gweneth Paltrow, Jon Favreau (also the film's director), Samuel L Jackson, Clark Gregg, and Paul Bettany also return to their respective roles. Scarlett Johansson and Don Cheadle join the cast as the Black Widow and Stark's best friend James Rhodes. Cheadle actually takes over for Terrence Howard as Rhodes, and in my opinion brings a stronger bond between Stark and Rhodes to the table. I was a little worried about Scarlett Johansson's casting as the Black Widow. I really thought that she was picked more for her name and her looks (I mean, she is smokin') than for how well she would fit as a Russian double agent. But I was pleasantly surprised. She's not only a dead ringer for the character as portrayed in the comics (especially as drawn by Joe Quesada in the second volume of Daredevil), but she has one of the coolest scenes in the movie as she infiltrates a Hammer compound. Gary Shandling also has a run appearance as Senator Stern who tries to get the Iron Man armor/technology handed over to the U.S. Military.

Being the comic book fan that I am, I really enjoyed the parallels that this story had to the current run on Invincible Iron Man written by Matt Fraction (such as the son of one of Howard Stark's collaborators trying to impose familial revenge on Tony Stark by using a variation of his own tech against him and Pepper Potts becoming CEO of Stark Industries). There are also a few 'easter eggs' that may not be obvious to those not familiar with Marvel's comic universe including the now standard Stan Lee cameo, a certain red, white and blue Avenger's shield, and of course, the always fun Iron Man suit in a suitcase! While I'm on the topic of 'easter eggs', be sure to stick around for the Marvel regular post credits teaser scene.

All in all, Iron Man 2 is a very fun and enjoyable movie. It does what the best written comics do - it stands on it's own (for those that had not seen the previous installment of the franchise), it continues the story (for those who have followed the franchise), and leaves a couple of different directions for the story to go down for future installments. I think that the first Iron Man is a stronger story from start to finish, but this is a very good follow up. My only real hope for future Iron Man flicks is that they get away from mechs/Stark tech being the primary threat. Getting back to the potential link to the Mandarin (classic Iron Man villain) from the first film would be awesome.

A few movie related tidbits...

2010-05-05T18:24:00.005-04:00

Just a few quick thoughts before I camp out in front of Bruins/Flyers game 3 tonight:

Hugo Weaving is confirmed as the Red Skull in the upcoming Captain America movie - This has been rumored for a while now but is finally official. Honestly, I can't think of a better fit for Captain America's arch-nemesis. While I am a Chris Evans fan, I have my doubts about whether or not he's the right guy to play Steve Rogers, but there is no doubt that Hugo Weaving will be a great Red Skull. Looking forward to this!

Ron Howard set to direct big screen adaptation of Stephen King's Dark Tower series - This is also wicked sweet news. I have yet to get around to reading King's fantasy/western series, but I have read Marvel's graphic novel adaptations which have been quite good thus far. I can't think of a Ron Howard film that I didn't like, so this has me excited too.

Matthew Vaughn to direct X-Men: First Class - First let me say that I like have really enjoyed the films that Matthew Vaughn has been a part of whether he was directing or producing. This covers films such as Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Layer Cake, Snatch, Mean Machine, Stardust, Harry Brown, and Kick-Ass. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut I'm not sure that he's the man for X-Men: First Class and here's why: Fox LOVED Bryan Singer's proposed script for this movie. They wanted him to return to the X-Men universe (remember he directed X-Men and X2: X-Men United) and direct the film as well. When a scheduling conflict arose, Fox became impatient and decided to move on with production of the film with another directer. As much as I like Matthew Vaughn, I'm not sure it's a great idea to make him try and bring Singer's vision to life in his place. We'll see...

Thanks to my friend Brian, I'll be checking out an early (7pm) screening of Iron Man 2 tomorrow night. Keep an eye here for my review!

Review - Deftones - Diamond Eyes

2010-05-03T20:37:00.006-04:00

So I've never really been one to review music (and I don't really plan on making a habit out of it). Partially because my tastes tend to run a little harder than most people I have regular contact with, and partially because I've never been one to get too hung up on lyrics. If I like the tune or the beat, I'm a happy camper. Having said that, I'm really digging the new Deftones album 'Diamond Eyes'. It actually releases tomorrow (May 4), but my pre-ordered copy came in today's mail (although I must admit, I've been enjoying a downloaded copy for almost two months now).

In my opinion, it's their strongest album since 'White Pony' ten years ago. 'Diamond Eyes' actually represents the second album that Deftones has worked on since 2006's 'Saturday Night Wrist'. They were well into recording Saturday's follow up in 2008 when bassist Chi Cheng was in an auto accident that left him in a coma (he remains in a minimally conscious state). The band decided to put those recording's on hold and begin a new project that would become Diamond Eyes.

The majority of the first half of the album is filled with the classic hard driving Deftones sound, while the second half lightens up just a bit. The first two singles Rocket Skates and Diamond Eyes play to the heavy end of the Deftones spectrum, but I think my favorite song on the album is Beauty School. It's the exception to the weight the first few songs carry.

The Deftones definitely fall in the realm of 'not for everyone', heck, I didn't develope an appreciation for them until after seeing them live as part of Korn's Family Values Tour just before 'Saturday Night Wrist' was released in 2006. If you enjoy heavier tunes, definitely check out 'Diamond Eyes'. If not, the songs Beauty School and Sextape are still worth giving a listen.

I'm still not a big fan of purchasing music just digitally (call me crazy, but I prefer having a hard copy), but if you purchase the album through iTunes, there are 3 bonus songs. They are covers, but Deftones has done a wide variety of covers both live and as bonuses in the past and they have all been quite good.

Pick up the album here.

Rental Review - Fantastic Mr. Fox

2010-05-02T06:14:00.003-04:00

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009), PG, 87 minutes - The past couple of months my NetFlix queue has bogged down. Seemingly everything that I want to see has been a new release to the home video market and as a result has popped up on my queue as 'a long wait'. Well, I've finally waited out the 'long wait' and the majority of my queue is available again so it's time to get back to burning through a couple NetFlix movies a week.

One of these movies was Fantastic Mr. Fox - a stop motion animated, Wes Anderson directed movie based on Roald Dahl's book of the same name. I remember a time in my youth when reading through any and all Roald Dahl books you could was the cool thing at school. Fantastic Mr. Fox is one that I never got too. I have no idea how the film compares to the movie, but there is little doubt that the on screen version is a Wes Anderson film. The tone and humor falls right in with other Anderson flicks such as Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums, or The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou.

George Clooney voices the main character Mr. Fox - a fox who gave up his thieving ways to become a reporter at his wife's request after she becomes pregnant. He grows sick of pinching pennies and eeking by in life and in an effort to change their status, he moves them to a new 'house' in a tree that overlooks the properties of three farms with ruthless owners. The urge to go relive the excitement of a heist gets the better of him and he starts regularly sneaking out to steal from the three farmers. This is all well and good (aside from his wife wondering why their pantry is chalk full of poultry all of the time) until the hunters decide to fight back.

Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Owen Wilson (Wes Anderson staples), Meryl Streep, Michael Gambon, and Willem Dafoe lend their voices to the other characters of Fantastic Mr. Fox, which is an entertaining and different animated comedy.

Review - The Losers

2010-04-25T08:28:00.003-04:00

The Losers (2010), PG-13, 98 minutes - I've been looking forward to this movie for months and it didn't disappoint. It's based upon a comic book series that was published by DC's Vertigo written by Andy Diggle and penciled primarily by Jock.

The Losers is the story about a special forces unit that witnesses something that they weren't supposed to. Their superior, an evil ghost of a man known only as Max, orders their elimination. One problem: they survive and go about making Max's life difficult in their efforts to clear their names and records.

As with most comic book based movies, the cast is integral to the story's transition to the big screen, and the cast of The Losers is as close to a perfect fit as you can get. Jeffery Dean Morgan (Clay), Zoe Saldana (Aisha), Chris Evans (Jensen), Idris Elba (Roque), Columbus Short (Pooch), and Oscar Jaenada (Cougar) are all living, breathing versions of the characters created on the page by Diggle/Jock. Ok, so Roque wasn't a black guy in the comics, but the personification is right on. The Max character (played by Jason Patric) is a little more over the top than he was portrayed in the comics, but it works with the tone of the film.

Chris Evans really steals the show as Jensen though. He's a light hearted, wise cracking tech/communications guy that injects humor into the story with just about every word he speaks. Example: the thought to be dead team is meeting a contact in a cemetery, trying to be inconspicuous and he rolls in wearing a bright pink t-shirt that says 'Go Petunias'. 'What? It's my niece's soccer team!' he says.

In this day and age of epic 2+ hour running movies, The Losers comes in at just over an hour and a half. It's a highly entertaining, humorous, action packed romp that is extremely faithful to the source material. It also does an excellent job of leaving the possibility for a sequel or sequels (the movie only covers the first arc of the comic series plus the couple later issues that fleshed out The Losers origin) while telling a fulfilling self contained story.

Check out the comic here.

Alice in Chains - NC Music Factory, Charlotte, NC 4/20/10

2010-04-25T07:32:00.003-04:00

Many of you who will read this have probably heard at least a part of the trials and tribulations I've had in my efforts to see Alice in Chains live. For those who haven't, it's really too long to bother going into but I will say this: after two trips to Charlotte, a snow storm, a sick (with the flu) band, an 8 week postponement, a change in venue, and a combined two days of vacation time used, all it took to see Alice in Chains live was sitting through some rain.

The show was originally going to be held at The Fillmore in Charlotte. It's a great venue that I saw the Dropkick Murphy's at back in March. The postponement of the show allowed them to move Alice in Chains outside to the NC Music Factory (another part of the same facility). It makes sense really, you figure they were able to increase their capacity, sell more tickets, everyone wins right? Oh wait, it's now the end of April and it's raining.

Having worked in minor league baseball for a few years, I really don't mind running around in the rain. Two of the most fun sporting events I've ever been to were during torrential downpours (one of which never even occurred - take that Lee Corso's rental car!), but there's something different about sitting/standing around in the rain for a football game and a concert.

We weren't aware until we showed up for the rescheduled show that Shooter Jennings & Hierophant were opening. They only played for about half an hour but were quite good. I really wish I had been more familiar with their stuff as it would have been that much better. My friend Dave was all over their new album a month ago when it came out. See his review here. If only I had read that prior to my trip to Charlotte.

Once Alice in Chains took the stage, all of the shenanigans of the past month were completely worth it. They tore through 17 songs - a great mix from not only the latest album Black Gives Way to Blue, but their earlier albums as well. I swear that it started raining harder half way through 'Rain When I Die', which was amusing. After about 5 minutes of the crowd cheering, drumming on seats, and generally acting as though a riot was about to break out, Jerry Cantrell and Company came back out and played the two songs everyone had wanted to hear - 'Would?' and 'Rooster'.

Both after the main set and after the encore, all four band members picked up the mic and voice their appreciation for everyone's support and patience over the postponement and bad weather. That was pretty cool, not just the lead singer, or most well known band member, but each one. You could really tell that they were performing their hearts out up on stage. I can only hope for other fans that they play that way each time out and not just because they were trying to make it up to the city of Charlotte.

Over the past 4 months since I originally purchased my ticket for this show, the one thing I have heard from people over and over again was 'I'm not sure how you can have Alice in Chains without Layne Staley'. Well, let me tell ya somethin', the Layne Staley/Jerry Cantrell sound was unique and will never be replaced, BUT the 'new' lead singer William DuVall is as close as anyone could come. It's really quite amazing. His sound is very similar to Layne's, but it's natural. He's not trying to emulate Layne Staley. And that's what makes him a perfect fit for the band moving forward after their 14 some odd year layoff.

To anyone that hasn't checked out the new album, do yourself a favor and do so. It's excellent. If you have an opportunity to see Alice in Chains live, do that as well. It's well worth the money (and in my case the extra road trips/aggravation of taking time off from work).

Edit this setlist | More Alice in Chains setlists

Here's one of the videos I was able to take the other night:

Daredevil/Shadowland

2010-04-19T21:03:00.003-04:00

Daredevil has long been my favorite comic, and has been in the hands of some excellent creative teams over the past few years (Brian Michael Bendis/Alex Maleev, Ed Brubaker/Michael Lark, and now Andy Diggle with Antony Johnston and artists Roberto De La Torre and Marco Checchetto).

Over that time, one of the greatest things about Daredevil as a book is that the stories have been self contained in DD's own little corner of the Marvel Universe (Hell's Kitchen). This has been awesome in that all you need to do to follow DD's story is pick up a single book. No crossovers, no major universe changing events, just the monthly Daredevil release.

This past weekend at C2E2 (Chicago Comic and Entertainment Expo), Marvel made major announcements concerning the upcoming Shadowland storyline that has been teased in a couple of recent issues of DD. I was a little leery at first as it's being released as a separate mini-series (5 issues) that will stand alone, but will also tie into the upcoming Daredevil arc 'In the Shadows'. Luckily it appears that it will be comprised of the 5 issue series plus just a handful of side issues focusing on some of the other characters involved as opposed to the monster events of the past (from both Marvel and DC).

I'm excited to see where Diggle takes the story and DD as a character. I'm sure it will be entertaining as the beginning of his run has been strong. I'm just being selfish in not wanting to pick up a bunch of books to absorb everything. I suppose I can splurge this time since I've been able to avoid House of M, Civil War, Secret Invasion, and Siege (other huge Marvel events) over the past few years.

Shadowland Announcement (from CBR)

Check out a short interview with Andy Diggle below:

Shadowland at IGN.com

Review - Kick-Ass

2010-04-19T20:17:00.004-04:00

Kick-Ass (R), 117 minutes - As some may know, Kick-Ass is based upon a comic book series (8 issues), written by Mark Millar and penciled by John Romita, Jr. Millar's name may sound familiar to some movie-goers even if they are not into comics. Another of his creations - Wanted - was a big summer flick a couple of years ago.

Just as he did with Wanted, Millar succeeds in telling an interesting story while being shockingly violent and/or profane at times. Trust me, parts of the trailer don't even begin to portray how violent and profane Kick-Ass can be. That being said, as long as you are not easily offended and don't mind a little (ok, alot) of actiony blood-splatter, you will be thoroughly entertained by this comic book movie.

Kick-Ass is the story of Dave Lizewski, your everyday nobody teenager. He wonders why no one has actually tried to be a costumed hero in real life. After having a comic book nerd debate about it with his close pals, he decides to order a costume off of the internet (a wet suit) and take things into his own hands. He quickly learns why no one had done it before as he's stabbed and brutally beaten in his first attempt to do good. This incident leads to his very own comic book-like origin story as he has multiple surgeries and multiple metal plates inserted into his skeleton as well has parts of his body losing most of their feeling. After he recovers, he continues pursuing his heroics as he finds it's the one thing that doesn't make him feel like a loser. He learns that there are in fact other heroes out there and more violence and language-spewing ensues.

Aaron Johnson does a good job bringing Dave Lisewski to life, Nicolas Cage is oddly entertaining as Big Daddy, and Mark Strong and Christopher Mintz-Plasse portray an oddly coupled mobster and mobster's son, but the spotlight is really stolen by Chloe Moretz as Hit Girl, an 11 year old who has been raised since birth to be the downfall of the local mob.

Kick-Ass is pretty faithful to the source material. The stories differ in just a couple of places. Having read the book and seen the movie, it is easy to tell why they made the small changes in the film. Millar likes to tell fairly self contained stories, and while he did leave Kick-Ass the comic open for another volume, the movie leaves much more open for the possibility of a sequel. Both versions of the story work, and both are quite entertaining.

Check out the book here

Watch the RED BAND trailer here
(This gives you a much better idea of what you can expect than the standard trailer you see on tv - you have been warned!)

Coming Soon (4/23/10) - The Losers

2010-04-11T20:21:00.002-04:00

The Losers is based on a Vertigo comic book by the same name written by Andy Diggle and illustrated primarily by Jock. I just finished the series this morning. It's a miltary/special ops action/thriller with a good bit of humor thrown in. The trailer looks to be pretty faithful to the source material and the cast also looks to fit the characters of the book quite nicely. Can't wait for this!

So...

2010-04-11T15:35:00.002-04:00

I've been thinking about launching a blog about the various things I'm interested in for quite a while now. I figured it was finally about time to go ahead and do it. As some may know, I'm a huge movie buff and have posted many movie reviews in different places in the past (myspace, facebook, even a facebook review group created with a couple of friends). None of these really worked out the way I had hoped (or would have liked), which is why I've begun anew here.

This space will most likely be filled with movie reviews and my thoughts on upcoming films as well as sports, comics, music, or whatever else pops into my head. As always some reviews will be lengthy and detailed, others short and sweet. It really just depends on the mood I'm in at the time.

I encourage open discussion (everyone has their own thoughts/opinions/suggestions) so feel free to add your two cents if you feel so inclined! I'm also not sure that I like the name that I've given it so if anyone has any suggestions please let me know.

Review - How to Train Your Dragon (3D)

2010-04-10T14:00:00.000-04:00

How to Train Your Dragon 3D (PG) - 98 minutes - I've been hearing really good things about this movie for the last two weeks and I finally got a chance to check it out myself. I must say, I wasn't disappointed in the slightest. The animation is excellent, the story is fun, and the use of 3D may be as good as it was in Avatar.

How to Train Your Dragon is the story of a young viking named Hiccup who can't bring himself to kill the rare and dangerous Night Fury dragon after shooting it down amidst a dragon attack on his village. Hiccup's father (the leader of the village) enrolls him in dragon training in the hopes of toughening up his son and making a proper viking out of him. Hiccup attends the sessions and takes the verbal abuse from the other viking youth in his class then sneaks off in the afternoons to nurse the Night Fury back to health. In the process he learns that dragons and vikings can co-exist and that the dragons attack because they are just as scared as the vikings are.

As you can guess, Hiccup's relationship with the dragon turns things in the village upside down and plays a huge part in the outcome of the movie. For that reason, I won't continue on and possibly spoil anything.

The voice acting is done quite well and there are many familiar voices (Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, Jay Baruchel, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Kristen Wiig). It's a great film for young and old alike. Like Avatar, How to Train Your Dragon was made specifically for the 3D format and it shows. Maybe it's because they both take advantage of aerial shots provided by the inclusion of dragons (or dragon-like creatures), but they are the two most well made 3D films that I have seen to date. This movie pretty much cemented my belief that unless a film is intentionally made for the format, there is no point in paying the extra admission fee to see a movie in 3D. I have been warning against the 3D versions of other recent films, but if you do take the time to check out How to Train Your Dragon make sure you do see it in 3D. You won't be disappointed!

TRAILER