The Superman Fighter

Alright, here are two very different movies: an Oscar nominated movie based on a true story, and an animated Superman movie. I enjoyed both, but there's really no comparison between the two. I've also been tweaking my list of favorite movies for last year. The hard part is that any movie released later in the year (November or December) doesn't get released on DVD for a couple months into the next year. So, once I finally see all of the Best Picture nominees I will create my list. Until then...

The Fighter - (4 Stars)*

Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) is a boxer from Lowell, Massachusetts who has always lived in the shadow of his older brother Dicky's professional boxing career. Managed by his mother (Melissa Leo) and coached by Dicky (Christian Bale), Micky's time spent practicing is more about reminiscing on Dicky's accomplishments rather than actual training. However, things begin to change after Micky meets Charlene (Amy Adams), who pushes Micky to go after the things he wants.

"The Fighter" is a good inspirational story, with just enough boxing to appease fans of the sport, but with more of a focus on the family of characters and story around the boxing. Wahlberg shines as the lead Micky who is torn between his new girlfriend, his family and boxing and Christian Bale earns his Oscar with every bit of screen time he has. The cast as a whole is very strong which helps make the movie, focused on characters, such an enjoyable treat. The fact that it's based on the true story of boxer Micky Ward's early years boxing makes all the more entertaining.

(115 minutes - Rated R for language throughout, drug content, some violence and sexuality- 2010) (Netflix)

All-Star Superman - (3 1/2 Stars)

What if Superman was dying? That's the premise in the latest of DC's animated feature "All-Star Superman," adapted from the very good Grant Morrison story. After taking a super-sized dose of solar radiation by flying too close to the sun (all set up by Lex Luthor, of course), Superman discovers that his cells have begun to break down. So he sets about making everything right in his world, including his relationship with Lois Lane. But just because he's dying, doesn't mean he has it easy.

The story and art is adapted well and really captures the essence of the original comic story while jettisoning some of the story bits that felt out of place or extra. As a whole, the story is full of action,  classic villain encounters and as much poignancy as you're likely to get out of a comic book. I'd recommend this highly to anyone who has read the story, is a fan of the character or comic books in general.
(76 minutes - Rated PG for sequences of action and violence, language including brief innuendo, and some sensuality - 2011) (Netflix)

127 Hours - The Importance Of The Buddy System...

127 Hours - (4 1/2 Stars)*

I'm always fascinated by movies that are based on true stories. Some movies truly do capture actual events, while others can only claim vague inspiration for their events (I'm looking at you Open Water). "127 Hours" is probably going to be one of the most factually accurate movies you'll see based on true events, which makes it even more of an emotionally charged movie.

Aron Ralston (James Franco) is a twenty-something engineer who enjoys hiking, climbing and any other outdoor activity you can think of. One weekend he decides to head to Blue John canyon to enjoy the weekend, but does so without telling anyone where he is. After a brief encounter with some other people, Aron goes off on his own and becomes trapped when a boulder he is using to climb down with gives way and pins his arm at the bottom of the canyon.

This movie is effectively a one-man movie. Aron encounters a few people and hallucinates/remembers others, but the focus is entirely on him. James Franco's performance is what makes or breaks this movie, and he does not disappoint. His performance as Aron is definitely deserving of his nomination for an Oscar (if not deserving of a win), and is his best to date. Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, 28 Days Later) also does a fantastic job with directing. If this story didn't have the right actor or director, it could easily have been boring or too sensational.

Most people know how the story ends, but I'll still remain purposely vague on the specific details about the climactic scene towards the end except to say that it is definitely graphic and realistic. That being said, Boyle doesn't film it in a way that is going shock value. It is a part of the story, but not the centerpiece. The real story lies in the emotional struggle of Aron Ralston.

(94 minutes - Rated R for language and some disturbing violent content/bloody images - 2010) (Netflix)

full disclosure: I stole the review subtitle from my wife.

Me And The Distance Conviction

Have a lot of movies coming up, so I'm going to try to churn out a couple of posts this week and next. Here we have an overlooked drama, an overlooked coming-of-age story and a "should be" overlooked romantic comedy.

Conviction - (4 Stars)*

A well acted, emotional true story of how far one person was willing to go to free her brother. Hillary Swank and Sam Rockwell give award-worthy performances as the  Waters siblings torn apart by a false conviction for murder. The story does a good job of drawing the viewer into the lives of the Waters. The movie is also paced well and is suspenseful enough (despite being a true story) to keep you wondering about the case. Melissa Leo (this year's Academy Award winning Supporting Actress) has a small, but integral role as well.

(107 minutes - Rated R for language and some violent images - 2010) (Netflix)

Going The Distance - (1 1/2 Stars)

Garrett and Erin (Justin Long and Drew Barrymore) meet in New York and quickly begin dating. However, Erin is only an intern and soon has to move back to California forcing the two to start a long distance relationship. "Going The Distance" takes this premise and creates an unfunny, crude "romantic comedy." I put both words in quotation marks because there wasn't much romantic or funny about the movie. Most jokes are  along the lines of awkward situational humor or some crude remark or joke from one of the couple's friends. If I wanted to end this review with a one-liner that sums it up, I'd say to keep your distance from this one.
(102 minutes - Rated R for sexual content including dialogue, language throughout, some drug use and brief nudity - 2010) (Netflix)

Me And Orson Welles - (3 Stars)^
Orson Welles was one of a kind. Equal parts brilliant and egocentric, Welles is responsible for Citizen Kane, a movie that makes many "Top Movie" lists. But, "Me And Orson Welles" focuses on (and fictionalizes) an earlier time in Welles' life. It also doesn't follow Welles, but rather 17-year-old Richard Samuels (Zac Efron). The movie uses Orson Welles' landmark production of Julius Caesar as a backdrop for a coming-of-age story.

The movie has its moments, but is overall a bit slow. Being a fictionalized account of a true event also makes it hard to determine what really happened and what was invented just for the story. The real star is Christian McKay as Orson Welles. His performance is superb and his presence is felt even when he isn't on screen. Overall, an interesting watch, but one that doesn't leave a lasting impression apart from McKay's Welles.
(114 minutes - Rated PG-13 for sexual references and smoking - 2009) (Netflix)

^Netflix Watch Instantly

The Other Despicable FreakoGruber

Alright, I've been sitting on a couple of the reviews here for awhile so I thought it was time to get them out there. I've been also slowly working on my Oscar picks and Favorite Movies of 2010 list, so those should be out here, soon. But for now, here are three movies and one failed attempt at stretching one joke into a feature length film:

Despicable Me - (3 1/2 Stars)

There have been a lot of animated movies released in 2010, of which a surprising amount have actually been pretty good. Despicable Me is just another example of what a great year 2010 was for animation.

Gru (Steve Carell) is a super-villain. In fact, he's the best (worst) super-villain of them all and he's saved his best heist for last: to steal the moon. But, when another clever villain steals the Great Pyramid, the villain community begins to lose faith in Gru, which leads him to finally put his big plan into action. Along the way, Gru encounters a young group of orphans who vie for his attention. In fact Agnes, the youngest, steals most of the movie.

The movie is funny, well cast and endearing at parts. But at other times it felt like a mash-up of Incredibles and Monster's Inc. Mostly due to the atmosphere and feel of the movie, not from borrowed plot devices or characters.

(95 minutes - Rated PG for rude humor and mild action - 2010) (Netflix)

The Other Guys - (3 1/2 Stars)

There are certain movies out there that are so dumb, they're funny. The Other Guys fits right into this category. Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg are partners Gamble and Hoitz at the NYPD. They don't really get along and are always being overshadowed by two other larger-than-life cops. But, when a change at the department leaves a void, Gamble and Hoitz attempt to fill it.

"The Other Guys" is a lot of what you'd expect from Will Ferrell and his director buddy Adam McKay (Anchorman, Talladega Nights). There are plenty of laughs and one-liners. Ferrell does his usual bit, and it works. Wahlberg works well against Ferrell as well. Michael Keaton as the Captain is particularly funny, stealing a couple scenes from Ferrell and Wahlberg. Keaton seems to have found his niche in funny, supporting parts (he was also great in Toy Story 3 as Ken).

As with most other movies of this type, the laughs do slow down a bit towards the end when they have to wrap up the storyline, but there are enough other laughs throughout to make it worth watching. 

(107 minutes - Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual content, language, violence and some drug material - 2010) (Netflix)

Freakonomics: The Movie^ - (3 Stars)

Having had the books recommended to me, I went to my local library last year and quickly read both Freakonomics and its "sequel" SuperFreakonomics. I was excited, or at least had my interest piqued, when I heard they were attempting to make a documentary out of the books utilizing various filmmakers, such as Morgan Spurlock (Super Size Me), who's work I also enjoy, among others. While the end result is not bad, it's doesn't particularly add anything to the books.

The movie includes both of the authors, Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, as narrators of sorts for the whole movie. They also fill in the gaps between the various segments. Each segment takes its inspiration from chapters from both books and are written and directed by a different documentary filmmaker. The problem becomes that out of two books that were already packed to the brim with information, we end up with four full "chapters" and various short segments that just don't do enough justice to the books. Basically, just go read the books.

(93 minutes - Rated PG-13 for Elements of violence, sexuality/nudity, drugs, and brief strong language - 2010) (Netflix)

MacGruber - (1 1/2 Stars)

I mentioned before movies that are dumb, but funny. MacGruber is just dumb. I did laugh at some parts, but overall the rest of it was the big equivalent of a fart joke. Not much else to say for this SNL spin-off.

(90 minutes - Rated R for strong crude and sexual content, violence, language and some nudity - 2010) (Netflix)

^Available on Netflix Watch Instant

The Social Town

The Town - (3 Stars)
Ben Affleck stars and directs this predictable but enjoyable crime movie where, once again, we are tasked with following and tend to find ourselves rooting for the bad guys instead of the good guys. . Of course, this isn't really the kind of movie where good and bad are black and white anyway. "The Town" felt like shades of "The Departed" meets "The Outsiders" meets any movie about robbing banks. It didn't blow me away, but I enjoyed it. This was mainly due to the fact that despite it doing nothing new, everything, from the acting to the writing to the directing, is executed really well. The movie gets bonus points for featuring some scenes at Fenway Park (and tons of wicked awesome Boston accents).
(125 minutes - Rated R for strong violence, pervasive language, some sexuality and drug use - 2010) (Netflix)

The Social Network - (4 Stars)*
Everyone and their mom seems to be using Facebook these days. I'm not trying to exaggerate (well, I'm slightly exaggerating). But what's the story behind "The Facebook?" Well, David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin have the strange, sordid (well, slightly sordid), and partially fictitious answer in their movie, "The Social Network."

The movie is an engrossing, character driven tale that follows Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) from a messy break-up, through Harvard and on to the eventual founding and expansion of the most popular social networking site currently online. The movie doesn't have a lot of action, since it revolves around the founding of a website, so some won't find much appeal. However, Fincher really has a gift for pacing his movies and keeping things moving.

In all honesty, I was reminded a lot of the little seen "Shattered Glass," with its focus on an interesting, but not well liked main character and the people in his life that he interacts with. Most of these interactions are not very positive. In fact, most will sympathize with his best friend and co-founder Eduardo (Andrew Garfield, who everyone will get to know soon as the new Spider-man) who slowly finds himself less and less a part of Facebook.

The biggest theme to me that resonated throughout the movie was a sense of tragic irony. Mark founds Facebook, at least according to the movie, as a way to get back at a girlfriend who dumps him. Along the way he alienates himself from many people and loses friends. Mark eventually finds himself the creator of the biggest social networking tool whose sole purpose is keeping up with and making friends, and yet he doesn't seem to have any friends of his own.
(120 minutes - Rated PG-13 for sexual content, drug and alcohol use and language - 2010) (Netflix)


Note: I highly recommend checking out Shattered Glass if you haven't seen it: Netflix

The Christmas Repo Writer

Today I have two new reviews and one old one that I missed. These movies still fall a bit on the underwhelming side, but each has their own interesting aspect that bumped their reviews up a bit. I also have some tidbits for these movies that will work well in my first "After the Movie" post. I'm a bit miffed that I missed out on an easy chance at winning tickets again today (I thought they were just more tickets to see Due Date, and I'm good in that respect, but they were actually for any movie so I never called). So, no Harry Potter review upcoming just yet. Anyway, here are the reviews in order of my viewing:

Repo Men – (2 ½ Stars)

I'm a sucker for a well done, clever Science Fiction story. So, going into the movie, I thought there could be some potential for a surprise. To me that's one of the best movie going experiences, when a movie completely delivers something you don't expect. And while "Repo Men" has an interesting enough concept, it doesn't completely deliver in the end.

Jude Law and Forrest Whitaker play the title characters who, in the semi-near future, are tasked with tracking down and repossessing artificial organs that the owners have fallen behind in payments on. The idea is both well executed and sloppy at the same time. Some plot holes exist because of this (or I guess, more along the lines of logic or character motivation holes). 

The movie still moves at a pretty quick pace and provides some decent action. I actually gave the movie a higher rating because of the ending (which I will discuss more in my AtM post). While it may lack in some areas, "Repo Men" at least offers some action and some interesting ethical dilemmas. For example, to think of predatory lending extending to something that is actually in your body is a scary idea indeed.  

(119 minutes - Rated R for for strong bloody violence, grisly images, language and some sexuality/nudity - 2010) (Netflix)

A Christmas Carol – (2 ½ Stars)

I will be very happy when this 3-D fad finally comes to an end and movies will be made for the sake of the story, and not to serve a gimmicky technology. Disney's latest version of Charles Dickens' classic is a perfect example. What starts off as a seemingly faithful adaptation quickly falls prey to ridiculous flying scenes and various objects coming at the camera just for the sake of a 3-D audience. I did not watch the movie in 3-D, so it just came across as awkward and, well, unnecessary.

Since Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" is such a well known and beloved story, there's not much to say that people don't already know when it comes to the story. At times, this version follows the story closer than other adaptations. But, just when you think it might be on the right track, another gimmicky chase/action scene is thrown in. Jim Carrey does a pretty good job at channeling his inner miser (and the various spirits), but even that isn't enough to save this rendition. However, it still had some enjoyable moments. But this is mostly due to its source material. 

Note: Since it does try to keep closer to the story, there are some frightful moments. This is not recommended for younger kids. If you have younger kids, watch the much better Muppet Christmas Carol. If you don't have younger kids, watch Scrooge, or you might as well still watch the Muppet version anyway, too.

(98 minutes - Rated PG for scary sequences and images - 2009) (Netflix)

The Ghost Writer – (3 Stars)*

There was a lot of press build-up for Roman Polanski's latest film due to his possible extradition to the US and being placed under house arrest, and so on and so forth. To be honest, all of the press probably helped this movie get noticed, but it doesn't really help the movie as a whole. Especially when there are definite parallels to Polanski within the characters in the film.

Ewan McGregor is the ghost hired to help pen the memoirs of a former British Prime Minister (Pierce Brosnan) when the previous ghost writer is mysteriously found dead. The movie takes this premise and builds a suspenseful, complicated web of politics and deceit. The scenery in the movie is fantastically dreary and only adds to suspense. Perhaps the strongest aspect of the movie is Polanski's directing. However, the story is where things begin to unravel.

"The Ghost Writer" builds everything up incredibly well, but it all falls apart and becomes rather simplistic by the end. The movie, based on a book by Robert Harris (a former BBC reporter), also doesn't really try to hide its political opinions and message. So, instead of a good suspense movie to take you out of reality, you have a suspenseful movie that tries a little to hard to force an idea on you. Overall, there are many elements to this movie that are extremely well done, in the end it just fizzles.

(128 minutes - Rated PG-13 for language, brief nudity/sexuality, some violence and a drug reference - 2010) (Netflix)

Due Date: Planes, No Brains and Stolen Automobiles

*See the bottom of the review for more information about the idea proposed in this month's poll.*

Due Date - (2 Stars)
The first thing I thought when I saw the preview for "Due Date" was that it looked like an updated version of the movie "Planes, Trains and Automobiles," as I'm sure many other people did. The movie was basically marketed as "Planes..." meets "The Hangover." Fans of "The Hangover" will be much more interested than fans of the "Planes..." (in fact, Todd Phillips directed both "Due Date" and "The Hangover"). Although, even they might not find it too funny. I was not particularly amused.

"Due Date" uses the tried and (usually) true method of pairing two mismatched people for comedic effect (call it an odd couple, or the "jerk and the moron" or even a variation of the straight man to the funny man). The problem is that most of the time you really don't like the "jerk" or sympathize with the "moron." I'd like to say that along the way their characters grow and get better, but they really don't.

The aspect of the movie that bothered me the most and really put me out of the movie-going experience was that "Due Date" wasn't a realistic, sincere type of comedy. Now this wouldn't be a bad thing except that it's not on the opposite end of the spectrum, a ridiculous, funny slapstick style of comedy either. The movie starts out believably enough (and enjoyably enough as well) but quickly begins veering more towards stupidity and away from being funny or believable.

One of the reasons I wanted to like this movie more than I did was that I have enjoyed Robert Downey, Jr.'s performances of late. I was more than a little disappointed when I saw that he was going to be in this movie, but held my breath that perhaps he and Galifianakis could pull it off. However, Galifianakis seems to be playing a vaguely similar character to his Hangover counterpart, who I didn't enjoy the first time around and Downey is channeling a more smarmy version of Tony Stark, his character from "Iron Man." Except where Tony Stark's character is a likable character with some personality flaws, Downey's character in "Due Date" is just completely unlikeable.


In the end, there were definitely funny parts throughout the movie, but many of them also showed up in the trailers. "Due Date" never hits any real comedic stride and really peters out by the end. In fact, as the movie went on I found myself wondering how long it was. While it officially clocks in at 100 or so minutes, it feels closer to north of 2 hours.
(100 minutes - Rated R for language, drug use and sexual content - 2010) (Netflix - February 22)




***
I'm toying with a new idea and have added a poll to see what people think. I try to keep my reviews as spoiler free as possible, but I often have more to say. What I'm thinking of doing is creating a series of posts that would be extra, spoiler-filled commentary for people to read after they have seen the movie. For example, there are several things from this movie I wanted to elaborate on but didn't want to spoil anyone as to what specifically occurs in the movie. There was also a lot in Toy Story 3 and Inception as well. Please take the poll and let me know what you think about this idea!
***

Halloween B-sides

As I was working on my list of my personal favorite Halloween movies, I found myself having to leave out several movies in order to keep it to 5. I also wanted to keep my list to those that have a great October creepy feel (with the exception of Nightmare Before Christmas). So, that means that I was left with several great Halloween comedies that didn't make my list (but are definitely worth watching). Consider these the lighter alternative to my previous list: the B-Side. A way to laugh away any lingering creeps you may have left over from Halloween. Click on through to view the list (note: there are parallels to some of the titles on the previous list):

My Personal Halloween Movie Picks

Let me start off by saying that these are my favorite Halloween movies to watch each year and NOT what I consider to be the best Horror/Halloween movies of all time. That would be a separate list, one that I will probably not make anytime soon. Please feel free to weigh in with your Halloween movies in the comments section (and to add a little suspense to the list, I've added a 'jump.' You'll have to click on through to see the list).

The Survival of Temple's Iron Hood

Here are a couple more movies I've watched recently. It's a pretty mixed bag with mixed results as well. Temple Grandin is from a few weeks ago (forgot to include it before), but the other 4 I just watched this week and most are relatively new releases.

Temple Grandin* - (4 Stars)
A touching, and wholly interesting look at the life of one of the leaders in humane livestock handling who also happens to be autistic. Won the Emmy for best Made for TV movie (it was on HBO), as such it is not rated. It is basically the equivalent of a PG movie along the lines of Finding Neverland (no real objectionable content but not really interesting for younger kids). (103 minutes - NR - 2010) (Netflix)


Survival of the Dead^ - (1 Star)
George A. Romero has officially lost his touch with zombie movies. It's a good thing "The Walking Dead" starts on AMC on Halloween night (10pm) or else there would be nowhere to turn for good zombies anymore. I have four words to summarize how bad this movie is: zombie riding a horse. Oh yeah, and he uses digital effects instead of makeup effects (see my review of Zombieland if you really want to know more about how I feel about zombie movies) (90 minutes - Rated R for strong zombie violence/gore, language and brief sexuality - 2009/2010)(Netflix)


Iron Man 2  - (4 Stars)
Great follow-up to the original. If you liked the first one, you'll like this one. I like that they are building up to a big team-up movie (The Avengers), but they are forcing too much information into the Iron Man story that could just be saved for the actual Avenger movie. As a side note: I thought Sam Rockwell stands out as being perfectly annoying as Justin Hammer, Tony Stark's business rival, whereas my wife just found him annoying. (124 minutes - Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence, and some language - 2010) (Netflix)


Robin Hood - (2 1/2 Stars)
Ridley Scott, who apparently lives to make epic battle movies, brings his style to a Robin Hood prequel tale. Some of the changes to the mythos work, others are just confusing. I found myself liking some parts and hating other parts of this movie. Overall, the movie is a bit long and convoluted (too many extra characters, some of which are probably set-up for a potential sequel) and probably would have been better had it not been about Robin Hood. (140 minutes - Rated PG-13 for violence including intense sequences of warfare, and some sexual content - 2010) (Netflix)


Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths^ - (2 1/2 Stars)
Not the best and not the worst of the DC Animated movies. Standard comic book fare that is at the very least an entertaining popcorn watch. (75 minutes - Rated PG-13 for action violence - 2010) (Netflix)


*Recommended Pick of the Week
^Netflix Instant Play

John the Night Road Stalker: In Rome!!!

Finally, after quite a long hiatus, I have some new movie reviews. I've had a lot going on and just haven't had the time to getting these reviews finished and posted. They've been partially completed after I watched each movie, but now here they are. Part of the reason I didn't post was also due to not watching as many movies (nothing coming in, starting to watch "Fringe" again). However, now there should be a pretty steady stream of movies coming in (and maybe a few theatrical reviews as well!)

*The Road – (3 ½ stars) – 

“The Road,” based on the Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name, is a bleak vision of a post-apocalyptic American wasteland. The story follows a man and his son as they trek the wasteland in search of food and hope for a place that is free from all of the destruction. The movie is fairly faithful to book, however some character chemistry is lacking until the end of the movie, which does take away from the movie since most of the story emphasizes the relationship between the man and his son. I also found that the young actor who played the boy was quite annoying (more than I remembered the boy being in the book). Overall the movie does an excellent job of adapting the book although, at the same time, you really could just read the book.

(Netflix) (111 minutes - Rated R for some violence, disturbing images and language - 2009)

The Night Stalker – (3 Stars) – A television movie that kicked-off a subsequent series, “The Night Stalker” is the supernatural precursor to “The X-Files.” The story follows the exploits of the great character of Darren McGavin’s Kolchak, a newspaper reporter, as he tracks down what he believes to be an actual vampire preying on young women. The movie is a bit dated, but still a lot of fun. There is a second movie and the series, however it was short lived, but there was another an attempted resurrection a few years back (to no avail). Also, for those not familiar with the name Darren McGavin, he is the dad who finally relents to getting his son a Red Rider BB gun in “A Christmas Story.”

(Netflix) (74 minutes - Not Rated/Television Movie - 1972)

Dear John – (1 Star) – Chances are that if you are sitting in on “Dear John” you are either the intended audience or were dragged there/coaxed into renting it by the intended audience. Either way, expect the expected. As is standard in a Nicholas Sparks book-to-movie adaptation, we have our typical boy meets girl story full of bad acting, annoying characters and plenty of clichés. You can definitely tell that Sparks is a man trying to write a woman character because they always turn out terribly two-dimensional. By the way, I checked with the intended audience (two teenaged girls and one twenty-something girl): they didn’t like it either.

(Netflix) (108 minutes - Rated PG-13 for some sensuality and violence - 2010)

When In Rome – (3 Stars) –“When in Rome” is a romantic comedy that doesn’t take itself seriously and doesn’t require you to. Starring Kristen Bell (who is most know from her turn as Veronica Mars on CW) and Josh Duhamel (mostly known for being Fergie’s husband), as the couple of interest. They meet at a destination wedding in Rome near a famous fountain of love. The movie includes some funny bit parts from comedians Jon Heder, Danny DeVito, Will Arnett and Dax Shepard (Bell’s real-life love interest). Overall the movie is pretty predictable but remains enjoyable.
(Netflix) (91 minutes - Rated PG-13 for some suggestive content - 2010)


Upcoming Reviews:
Alice in Wonderland
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (for real this time)
The Wolfman (2010)
Dead Alive


Some potential movie reviews currently in theatrical release:
Grown Ups (definite review incoming, I have free passes)
Toy Story 3
Inception

Avatar Primer - Invictus: The 9 Lovely Crazy Edge of Daybreakers Day

Well, since I will be gone all next week, I held back some reviews to make this special jumbo sized review. As you can see from the mouthful of a post title, there was quite the variety of movies. In the spirit of Clint Eastwood (who is represented in a movie this week) we have the good (Primer, Invictus, Daybreakers, 9), the bad (Valentine's Day, Edge of Darkness) and the ugly (Legion, The Lovely Bones). Stuck between them of course, are the mediocre (Avatar, Crazy Heart). Hope everyone has a good week, I know I will. New movie reviews will be up sometime around June 14-15.

*Primer – (4 ½ Stars)

I’ll start this review off with a warning: “Primer” is probably the most confusing 

movie I have ever seen. However, because of how intricately layered the narrative is, I wanted to watch it again after I finished it. “Primer” follows two young engineers who are trying to create the next big thing. What exactly they are trying to build? That’s debatable, but what they end up creating is a time machine (of sorts). Their venture into time travel results in an incredibly original take on the time travel genre.

One of the reasons “Primer” works so well is that it doesn’t lay everything out for you. It is a puzzle to be decoded and as a result it is definitely worth multiple viewings because it leaves many facets of story open to viewer interpretation (purposely). There are various articles and timelines out there to help decipher what occurs, and I do recommend checking them out, but only after you have watched the movie through at least once.

(Netflix) (77 minutes – Rated PG-13 for brief language – 2004)

Invictus – (4 Stars)

After spending almost 30 years in prison for opposing the apartheid in South Africa, Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) is released from prison and several years later is elected the first black president of South Africa. However, he still faces many tough trials in a divided post-apartheid South Africa. Looking to peacefully unite the White Afrikaners and the Black South Africans, Mandela turns to the Springbok rugby team, a longtime symbol of the apartheid.

“Invictus” focuses on these events as the basis for its story. We follow Freeman’s Mandela as he attempts to set up his new government and promote equality and eventually meets with the captain of the springboks, Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon) and enlists his help. The movie is a well acted, uplifting story. Freeman has Mandela down to a ‘t’ and the story stays very engaging, whether you know how rugby is played or not. “Invictus” is a truly inspiring movie with a good message, despite your opinion of Nelson Mandela.

 (Netflix) (133 minutes – Rated PG-13 for brief strong language – 2009)

Avatar – (2 ½ Stars)

Going into a viewing of “Avatar,” probably the most hyped movie of all time, it is hard to do so with an objective mindset.  Everywhere you turn, someone has an opinion of “Avatar” be it good or bad. With this in mind I did my best to put aside outside opinions and just focused on the movie and my own perspective on James Cameron’s opus.

 

Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is a paraplegic marine enlisted to journey to the distant planet Pandora where he will participate in the Avatar program, an interface that allows Jake to take control of a genetically engineered hybrid of Pandora’s native Na’vi people. Some want Jake to use his Avatar to help gain a rapport with the natives and learn their way of life, while others want him to gather military intelligence. The Na’vi are in-tune with their surroundings on a different level than humans have ever been. They literally possess the ability to plug in (via their extensive hair braid) to various plants and animals. However, situated directly below their tree home, is the planet’s largest deposit of unobtanium, the main reason humans are on Pandora.

I’ll start with what works. “Avatar” definitely does feature some of the finest CGI of any movie out there. If everything didn’t look so fantastical, the line between real and CGI would definitely be blurred. With that being said, it’s still CGI and severely overused. In my opinion, CGI should be used to complement the real effects, not be the entire movie. Make no mistake “Avatar” is all about how it looks. It’s definitely not about an original story, as “Avatar” borrows heavily from a lot of different sources (one can’t help but think of Pocahontas as one). Even the musical score seemed to borrow pieces from various other movies.

 “Avatar’s” weakest area is definitely the script. If it weren’t for the state-of-the-art special effects, I’d think I was watching a Sci-Fi SyFy channel original movie. It’s painful to hear some of the phrases that come out of these character’s mouths. This dialogue ineptitude really ends up hurting the character development as well. They seem to be more caricatures than characters. Cameron definitely seemed to dip into the well of stereotypical characters to fill out the story.

Is "Avatar" a terrible movie? No. Does it deserve to be the highest grossing movie of all time? Probably not. But, if I were to make a list of the worst movies of 2009, it would not be on it. The story, while not exactly spectacular, is still coherent and fluid and the CGI is second-to-none in most respects. In the end, “Avatar” is simply mediocre.

(Netflix) (162 minutes – Rated PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking – 2009

Valentine’s Day – (2 Stars)

Following in the success of movies like “Love Actually” comes “Valentine’s Day,” an ensemble Romantic Comedy starring quite a long list of stars. I’m sure this works for getting people into the theatres, but for the story it makes everything drag a bit because there are just too many people. I will give them credit for at least tying everyone together in one way or another, but some of these extra characters could have been cut in order to focus on some of the more important character stories as they only really serve as “bridge” characters. Overall, “Valentine’s Day” is a pretty typical, politically correct and overlong romantic comedy.

 (Netflix) (125 minutes – Rated PG-13 for some sexual material and brief partial nudity – 2010)

9 – (3 ½ Stars)

Sometime in the future, the world has been rendered a post-apocalyptic wasteland due in part to mankind’s dependence on machines. The only creatures still stirring appear to be strange burlap dolls, each with a number designated them and “the monster.” “9” is a fun and inventive animated feature. It has a great voice cast, an interesting and cohesive story and wonderful, creative visuals. The movie is for an older audience, as there is some violence and some images that may be too much for younger kids.

 (Netflix) (79 minutes – Rated PG-13 for violence and scary images - 2009)

The Lovely Bones – (1 Star)

Susie Salmon is dead. She was murdered, she tells you, when she was 14. What follows in this movie, one would hope, is the tracking and catching of her killer and her family finding peace and coming to terms with her death. What actually happens? Not too much. The story starts out promisingly enough, but drags on endlessly as we follow Susie through the “in-between” as she watches her family deal with her loss. However, for whatever reason, we don’t really seem to connect to the characters due to the fractured storytelling. One “bright” spot is Stanley Tucci, who is unnervingly perfect as the neighborhood creeper who murders women out of some deep-seated need. It’s sad that the portrayal of the serial killer is the best part of this movie.

(Netflix) (135 minutes – Rated PG-13 for mature thematic material involving disturbing violent content and images, and some language - 2009)

Edge of Darkness – (2 Stars)

“Edge of Darkness” is Mel Gibson’s first acting gig since 2002’s “Signs.” One wonders what exactly about this script made him decide to come out of quasi-retirement. Gibson plays Boston cop Tom Craven, whose daughter is murdered in front of his eyes on the front porch. While the police think he was the intended target, Craven suspects that his daughter was caught up in something dangerous and sets out on his own investigation.

With a setup like this, one would expect “Edge of Darkness” to be a typical action revenge thriller. Instead, we are treated to a convoluted and poorly executed conspiracy picture. The movie is very low on character development and we meet a lot of different characters, some of which we never really understand who they are or what they do. What ends up resulting is a very sloppy movie that is not quite action, not quite drama and all kinds of slow-moving. I did discover that this movie is actually based on a BBC miniseries, which makes infinitely more sense. In a mini-series I could see characters being developed and the story taking shape in a much better way. “Edge of Darkness” is just a little too long and yet still not enough happens in it.

(Netflix) (117 minutes – Rated R for strong bloody violence and language– 2010)

Daybreakers – (3 ½ Stars)

“Daybreakers” is a different take on vampire movies. In the year 2019, most of humanity have become infected with a disease that turned them into vampires. As a result, humans are basically an endangered species and are hunted and farmed as a food source. But, there are some humans who claim to have found a cure. The movie does a lot of interesting things with vampire mythos that work (and some that are a bit over-the-top). There are also some interesting conclusions/comparisons you can draw from the situation of mankind in the movie.

Overall, “Daybreakers” is a pleasant surprise of a movie. For the most part it keeps a brisk pace, with only a few plot points and moments that drag it down. The actors all fit pretty well for their roles with Ethan Hawke playing the vampire with a bit of a conscience and Sam Neill as the vampire who definitely doesn’t have one (he also looks quite nefarious as a vampire).

(Netflix) (98 minutes – R for strong bloody violence, language and brief nudity – 2009)

Crazy Heart – (2 ½ Stars)

Bad Blake is a grizzled old country music singer who is prone to drinking and all around hard living. Jeff Bridges plays the alcoholic Bad in a sympathetic, likeable way but movie just seems to aimlessly follow Bad’s exploits for most of the movie before deciding to get to his potential redemption and rejuvenation. Maggie Gyllenhaal co-stars as a reporter who gets to meet the person behind the singer and helps him try to turn things around.

(Netflix) (111 minutes – Rated R for language and brief sexuality – 2009)

Legion – (1/2 Star)

In “Legion,” God apparently loses faith in mankind and decides to eradicate them. Michael the angel disobeys and goes to protect humanity’s only hope: the unborn son of truck-stop waitress. Angels act like demons, possessing people and spouting off expletive laced diatribes, and terribly cliché action sequences abound. Every single character in this movie is completely unlikeable and it doesn’t help that the plot really goes nowhere. “Legion” is one of those movies where you think the writer and director just wanted to “do some cool things and blow stuff up.”

(Netflix) (100 minutes – Rated R for strong bloody violence and language – 2010)

Upcoming Movie Reviews:

The Road

Leap Year

The Great Mouse Detective

Did You Hear The Young, Crazy Superman in the Air got Tenure?

This is a double week of movie reviews, although it's about the same as some of my previous week's worth. It's a modest bunch of movie, none of which truly stand out, but since it was nominated for several awards (and I enjoyed it, along with the director's previous works), I selected "Up in the Air" as my pick of the week. "Tenure" was close, but I think I need to watch it again to see where I stand on it. I also don't think it would appeal to many. Next week's movies are quite the beast. I will finally watch and review "Avatar," which I will try to do as objectively as possible (I'll also pretend I'm watching it on a big 3-D screen for full effect). But, that's next week...here are this week's movies (Side-note: I really like my title this week):

*Up in the Air – (3 ½ Stars)

George Clooney is Ryan Bingham, whose job it is to fire people when their own company doesn’t have the intestinal fortitude to do so. He spends his days literally up in the air flying from point to point on his seemingly cold-hearted endeavors. However, in an effort to save money, Ryan’s company takes the advice of its inexperienced recent hire (Anna Kendrick) and begins to implement a new means of firing people. Feeling his way of life being threatened, Ryan tries everything he can to stay in the air, which leads to Natalie (Kendrick) accompanying him on his journeys.

“Up in the Air” takes the viewer on a tough journey. Due to the nature of Ryan’s job, we are witness to a number of individuals at their lowest. But there are plenty of light moments to lift the mood as well as many funny moments. Ryan’s slow turn from the detached, disconnected (albeit charming) loner who spends most of his time on the road is engrossing and the interactions between Natalie and Ryan are often amusing and insightful.

(Netflix) (109 minutes – Rated R for Language and some sexual content – 2009)

Crazy on the Outside – (2 ½ Stars)

“Crazy on the Outside” finds Tommy (Tim Allen) released after a three year stint in jail. Fully intending to turn his life around and restart his father’s painting business, he runs into some snags in the form of his parole officer, a zany sister and his old partner in crime. Allen’s directorial debut is a well-meaning comedy with some funny moments, but it just doesn’t quite deliver what it could have.

 (Netflix) (96 minutes – Rated PG-13 for Sexual content and language – 2009)

The Young Victoria – (3 Stars)

Victoria (Emily Blunt) is the only heir to the throne of England. Unfortunately, nobody seems to really think she is fit for the job. “The Young Victoria” chronicles the early life of England’s longest serving monarch including her romance with her future husband, Prince Albert. The movie is a great looking period piece with pretty good acting all around. However, the directing leaves something to be desired. “…Victoria” shows signs of being an excellent movie and perhaps in the hands of a better director it would have been. But clunky cuts and strange transitions bring an otherwise entertaining movie down.

 (Netflix) (105 minutes – Rated PG for Some mild sensuality, a scene of violence, and brief incidental language and smoking – 2009)

Did You Hear About the Morgans? – (2 Stars)

“Did You Hear About The Morgans?” basically ended up being exactly as I had expected. Take two of the most annoying “romantic” leads in movies (Hugh Grant and Sarah Jessica Parker) and have the bicker and argue. Mix in a typical “witness protection” storyline that throws them into the middle of nowhere and you have the “big city/country” angle. There are some moments that are funny, and the movie does have a redeeming quality about it, but I just couldn’t get past most of everything else to really enjoy the movie.

 (Netflix) (103 minutes – Rated PG-13 for Some sexual references and momentary violence – 2009)

Tenure – (3 Stars)

“Tenure” stars Luke Wilson as college professor Charlie Thurber, who has never been able to gain tenure, despite being an intelligent and well-meaning guy. He seems to finally be on track to gain tenure at Gray University until a new Yale educated professor is hired into the department as direct competition. With his Bigfoot-obsessed colleague at his side (David Koechner), Charlie sets out to show that he has what it takes to earn tenure. “Tenure” is not as funny as it could have been (and this is its biggest drawback), but there are a lot of good moments throughout. Perhaps I enjoyed the movie more because I identified with Charlie’s plight, but I enjoyed tagging along on the journey.

(Netflix) (89 minutes – Rated R for Language, some sexuality and drug content – 2009)

Superman/Batman: Public Enemies – (3 Stars)

What do you do if your arch-enemy becomes the President of the United States? Based on the graphic novel by Jeph Loeb of the same name, “Superman/Batman: Public Enemies” has DC’s greatest superheroes team up to stop Lex Luthor in his latest bid to take over the world. Or has he finally turned over a new leaf? As a comic, the story works a lot better. There are certain intangibles that just don’t translate from comic to screen and this is the case with “…Public Enemies.” The movie is good, the comic is better.

 (Netflix) (75 minutes – Rated PG-13 – 2009)

Upcoming Movie Reviews:

Avatar

Invictus

Valentine's Day

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil

Extraordinary Measures