nightmare before christmas

saturday i went with a group of people to go and see the rerelease of nightmare before christmas, this time its in 3d! ive been looking forward to this ever since i first heard that it was coming out.
i have seen the movie many many times, and have most of the music from it lodged permenantly into my memory (i have been known to periodically break into 'this is holloween' singing). i actually remember going to see this one when it first came out, back in 93. if you havent seen it yet, you really should. the story is simple, but well done. it goes like this: there are towns based on each of the holidays (easter town, thanksgiving town, etc.) and the leader of holloween town stumbles into christmas town and decides that he is going to bring christmas to holloween town. needless to say, trouble ensues. the story is well told, the visuals are amazing, but the real show here are the songs! all written and composed by danny elfman (he did the batman movie theme, and the simpsons theme).
the movie by itself looks amazing, but the 3d effect makes it even more impressive! the 3d stuff is really well done and makes the movie even more fun- when jack explores christmas town, when he is being shot at in his sleigh, and other scenes have an incredible 'wow' factor. the fact that the movie is only 76 minutes long actually works quite well in this situation- much longer and you would have a big headache from the 3d effect on your eyes. the film is only availible in limited release because its only in theaters that have 3d projectors. but if you get the chance to see it, go for it! it is a unique and amazing experience!

in theaters now

i havent really been to the movie theater in a while, but id really like to go soon. there are quite a few new movies out that id love to see. im sure i wont get to all of them before they leave the multiplexes, but i hope to catch at least one or two. in no particular order:

the departed- ive seen martin scorsese's last few films and ive been quite disappointed (gangs of new york, aviator) and ive begun to think that he has lost his eye for telling a good story, but i keep hearing such good things...

the illusionist- you have to love ed norton, and the movie just looks mysterious and interesting. oh, and jessica biel is super hot.

the guardian- its got ashton kutcher in it, which is a big turn off, but its also got kevin costner, and ive loved every movie ive seen him in (yes, that includes waterworld and the postman).

one night with the king- i dont know very much about this movie, but what i do know is that its a big budget account of the story of esther. sounds like its at least worth a look.

nightmare before christmas 3d- this one i will definately see in the theaters- many times! this has got to be one of my all-time favorite movies, i can sing along with every single song (ok, so maybe i shouldnt watch this one in public...)

the prestige- the commercials for it look great, and the talent involved is unbeatable. the director did batman begins and momento. now thats a resume you can trust! also, who doesnt love a good old fashioned twisty and turny movie with magic and cool actors? im in.

let me know which, if any, of these might be worth my hard earned money...

horror movies

the other night i watched a movie called 'wolf creek'. if you are unfamiliar with it, its an australian horror film that came out a year or two ago. its about a few college kids who decide to take a road trip through australia. it all starts well and good, of course, but then their car dies and they rely on the kindness of a stranger to help fix it. only the stranger isnt too kind. it soon turns into a blood-and-guts free for all until the bad guy kills almost all of them.
this plot and style seem to be the latest style of choice for horror movies, and i just want to say that i dont particularly care for it. im not sure exactly when this gorefest became the new standard. i would guess around the time of 'saw'. before this, the popular style was remakes of japan horror movies that always involved a psycho child (usually a girl with black hair in her face) which is best exemplified in 'the ring', and 'the grudge'. but the new style seems to be more torture horror. the scares dont really come from a place of fear anymore, rather, it seems that the scare comes from disgust and uncomfortable situations. instead of the bad guy chasing the good guys, its a bad guy inflicting the most gruesome pain the screenwriter can think up. thats not horror, thats just gore porno.
the problem is, none of these movies are actually scary. they are creepy and unsettling, but they are not scary. i guess i just prefer scares over gross-outs.
maybe its just me. a lot of people seem to like these movies, so maybe i just dont get it. i did really like the movie 'saw', but maybe thats just because it was the first one to really dig into that style, and all the rest have just been returning (unsuccessfully) to that idea.

crank

one of the newest movie ive seen in the theaters was the movie 'crank'. its been a while since i saw it, but then again its been a while since i have posted...
when i saw the commercials for it i saw that it had jason statham in it. i didnt need to see or hear anything else about the movie, i was already sold! he is one actor who i really love watching. he has a strange charisma about him that i really dig (i would say he has the same draw for me that the Rock does).
i totally loved the transporter movies. the first one is a classic- the action starts out unbelievable, and then gets crazier as the movie progresses until it get to the point of cartoony silliness. the second one isnt quite as good, but the action is still quite cool. when i saw the previews for crank i could tell right away that this one was going to be just as ridiculous. and it was. times ten!
the movie is pretty much the unrated version of the transporter movies. the action is ramped up, the swearing is ramped up, and the sex is ramped up. but what makes it so great is the fact that it revels in its absurdity. its so over the top that it actually turns into humor. ive never laughed so hard during an action movie! heres the set up: hes been injected with a poison that will kill him if his adrenaline falls. thats it. pretty much the movie 'speed' as speed! though out the movie he does hilariously crazy things to keep his adrenaline pumping. everything from pounding down the red bull, to shouting out racial slurs in a room full of black people just so they will fight him. i really enjoyed the movie, complete with an outlandishly unbelievable ending. definitely one that i will be buying- i cant even imagine the crazy deleted scenes that will be on the dvd!

too much free time...

its summer time, and i have a lot of free time on my hands. i could use that time productively, but i usually just end up waisting it on watching movies. so, needless to say, ive seen many over the past month and a half. ive been revisiting a few old ones that i own, and ive been watching some that i skipped when they first came out. (it also helps that i am getting free encore channels on my dish for the next couple months...)
just for fun ive been keeping a list of what ive seen since school got out. i figured id put the list up here with a very basic rating after each. here is the scale(along with occasional comments): 1- sucked. 2- not that good. 3- average. 4- better than expected. 5- loved it!. also, there are some movies that i have already reviewed, so ill link to those as well. ok, here goes:

x2: x men united: 5
pirates of the carribean: 5
poolhall junkies: 5 this movie rules!
spiderman 2: 4
blade: 3
blade 2: 5
blade trinity: 2
league of extrordinary gentlemen: 3 it gets worse with each viewing...
star wars 3: revenge of the sith: 4
nacho libre: 3 funny, but not as funny as i hoped
kiss kiss bang bang: 5 wow, i didnt expect much, and was blown away at how funny this movie really is!
pulp fiction: 4
cars: 4
16 blocks: 3 good, but forgettable
night watch: 2 it looks great, but it makes absolutely no sense...
stay: 3 i wanted to like it, but i just wasnt drawn in
borne supremecy: 4
green street hooligans: 4 a cool look at sports fanaticism and the need to belong
kindom of heaven (directors cut): 5 a million times better than the theatrical release, its almost a completely different movie.
undercover brother: 4
sin city: 3
valiant: 2
x3: last stand: 3
superman returns: 3
ali g indahouse: 2 stupid-funny that never actually goes past the stupid to be funny
rounders: 4
sexy beast: 3
princess diaries 2: 2 i had a lot of time on my hands...
christman with the kranks: 2 had even more time...
out of sight: 5 surpisingly great! hadnt ever seen it before and was really impressed
waterworld: 5 i love anything costner is in
the aviator: 3 kinda interesting, but mostly boring
white chicks: 4 i wanted to hate this one, but actually found my self laughing. alot.
bewitched: 3 will farrell is funny in it.
mindhunters: 4 its a dumb scary movie, but i was drawn in
two brothers: 3 cute and fun
superman 3: 3 really stupid and cheesy, but thats what made it fun
field of dreams: 5 makes me cry like a little girl
michael: 2
eternal sunshine of the spotless mind: 4 i think i will like it more on repeat viewings
chopper: 3
a lot like love: 1
p.s.: 2
brave new world: 2
daltry calhoun: 3
stealth: 3 not as bad as i had expected. oh, and jessica biel is super hot
dark water: 2
pirates of the caribean: dead mans chest: 5 totally awesome
jury duty: 3 i know its pauly shore, but i still like him
sky high: 4
psycho (remake): 3
good will hunting: 4
pleasantville: 2 for some reason it gave me a propaganda-y vibe
nixon: 2

superman returns

i really like brian singer. he directed many good movies. the usual suspects is one of the best murder/mysteries i've seen in the past 15 years. he really did a great job of translating xmen to the screen, and he then hit it out of the park in xmen 2. and now this.
i didn't quite know what to expect. i have never really much cared for superman as a character, so i wasn't foaming at the mouth with excitement for this movie or anything, but i was looking forward to it.
boy, was i disappointed. the basic premise is this: superman leaves for five years and then returns. where did he go? the movie doesn't really explain that well. why was he gone so long? no answer. do we at least get to see some of the cool stuff he did out in space during that time? nope. when he does return, no one is that surprised. he comes to save an airplane from crashing. the people inside the plane see him out the window and just stare blankly. no excitement, no enthusiasm, no joy that their hero has returned. and that is exactly what is wrong with this movie. its filled with alot of blank stares, bland expressions, stiff acting, and basic dialog. and seriously, do we need to rely on the same old cliche of superman and kryponite? hasn't that been done in every other single superman movie ever made? why do we have to keep going back to that dried up well?
there were some good ideas that could have been developed. the movie briefly covers the themes of adoption, fatherhood, responsibility, moving on, and maturity. each of which could have been further explored, but instead they decided to make lex luther an evil real estate salesman. gee, creative...
sure, the visual effects are great, the flying scenes looked great, the bullet in the eye thing was cool, but over all i was not expecting much, but was still disappointed.

cars

how do these guys do it? those guys at pixar just keep making great movies! its almost like they keep getting better. toy story was great, but the second one was better. bugs life was good, but monsters inc was better. all of those were good, but finding nemo was better. incredibles was really good, but i didnt think it was as good as nemo. but this latest one, cars, is totally awesome! now, i must confess, i am not a car guy at all (which will come as a suprise to none), but this one was alot of fun. the story was strong, the characters were pitch-perfect, and the visuals were astonishing! some of the jokes were really creative, i liked the over-the-top modified cars that forced lightning to get lost in the first place. my friends and i constantly mock those cars, so it was kind of fun to see them shown as the bad guys.
my only complaint would be the cheesy song montage where the singer keeps complaining about how 'life was bettter in the 50s' and stuff. sure, we know, things were different back then, but i kind of like the way things are now, thanks.
im just impressed that these guys can make movies that kids like, and adults willingly go see too. well done.

x3: the last stand

not very often do i say something like this, but in this situation its true: this movie has too much action. what?!? crazy talk, i know. but true. the first xmen movie was good, too much origin and set up, but what do you expect from a first movie? the second one, on the other hand, was excellent, it followed through on all the potential laid out in the first one. each of those movies had some really great ideas and conflicts that were fleshed out very well. when charles and magneto confronted each other you could really understand the different opinions and the weight of what needed to be done. there was action, but it was all to serve the story and its characters.
the problem with this third movie is that the action feels like it happens so that there can be action in it. the story line is interesting, but it never bothers to dig deeper and try to understand the characters and the choices they make. we never really feel the impact of the events because we havent taken any time to understand what the characters are thinking or feeling.
also, this movie is just plain too crowded! there are far too many characters to really give them enough time to tell there story. there are a couple times where a character dies and its almost hard to care because we dont have any connection with them in this movie. we are introduced to several new ones this time around, but we are not given much time to spend with them and care about what they are going through. oh, and what ever happened to nightcrawler?!? there is enough story here to fill three or four movies, but instead they jam pack it all in and only cover the highlights. the development in the story of mystiques relationship with magneto alone could have been an interesting movie. the relationship and decisions made between rogue and iceman could have been a movie. angel's relationship with his father and what comes of it could have been a movie. like i said, there could have been three or four movies made out of all the parts of this one, but instead all we get are the clift notes version of each.
dont get me wrong though, its definitely worth seeing: the story was good, the action was done well, i just wish i had more time with the characters along the way.

blade trilogy

for some reason i cant remember i decided to watch the blade trilogy. i did it a bit out of order though, i started with the second one, then third, and finally the first one. i like the series, so it was kind of cool to watch them all with in the same same day or two. here are a few of my thoughts:
Blade- when i first saw this in college i remember thinking how awesome this movie was and how amazing the action was! its strange what a few years can do to your perspective... this is one of those movies that falls victim to the matrix 'shift' i wrote about last post. the action was fast paced and exciting, except after the matrix it seems generic and a little lame. the 'blood bath' club scene at the beginning, which i have always looked back at as one of the coolest scenes in any vampire movie, even looks cheesy. the bad guy, deacon frost (stephen dorff) comes off as a total puff. i still enjoyed the movie, but it is not nearly as good as i always thought it was. oh well.

Blade II- the first time i saw this was in the theater. i fell asleep (granted i saw it on a weeknight at 11:00pm after a long day of work). it wasnt until it came out on video that i gave it another look. and wow, im glad i did! this is, in my opinion, the best of the three by far!!! the whole attitude and atmosphere of the first one was different- this was an action horror movie, not just an action movie. the unreal setting (which many people dont like) allows the film to go darker and deeper into the vampire culture. and those new creaures with their jaw-fangs still freak me out!!! the effects are better, the action is very exaggerated and over the top, but in a way that is believable within the films unreal context. the aspect of blade having to team up with the vampires and form a group of mercenaries on the hunt gives it a kind of uneasy 'seven samurai' feel to it. also, the way the bad guy effects are done, they are very off handed and little attention is paid to them- which makes them more believable and almost scarier. the director went on to do 'hellboy' which is one of my favorites! i just really loved rewatching this film. to be honest, i watched this one twice in a row, once just watching, and the second time with the director commentary, and i look forward to watching it again soon to hear the other commentary on the disk! i must say, if you havent seen blade II you are really missing out!
Blade Trinity- crap. i really wanted to like this one, its got ryan reynolds in it, whom i still totally love from 'two guys and a girl' as berg, and its got the hottest chick on earth: jessica biel. so, its got a lot going for it, but for some reason it just plain sucks. this is the 'batman and robin' of the blade series. i dont know what went wrong, maybe it was the first time director (who actually wrote all three films), or maybe it was the complete change of direction from action to action/comedy that brought it down. i dont know. one of its problems is that its on about the same level as 'alien vs. predator'. nothing creative, nothing inspired. i mean, the movie starts out with guys in space suits finding a hidden mystery in an ancient pyramid- how cheesy and generic can you get?!? all that being said, i would actually love to see a 'nightstalkers' movie with reynolds and biel. that would be cool. just dont let this guy direct it...

shifts

though out the past there have been huge shifts and changes in the movie business. these changes altar our perspective on the films we see. something can come up in a particular movie and every movie after it is no longer the same. i guess it would be like different eras in film. for example: when 'jaws' came around, the business changed. suddenly there were movies that could become "blockbusters". there have been other such important changes in the past. here are a couple more, in my life, that i noticed:
jurassic park- every movie that came before it was now outdated, and every movie after had to reach a certain bar of special effects.
matrix- every action movie before suddenly looked boring and simple. no longer were we interested in segal/van damme style action. action films reached a new standard.
its like you can watch a movie and notice 'oh, this is pre-matrix, im sure it was cool then, but now it looks cheesy'. for example- mortal combat had some cool action in it (i thought so at least), but now the action is laughable.

zathura

i wanted to like this one, so im sure i am a bit bias, but i actually liked it more than i thought i would. i am a fan of chris van allsburg, the writer. when i was in elementary school he came to the local book store to read a book to everyone and i was able to go and meet him. it was really cool. his books are actually one of the reasons that i gained an interest in art, and eventually went to college for art.
he wrote the books that jumanji and polar express are based on, as well as the basis for the is movie (which is a sequel of sorts to jumanji). i havent seen jumanji in a very long time, but i remember liking it a bit, and i havent yet seen polar express, but i really thought zathura was very good! the directing, by jon favrou, was really great. the pace allowed the story to move and keep our interest. also, the mood of the film was very playful and upbeat. even when these horrible things were happening it was obvious that nothing was going to happen to the boys, and instead you could just go along for the ride! i think it got unfairly categoried as 'just' a family film (which typically means that twentysomethings wont really care for it) but i thought it was alot of fun, and certainly not just for kids. it has that same sort of appeal that 'elf' has (oddly enough, also directed by favrou).

red eye

i figured id give this one a shot this weekend. i know john carpenter is often hit-or-miss (and typically a miss), but with all the positive responses when it first came out, i thought i should try it out. i enjoyed it more than i thought i would. it not necessarily scary, nor does it try to be, it just accepts itself as a fairly straight ahead thriller. the twists and turns are minimal, but thats not a bad thing. there were, as with all these kinds of movies, a few points of impossibility and plot elements that just dont add up, but the chemistry of the the two leads, the spunky pace, and the fluffy popcorn feel of the movie allows one to dismiss a lot of the problems and instead just sit back and see how this one plays out.

da vinci code

i just went to go see the da vinci code. it was pretty good. actually, it did a good job of cleaning up a lot of the sloppy structural plot problems of the book. i found the book was a bit to much 'all over the place', while the movie stays focused better. much of the book i had forgotten, so it was a bit nice to have some of the revelations and twists be new again for me.
the story is well told, there is some nice moments of suspense throughout, and the best part is definitely ian mckellen! he plays an eccentric billionaire (always handy to have one of those around to save the day whenever the story gets written into a corner...) with a charming obsession with england, and a razor sharp sense of humor. i would have actually preferred to just watch him for two hours... tom hanks does a decent job, but i have one question: did he have a cold through out the whole filming or something?!? i dont know, maybe its supposed to be a different voice for the role, but it just sounds like he has a stuffy nose throughout the whole movie!
here's my main problem with the film (i guess the book too): they keep saying that this priory of sion must hide this secret that, if revealed 'will destroy the church'. but throughout the movie the priory of scion is shown as the enemy of the church. if that's the case, then why wouldn't they want to reveal it? if you have a chance to destroy an enemy, why not use it?
also, how would this information destroy the church? oooooh, jesus was married! so? that still doesn't effect the fact that he's the son of God. ooooh, mary magdalene was supposed to be the head of the church! so? this would really only tick off the catholics because of that whole pope thing.
i guess the big problem to me is this: with in the contest of the story, the claims it makes and claims as true, it doesn't make any sense. let me explain: according to the 'facts' of the story, they claim that jesus was not the son of God, but just a normal man who Constantine decided to make into a god. ok. if that's the basic idea being presented then why do we care about the rest? why would these secret societies be so obsessed with the story of jesus and his lineage if they see him as just a normal guy? why aren't there secret societies obsessed about the lineage of gary the mailman? he's just a normal guy like they claim jesus is, so why do they care? by making it such an important thing they are contradicting themselves.
when it comes down to it, 'national treasure' was a better movie.

ace ventura

even after all these years, this one still makes me pee my pants laughing! (though, honestly, the second one is funnier...)

bubble

this movie got a lot of press a little bit ago because of its unconventional release. the movie was available at the theater, on dvd, and on pay-per-view all on the same week. it is the first in a line of experimental films that will see if this is actually a viable business model for films. i dont know if it was successful or anything, i just know that i saw the movie last weekend.
my reaction to the film: wow. i dont know what it is about the film, its not like there is anything in particular that stands out or anything, but its been almost a week and it still haunts me. the story is very simple. ridiculously simple, actually. its about a young guy and an older woman who work together in a factory in the midwest. then a new woman starts working at the factory. and thats pretty much it. (well, there is a little bit more, but i dont want to ruin anything for you.) the mood of the film though, is amazing. its poorly lit, its messy, its awkward. just like real life. it hardly has the feeling of a movie, it feels more like a day in the life of these people as they go about their usual daily events. some parts are slow, sometimes the characters dont have anything interesting to say, and things dont always work out well. but its done in such convincing way that it gets to the hardest thing to do in cinema: it tells the truth.