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...

transformers

i, like all guys my age, have a special place in my heart for the transformers. i loved the old cartoon, and i really loved the toys. when it was announced a while ago that there was going to be a live action movie i wasnt sure how to react. at first i thought 'awesome! they are going to bring back all my favorites and it will be great!' but on the other hand i thought 'dude, they are totally going to suck it up and make it really stupid.'
those were the initial thoughts, and i havent much moved past them. im still not sure if its cool or a travesty. ive decided that i am going to reserve my judgement on it until i see more from it. ive seen the preview and am still withholding a decision on if i think it looks good or not. i recently found this picture of what the new optimus prime will look like. again, i just dont know how i feel about it.

the prestige

we went to go see this last weekend. i didnt quite know what to expect, other than i knew it would get a bit weird. and it was. over all i really enjoyed the movie. it went in a different direction than i thought it would. each twist and turn twisted and turned differently than i expected, so it (almost) always had me guessing as to what would come next. the narration cuts back and forth a bit (but what else would you expect from the guy behind 'momento'?) its a bit hard to talk about the film to those who havent seen it. not because it is really complicated and hard to figure out, but because i wouldnt want to give anything away! both the leads did a great job, and were very convincing as rivals trying to one-up each other. michael caine was cool in it too (i cant help but say the name of the movie in his accent every time!)
one of the coolest surprises in the film (dont worry, it doesnt give anything away) was the appearance of nikola tesla. if you dont know anything about him, then shame on you! (go check him out here) although i must admit i didnt know much about him either until joy electric wrote a song about him (which you can hear here). and what made it especially cool was that he was played by david bowie!
the movie does end on a bit of a downer, but its very thought provoking.
on a side note, its kind of fun to think about the main actors and what they have done in the past- in a strange way this movie is wolverine vs. batman!