sweeney todd

ive been looking forward to this film for quite some time. im not at all familiar with the musical its based on (yes, this movie is a musical), but the prospect of any film by tim burton with jonny depp in it is always something to get excited about.

i went to go see it wednesday, and my general reaction was this: meh. im not sure why, but i was all together unimpressed. the story is dark and interesting, but i think it fell flat because of the fact that its a musical. it may have been great as a musical, but i felt the the songs themselves were quite bland as well. nothing really stands out as a memorable tune. the songs werent catchy, and there were many times where i just plain couldnt understand what they were singing. oh, and none of them could really sing that well, so that has a way of lowering the quality of the film. the story line has a lot of promise, but even that didnt pan out as being that interesting. the bit with the daughter and sailor boy was disjointed and disconnected from the major plot and never really played any important role in what was going on with the main characters, the bit about the poor woman was weak and very obvious, and the meat pie thing wasnt very well executed.

it saddens me to say this, but i think burton and depp missed the mark on this one.

the assassination of jesse james

now, that not exactly the full title of the film, but i figured i wouldn't be able to fit the whole thing on there. the full title is 'the assassination of jesse james by the coward robert ford'. a bit of a mouth full, huh?

tuesday i was sitting around my parents place and getting bored, so i figured i'd catch a movie. i saw that woodland theaters (the cheap second run and art house theater) was showing this movie and i had read a bit about it and wanted to check it out. so i did.

the film itself is a bit unusual as far as films go. its not so much a story as it is a character study. all the scenes don't necessarily tie in with each other so much as they all show different aspects of who these guys are. brad pitt plays jesse james as a tired, sad, and angry man who distrusts everyone (with good reason), and casey affleck plays robert ford as an insecure boy with a misplaced ego. the film itself is quite slow. it really creates the feeling of being there. the pace of the film helps us to understand the pace of life at that time, as well as the reality of the actions and events portrayed. it plainly shows the emotions of jesse james, a spent man accepting what evils have finally caught up with him, and robert ford, a desperate man blind to the truth that he will never amount to anything. its quite sad, really, but that's what makes it even more powerful.

oh, and the guy who plays dick liddil, paul schneider, is amazing. its difficult to admit, but i think he stole the show away from brad pitt. truly someone who will be making it big, and soon. keep an eye on this guy.

national treasure 2

monday i met up with jeffry lee at the mall and we figured we would catch a movie. there were a couple that we wanted to see, but werent particularly passionate about which one we should see. we ended up deciding to go see 'national treasure 2: book of secrets'.

now, its no big secret that i am not a nicolas cage fan, but for some reason i really enjoyed the first one. i think it was because i had just finished reading 'the da vinci code' and wanted to see a fun puzzle-based adventure movie. i saw it and really enjoyed it- it was certainly better than the really crappy da vinci movie that was eventually made. the first one was filled with a fun mix of history, conspiracy theories, puzzles, action, and adventure. it was completely over-the-top and left any sense of logic in its wake.

the second one is just more of the same (well, except less of the logic). the plot is loosely based on something or other to do with the lincoln assassination. the journey to find some sort of golden city takes them to paris, england, washington dc, and finally south dakoda (as all good adventures should...?) at many points you must actively fight your brain from working because the jumps in logic are so ludicrous that any sort of thinking would ruin the fun. but there are actually a few times where the characters themselves begin to question its absurdity, so they are obviously in on the joke. one of the funnies things in the movie is the fact that the only way a character is able to add emphasis to what they are saying is to repeat it ('is it? is it?'), which happens about ten to fifteen times throughout the movie. jeff and i got a great many laughs out of that, but it seems that the rest of the audience didnt quite pick up on it. the rest of the audience didnt quite pick up on it.

over all, im sure i will quickly forget the movie, but in a couple years when its on tv i will probably stop and watch it again for the laughs and the ridiculous ride it takes you on.

transformers

ive seen this one a few times now, and i figure i should say a few words about it. the first time i saw it was opening weekend in theaters, and i loved it! i had always intended to head back and see it again on the big screen, but the summer passed by faster than i thought it would. oh well.

a few weeks ago it came out on dvd. i, always a sucker for special movie packaging, had to get the two disc version from target. the case is so ridiculous that its actually quite impressive. they made the dvd case into a transforming robot. it looks really stupid as the case, and it doesnt really look much better as the robot. but thats not the point, the point is that its really outrageous and lame- which automatically means awesome!

i watched it when i first got it and is fun factor was still intact, even on a smaller screen. the film itself does a great job of bringing a back story to the robots. they did a really great job on optimus prime and the effect of all the robots changing. the human characters are passable for the most part (i still can not stand the girl with the australian accent, i know its real but it sounds totally fake!) the 'all spark' cube is a bit lame, but they needed a macguffin, and it did enough to serve its purpose. would have loved a few more fight scenes, but thats when a sequel is for, i guess... on top of a good movie was the second disc. the bonus second disc is worth the purchase alone, it goes very in depth about the production and everything that went into making it. some of the shots of how they filmed and then added in the robots was more interesting then i expected.

i just watched it a third time this week, this time with the director commentary on. and once again, i am impressed. having listened to many, many director commentaries, i was quite impressed with michael bays candor. usually the people doing the commentary end up kissing each others butt the whole time 'oh, you were so great in that scene', 'oooh, i loved the camera angle you used there' (im looking at you, kevin costner), or they become very technical or just plain nonsense (that you be you, tim burton). but on this commentary, bay is completely honest about what went right, what went wrong, how the transformer fans helped or were wrong about different stuff. it was refreshing, to hear someone tell it like it is and actually give some insight into the movie making process.

all in all, it was one of those rare things: a great movie, with even better dvd extras!

once

the music. oh, the music! i was lucky enough to see this film in the theater (twice) and be swept away by the melody it brings. its a simple story of a man who loves to sing and play his beaten up guitar. his path crosses with a foreign woman who talks with him. they form a friendship and play music together for a while. their stories, music, and hearts intertwine for a short time, but it is magic to behold. the film is, in essence, a musical. the great thing though, is that it is not a traditional musical where the characters are talking and then break out in song and dance, rather the characters in it sit down and sing. they make music together as musicians, which leads them to a recording studio and briefly into each other's souls. its a love story, but more a love story about the love of music than any romantic type of love. soon their paths take them in different directions, but the music they shared and created continue to exist even after their time together. i must admit that immediately after walking out of the theater the first time i saw it i went straight to the store to buy the soundtrack- that song 'falling slowly' is one of the most beautiful and melancholy songs i have heard in years! the whole movie is inspired and moving.

rocky balboa

ive never been into the whole 'rocky' thing. in fact, i dont think ive ever actually seen any of them the whole way through. still, for some reason, i wanted to see this latest sequel. maybe out of morbid curiosity, just to see how badly stallone has aged, maybe because of the many good reviews it got when it came out, or maybe because it was free at the library. im not sure which was the reason for picking it up, but i watched it a couple days ago, and was somewhat impressed.

though unfamiliar with the previous 5, i could tell that most of the movie was filled with references to what had come before. it didnt seem excessive, just the opposite in fact, the movie is all about finishing strong and moving on, so it was altogether fitting that there would be frequent referencing of the past. the idea of one last fight was played out pretty well, and the final fight was actually quite exciting. it almost made me want to go back and check out the originals. or not.

quick hits

ive been watching a ton of movies lately, so i figured id do a quick fire review of some of them:


'bourne ultimatum': really good! this was a satisfying end to a consistently good trilogy. the action was insane, and the twists and turns along the way were very satisfying. its always an amazing thing when a series can start strong, and end even stronger. the questions raised in the first two are neatly tied up in this one, and done in such a manic style that it kept the immediacy and tension the whole way through. my only complaint is that by the end it seems that borne has turned into an invulnerable superman. does this man never get hurt?!?


'say anything...': though it pains me to say this, being a john cusack fan, this movie is rather lame. the pacing is poor, and the characters do not follow any sort of clear motivation. i had never seen this one before, so i cant rely on a nostalgia factor like most people. the characters were not real, and they acted more like they were in some strange stilted theater production than actual high school kids. disappointing.


'pathfinder': a unique tale about a viking boy left for dead in the new world. it mostly deals with finding a place with those that are different than you and coming to terms with where you came from. actually, it mostly deals with swords and axes. a bloody action movie that actually has some pretty cool action in it. when it was released it got a bum rap because it came out a week or two after '300', and tried to do similar things with its action scenes. not as successfully, but still a story i havent seen before.


'hot fuzz': this one was a treat. its a buddy cop movie from the guys that did 'sean of the dead'. needless to say, its quite funny (i do love british humor) and never falls into the cheesy spoof category. there are some really great homages to other american movies, but it certainly stands on its own. my one qualm- there are about 3 or 4 endings that make the film feel longer than it is.

'contract': sorry to be dogging john cusack again, but this one stunk. jeffry lee and i have a habit of renting straight-to-video movies based on cover art or who is in them. we figured 'cusack and morgan freeman? what could possibly go wrong?' well, turns out, a lot. the movie was generic and uninspired. i always wonder what caught the attention of such good actors to such a mediocre film?



'daniel tosh: completely serious': i dont know what exactly it is i like so much about this off-color comedian, but i love it! this is the full length stand-up concert video of what was shown on comedy central a couple months ago that first got me into him. his routine is hilarious in its blatant offensiveness. oh, but it hurts so good...

tmnt

dont let its categorization fool you- this is much more than a childrens movie. i saw this one in the theater in the spring, and recently got the dvd and watched it again. and boy, am i impressed! this movie is a lot better than it needed to be- it could have been just a basic retread of the old cartoons, but instead it is a well-crafted thoughtful examination of what it means to be a family and a friend.

the story picks up a few years after where the first live action movie left us. the turtles have, in a way, all gone their own separate directions and have lost touch with their dreams of being heroes. due to the recent appearance of strange monsters and ancient statues, they are required to step back into action. they arent quite ready for it, and must relearn how to work together as a team. there are some really great moments of character development which are surprisingly touching and honest. the animation is very stylized, and the camera shots and framing are creative and impressive. one scene in particular, a rooftop battle between leonardo and the night watcher is both strikingly beautiful, and emotionally powerful. by the end of the film the turtles, casey jones and april, as well as the 'bad' guy, have all taken an important personal journey.

this is one of the rare animated movies that actually left me pondering some of its ideas for quite a while after the credits rolled.

ultraviolet

i just rewatched this movie on demand. i was one of the 12 people who actually saw this when it first came out in theaters. i must admit, i was not very impressed with it then. the style of the movie is mostly cg effects, kind of like 'sky captain and the world of tomorrow', its very fuzzy and out of focus.
the story itself is fairly bland. its a sci fi futuristic fanasy story about a bad girl with a gun who must get a package and keep it safe as everyone around her is trying to take it from her.
i could see what it was trying to do, but it was obvious that it needed a ton more money to pull it off. but then i watched 'eaon flux'. at which point i realized that even with a lot of money, this genre kinda sucks.
one think i must admit though- after watching it again it got a lot better. the action was better than i remembered it being, and there were some really cool scenes that gave it a very unique feel.
i guess i would change its rating from 'uggh', to 'not bad'. take that for what its worth.

legend

a couple nights ago the guys and i, at rexs request, rented the movie 'legend'. its a ridley scott film starring tom cruise, tim curry, and that one girl from ferris beuller. i remember seeing small bits and pieces of the movie on cable in the past, but rex was adamant that we needed to watch it. i wasnt very excited for it, i figured it was going to be another clunker like ive been suckered into before.

jeffry lee and i went to go get it anyway and we watched it when rex arrived. and to be totally honest with you, i was quite impressed! its very fantasy-like, kind of along the lines of labyrinth, except with out the muppets. the premise is that there are two unicorns alive and they are the most magical beings in the world. if they die then the evil will defeat the good. tim curry as the bad guy with ridiculously large horns, intends to do just that. as he does that he also kidnaps the princess and forces her to marry him. cruise, the love interest, doesnt like that idea, so he goes off to save her and the unicorns. cheesy, i know, but the visuals are just amazing.

if you are even a little bit familiar with any of ridley scotts work, then you know that he has a penchant for having stuff falling in the air around his characters, often in slow motion. in gladiator it was sand and ash, black hawk down it was debris, kingdom of heaven it was sand and fire. well, it would seem that this is the movie where he was able to hown that skill. about 90% of the movie has stuff falling around in the air! he even gets creative- he uses snow, leaves, dandelion seed, flower pedals, and even bubbles! i wasnt even annoyed, i was impressed! though he has these signature flourishes, i must admit it looked amazing! the costumes and makeup looked perfectly believable.

the problem was the story. it flowed well, each step was a (kind of) logical one, but the editing and cutting were choppy and hard to follow. it was hard at times to understand what was going on. we watched 'the directors cut', but rex had seen another version and told us some of the stuff that was in it, and it sounded like some of the things this one would have benefited from. over all, a decent story thats lovely to look at.

gleaming the cube

have you ever heard of this movie? its a classic (ie terrible) 80s movie about skateboarding that stars christian slater. in junior high i had a friend, david carrol, who was obsessed with this movie. he was kind of a skater-wannabe, so it made sense. i just never got around to watching it and attempting to shair in his love for this movie.

well, this morning i had nothing to do, so i was surfing around on my dads 'on demand' cable thingy. i happened to notice this movie in the free section, and figured out of respect of david, and a never fulfilled curiosity, i should watch it.
surprise! turns out, its pretty lame. slater plays a kid whose brother is killed but the guys responsible for it make it look like a suicide. slater takes it upon himself to get to the bottom of it. there are many moments along the way where he must spend some time in self reflection, which of course is shown though 'cool' skateboarding tricks and campy electric guitar riffs. in a ridiculous turn of events it turns out that it is a group of vietnamese arms dealers who are responsible, and slater ends up saving the day single handedly. oh, and he gets the girl. and skates a lot. i hoping it was a lot cooler at the time, otherwise david had a really bad taste in movies...

thank you, come again

as movie tie-ins, there are some seven-11s around the country that have changed their sign and decor to mirror that of the simpsons 'kwik-e-mart'. along with that, they are selling funny product tie-ins as well- you can get a box of krusty-Os cereal, a six pack of buzz cola, and a squishee!

there arent any around stores with the sign change around here, but rex and i found one with the novelty simpsons products! so today we went there and some up. and we both had an orange squishee- resulting in an orange tongue. got to love that!

children of men

just watched this one last night. it was good, but im not entirely sure what all the hype was about? i remember when this one first came out in the theater and all the critics were clamoring and saying how amazing it was, but i guess i just dont see it. dont get me wrong, i thought it was good, but thats about it.

the concept was quite interesting: the idea that there hasnt been a child born anywhere in the world for almost twenty years is a great premise. then, miraculously they find a woman who is pregnant, and they must keep here away from the government for some reason. this is the part where the story falls apart, i think. the basic setup is filled with great conflicts and studies of human nature in the face of realizing the end of our species is in site. but... for some reason the story seems to focus more on immigration and the legalization of drugs. what? where does that fit in? you know, im not sure. it seems like there is an opportunity missed here. the story is too sidetracked to really deal with the powerful impact this situation would have on a society, let alone its individuals.

that being said, the cinematography and camera moves are truly something to behold. some directors like quick editing and split second cuts in their films, while others like to have long takes that create a mood. well, this movie takes the idea of a long take to the extreme. there are many times where the camera will continue rolling, uncut, for three or four minutes. sure, thats not groundbreaking or anything, until you realize this: all the long shots take place during the action sequences! there are hundreds of extras, tons of explosions and effects, along with the main actors who must all do their job perfectly, or else the whole long and expensive shot would have to be redone. talk about pressure!

the movie itself was kind of a miss in my opinion, but its almost worth watching for the uncut action scenes alone.

transformers

tuesday night i went with all the guys to go and see transformers. we have been pumped about this one for quite a few months now, so we were quite excited. i went in expecting a dumb movie, but a good dumb movie. fortunately, i wasnt disappointed! when you think about it, really, as long as they stick to the basic premise, the cant really go wrong: giant robots fighting. whats not to love?

the whole movie had that good old fashioned epic feel to it, a grand story of good verses evil with the main character mostly just getting in the way until he has the courage to stand up and fight along side the warriors. the story line is a bit cheesy, but i think that the film makers used that to their advantage. they took those cheesy elements and mixed them up a bit and had some fun with those standard elements. the acting was better than i would have thought (well, except for the austrailan girl- she totally sucked!), and im really taking a shining to that shia labeouf guy, he was perfect for this role.

oh, and the robots? awesome!!! the effects were so flawless that there was almost no point in the movie where i thought 'ok, that looks fake'. the best job they did was with bumblebee. they gave him such a cool personality, with out a voice even, that you couldnt help but love him! the other robots had great personalities too, well, except for jazz. he was such a lame stereotype that i just rolled my eyes ('oh, the black guy who likes to break dance, isnt that clever?').

the movie is very fun and a frenzy of cool effects. i left the theater very satisfied. now i must go, because i want to head back to see it again!!!

the simpsons

im not really very excited for the movie, but the in-theater advertising is totally awesome!

a hostile hostel

over the past week or so there has been a bit of a 'situation' going on over at my favorite online movie critic's page(s). its been very interesting, and also a bit humorous too.

here is the situation: david poland, the movie critic, got a bootleg copy of the movie 'hostel 2'. he said he would turn it into the authorities (which i assume he did), but on a whim he watched parts of it first. he was repulsed, and said so on his website here (warning: he gives spoilers and some rather graphic descriptions of scenes from the movie). he speaks about the film and how disgusting it is. he speaks of the movie and questions how something so "disgusting, degrading, misogynistic, [and] soulless" could have been released by a studio. he goes on to question those who greenlit it and financed it, he then asks what the director/writer, eli roth, was thinking and how he could justify the exploitation of the movie.

then, eli roth responds to polands accusations during an interview on 'attack of the show' (if you would like to see it, go to this site, then type 'eli roth' in the search bar, and its called 'the loop one on one: eli roth'). he claims that 'hostel 2' is a movie about female empowerment and is packed with political and social commentary. he goes on to call out poland and demand that his journalistic credentials be stripped away.

david then responds on his website here, and there is a flood of comments posted after his response. much of the reactions and discussion is actually quite intellectual- it rarely falls into the standard 'you suck!' internet debate one would find on most sites.

i have no interest in seeing the film (before or after all this went down), but it has been very interesting to follow the feud and resulting discourse. if you have any interest, the links above could provide you some thought-provoking conversations.

Pirates of the carribean: at world's end

what is everyones deal? almost every review ive read for this movie talks about how its too long, nonsensical, all over the place, and just plain bad. i dont get it. it sounds like a lot of people just want to complain about something, and so they decided to complain about this.

maybe they are right. but my approach to this series, ever since the first one, has always been just a willingness to go for the ride and not worry about it too much. i dont always take this approach, but i figured i was in good hands with johnny depp, so i didnt give it a second thought. the first one was a big dumb fun ride. it seemed that most people agreed. the second one was just a bigger dumber funner ride. it seemed that most people did not agree. and now this third one is just more of the same mindless fun, and its got people in an uproar! dude, just turn off you brain and enjoy!

the one complaint that i cannot understand at all is this: 'its too long!' what?!? you just paid between six and ten dollars to be entertained, and now you are going to complain that there was too much entertainment? i know there is something to be said for pacing and structure of storytelling, but ive always been of the mind that the longer time i can spend with these characters, the better. thats one of the reasons ive always liked kevin costners films- we always get to spend a lot of time with them! if its complaining because they cant sit still for that long, then thats even worse! grow up and get an attention span! or, just leave. see? an easy solution.

ok, enough ranting. i liked the movie, and hope they make more. the end.

ring tones

i dont know if youve ever seen the movie 'crank', but its really cool. i wrote about it when i saw it in the fall. the idea is there is a guy who has been given a poison that will kill him his his adrenaline goes down. crazy setup, crazier movie. but one of the really memorable and cool things in the movie is the ring tone of the main character. the whole movie feels like a drug trip, and the ring tone has that feeling as well.

my good buddy rex happened to find that ring tone on line. i have no idea where. but over the weekend he was kind enough to share it with me, and now it is my main ring tone. and it rocks!

spiderman 3

the first big movie of the summer finally came. i went to a midnight showing (against my better judgement) and really enjoyed it. the only problem is that it becomes less enjoyable the more i think about it. and now, after a second viewing, i have become even less fond of it.
as a comic book nerd growing up i always longed for movies about the heroes i loved on the big screen. ive gotten to see many of those dreams fulfilled- through x-men, batman, blade, and even hellboy. now, i must admit, ive never really cared for spiderman. he just never grabbed my imagination. comics aside, his movie adventures have often found me cheering. the first spiderman movie was a lot of fun and a joy to see the cool effects of spidey swinging around the city. the second spiderman was infinately better, it had a good villian, a great story, and all the fun and adventure i could have asked for. i would say it is one of the best comic book movies i have ever seen. needless to say my expectations were quite high for this latest outing. the previews looked great, and venom is definitely the best spiderman bad guy out there.
unfortunately the movie doesnt live up to the standard set by the second one. the problem is one that plagued another superhero '3' movie- x-men: the last stand. its got too much going on. i dont know why they thought they needed three bad guys, two love interests, and a total reworking of stuff they already covered in the first one. it just ends up being overkill. i can understand the culmination of harry's story, its something that has been building since the first movie, but the other two bad guys are contrived and poorly executed. who thought it would be a good idea to totally rewrite the murder of uncle ben? by doing this it totally throws out the whole reason peter parker become spiderman in the first place. what ends up happening to sandman? why does harry flip his alligance so quickly- and so often? why introduce a new love interest for peter, hes having a hard enough time trying to make it work with mj as it is. and whats with the black goo from space? no attempt is ever made to explain it. we just have to accept it and move on because thats obviously what the writers did.
even with all those questions though, it is still a fun movie and is quite entertaining. it has its flaws, but the action and effects are good at distracting attention away from them. at least for a while. but eventually even all that shiny stuff cant keep you from realizing its a bit of a dissapointment.

300

its been called a 'video game movie', it has been passed of as 'all flash, no substance', it has even had some critics questioning the role of special effects in film making. im not sure any of those titles fit.
i really enjoyed this film. it is based on a comic book written and illustrated by frank miller, of 'sin city' fame. my earliest memories of this title was when it was first released. i frequented comic book shops at the time, and would often receive free 'goodies' in my bag of purchased comics. these goodies were always marketing material in the form of cards, postcards, or fliers. one time i got bookmark that caught my eye- it was all black, but had a red spear and some splattered blood in the background. over the top it simply said '300'. i wasnt sure what it was but it peaked my interest. i liked the image so much that i still use said bookmark today.
that little subliminal marketing ploy worked on me. i never did read the comic book, but when i heard of the 300 movie i was hooked even before seeing a single frame. once i did see the preview i was totally in, not just from the visuals, but also from the nine inch nails song playing in the background!
fast forward to now. ive seen the film 3 times now. once with matt, once with ken, and once with my dad. each viewing brings me deeper into the story. now, many have voiced the opinion that the film is shallow, one-sided, and historically inaccurate. i would agree for the most part. but my argument is this: the film pulls you in. the story of 300 men versus thousands to the death is captivating. it is shallow, but it made me think about the actual event. since seeing it i have been inspired to learn more about the battle, and in turn more about the greeks. in fact, i have enjoyed learning how israels captivity in babylon and the roman empire are both inexplicably linked to this battle.
for me, this 'video game movie' has reignited my passion for history. if only every 'shallow' movie could have such an impact.

ghost rider

i thought this one would be crap, turns out its not too bad. sure, it still kind of sucks, but at least its fun! the best part is when the old ghost rider, played by sam elliot, joins him and they both go riding off to face the bad guy, one on a flaming motorcycle, and the other on a flaming horse. the rest of the movie is just details...

smokin' aces

what a crazy movie! going in i wasnt quite sure what to expect, other than over the top. looks like i got exactly what i wanted!
the films premise is quite simple: a guy wants 'aces', a vegas-ish lounge performer, dead. a million dollars is offered, and every bounty hunter in the land sets out to get that reward. though the story is straight forward, its execution is anything but. the fast pace and quick cuts give it the feel of a high octane whiplash. the story continually jumps between bounty hunter teams, the hapless target, and the cops who are trying to make a deal.
the setup feels like the classic 'its a mad, mad, mad, mad world', or the more recent 'rat race', except substitute the broad humor of those movies and instead insert stylized action and violence.
oh, forgive me, i have gone this far without even mentioning the cast- the films best asset! the target is played with disgust and enjoyment by jeremy piven. im not very familiar with his previous work, but here he krackles. the cops are played by ray liotta (a favorite of the writer/director who last used him perfectly in 'narc') and ryan reynolds, who is forever in the actors hall of fame based solely on his work in 'two guys a girl and a pizza place'. and with a supporting cast that includes alicia keys, ben affleck (who actually does a good job here) and andy garcia, its hard to go wrong.
actually, let me just get down to the truth of it. this movie is worth seeing just for the two scenes of jason bateman. so funny, it will blow your mind.

little miss sunshine

what a piece of crap. who ever did the marketing for this movie is a really good liar. they billed it as 'the funniest comedy of the year!' i would dispute the idea of this being a comedy at all.
i started the movie expecting an unusual querky light hearted drama. boy was i wrong. this movie is bland, boring, and depressing. if you are unfamiliar with the film, let me give you the character rundown: the dad- a motivational speaker who fails at motivating. the mom- well, shes actually kind of normal. the grandfather- a drug addict who during the course of the movie overdoses. the uncle- a gay professor who is in a mental ward for attempted suicide. the son- a silent depressed kid who idolizes nietche's 'everything is meaningless' philosophy. the daughter- a girl obsessed with getting approval, enters a beauty contest and performs a strip tease as her 'talent'. maybe im wrong, but none of these characters are funny. the situations they get in are not funny either. i felt sad for them more than anything else. each of them face a crumbling experience over the course of the film, but i guess the moral of the story is that family conquers all. or something. i dont know, it just felt painful and depressed for each of the characters. maybe i would have had a different opinion about the film if i had been told that it is a messed up drama about obsession and its destructive effects. i dont know. all i do know is that i did not like it at all.
i have no idea why it has become such an awards darling. obviously i am in the minority here. can anyone who has seen it explain what is so good about it?

pans labyrinth

i had the opportunity to see this film last weekend. its not in a really wide release yet, but we got lucky enough to get it here a bit early. if you are unfamiliar with the film (as i am finding most people are), let me give you a brief introduction to it. its a film by guillermo del toro, who also directed blade 2 and hellboy- both of which are favorites of mine. going in to 'pans' i didnt know all that much about it, but i knew that if del toro was directing i would love it.
the film is a mix between a brutal war horror story, and an enchanting fairytale. a strange combination, to be sure. its the story of a young girl who is transplanted with her mother to live with her stepfather on the front line of the guerrilla warfare after the spanish civil war. her father in law must stop the insurgents by any means necessary. along the way the young girl happens upon a few fairytale creatures and set off to find her destiny.
a little strange, but the execution is what gives it so much power. the stepfather is a monstrous brute when dealing with the enemy. some of his scenes are very hard to watch. there is definitely a reason the film is rated 'r'. the other aspect of the film is the amazing wonder and beauty that is displayed in the fairytale aspect of the film. its not all cut and dry though. some of the real world stuff is touching, and some of the fairytale stuff is quite horrific. to be honest, there is a scene where the girl meets a creature with eyes in his hands, and it is one of the most terrifying things i have ever seen in a movie! i was panting to catch my breath when the encounter was over.
it was moving, it was shocking, yet, it was beautiful. definitely the best movie i have seen in years.

apocalypto

im not entirely sure what all the fuss was about. when this movie first came out all the critics were going nuts about how violent this film is. last week i saw it, and i dont know what everyone is so frantic about. is there gore? yes. is it a bit over the top? sure. but seriously, its rated 'R' and its by mel gibson- havent you ever seen braveheart? its gory, now get over it.
this movie was a good surprise. i wasnt sure what to expect, other than the good storytelling weve come to expect from this director. i went and saw it with my brother-in-law and dad, both of whom were a bit skeptical about the subtitle thing. but all three of us were quite impressed with the film. it has moments of humor and horror, but at its core it is a chase movie about a man trying to get back to his wife and kids. the action is top notch, the pacing is fast and exciting, and the story is compelling. i have never seen a movie set in the mayan culture before, so it was very interesting to see someones take on what it may have been like.
some of the themes in the film were actually a bit surprising. i would not have expected this director to push the topic of environmentalism and the importance of finding balance with nature. certainly a position that gives me greater respect for him and his motives with this film.
and surprisingly, after the movie my dad said that the subtitles actually added alot to the films realism and power. sometimes dad still has a way of surprising even me...