Robyn and Todd Review Movies

Nice Guy Johnny

2011-11-06T22:19:00.001-05:00

Nice Guy Johnny
"Johnny Rizzo, is about to trade his dream job in talk radio for some snooze-ville gig that'll pay enough to please his fiancée. Enter Uncle Terry, a rascally womanizer set on turning a weekend in the Hamptons into an eye-opening fling for his nephew. Nice guy Johnny's not interested, of course, but then he meets the lovely Brooke, who challenges Johnny to make the toughest decision of is life."

3.5 Stars

How many marriages happen just because two people are in a relationship and they are at the age where they're supposed to get married? The answer may differ for everyone, but I tend to think it happens a lot more than people would like to admit. This seems to be the case for Johnny Rizzo (Matt Bush), an aspiring Sportscaster with a late night sports talk radio program in Oakland, CA. He's torn between doing what makes him happy, and pleasing a demanding fiance. On a weekend in New York to interview for an unbelievably boring job as a warehouse manager for a cardboard company, he is (to a certain degree) kidnapped by his womanizing Uncle Terry (Ed Burns) who appears to be sleeping with every unhappy housewife East of Montauk. Uncle Terry seems to say the things that most of us may dismiss as crude, but secretly admit they hold some validity. Whether he's acting off of actual perception or not, Terry makes is his mission to make Johnny truly question if he wants to get married, or if he's just doing it because everyone else expects him to. As much as Johnny tries to be dismissive of Terry's initial attempts, his resolve is slowly eroded away until he isn't sure what he really wants.

Enter Brooke (Kerry Bishe) playing the free spirited tennis instructor to the rich who clearly represents the opposite of Johnny's overbearing fiance. The story does suffer a little here because the two female characters are written, to an extent, as cliches. Johnny's fiance is selfish, materialistic, and almost completely without redeeming qualities. Brooke, on the other hand, is beautiful, fun, and much more supportive of Rizzo following his dream. But the cliches can be forgiven because of the genuine performance put forth by Bush and Bishe. I had seen Kerry in her last season stint as the lead role on Scrubs, and I really respected her comedic mettle, but Brooke seemed to be a much more complete character. One of the first problems I had with the romance was the height difference between Brooke and the diminutive Johnny, but the chemistry is so good that you tend to overlook that pretty quickly.

Now, one of the recurring themes of the movie is that Johnny is a nice guy "almost to a fault". And, while he does live up to that title for the most part, he does succumb to kissing a drunken Brooke less than 12 hours from arriving in the Hamptons. So, while he may think he has a tough decision to make and he is completely vested in his current relationship, it may be a little more talk than substance.

If the numbers are correct, this film was made on a minuscule $25k budget, and the truth is you really can't tell. Aside from the cast being relatively small, the production as a whole comes off as top notch which is probably a testament to Ed Burns' career knack for making good films on shoe string budgets. And, while it may not be garnering any awards, the message is pretty simple: Most of the world is going to hear your dreams and tell you that "you can't". So, you have to find someone who looks at you truthfully and says "of course you can". Life is long and hard, and we all want to find someone who will stand by our side while we make our way through it. But the truth is, marriage is an institution that can't be entered into lightly. Will Brooke be the girls of Johnny's dreams and will they live happily ever after? Maybe or maybe not. But what Johnny has learned is that, for him to be the best for those around him, he has to do what makes him happy.

The Parking Lot Movie

2011-05-17T23:49:00.003-04:00

The Parking Lot Movie
"Over the course of three years, filmmaker Meghan Eckman tracked the comings and goings of a solitary parking lot in Charlottesville, Va., chronicling the lives of the attendants who were working there. This inspiring documentary is the result. Hanging tough as they navigate the range of human emotion -- from hope to frustration, from a sense of limitless possibilities to stagnation -- the film's subjects embody the pursuit of the American Dream."

4 Stars

The Parking Lot Movie follows the grueling, nay, harrowing plight of a group of rag-tag societal misfits who utilize their unique positions as guardians of the Corner Parking Lot as an opportunity to sternly, but justly, maintain cosmic order in a world teetering on the edge of oblivion.

But seriously though, this movie is fucking brilliant, an all too rare tribute to the everyman. It starts out as a quirky documentary about the different personalizes and societal perceptions held by a group of guys who are all bound together one thing, their job as booth workers at a pay parking lot in Charlottesville, Virginia. But it eventually develops into a more substantial social commentary on our class system and the odd personas people can take on when they’re behind the wheel of a car. We get to see firsthand how some of us can get almost lost in a sense of entitlement just because we’re driving a vehicle with four wheels. And sometimes, unfortunately, that entitlement manifests itself into a way of treating other people that’s dismissive and, to some extent, cruel.

Now, don’t get me wrong, this movie isn’t sad on any level. Well, I take that back, maybe on some level. But the dry wit and sarcastic remarks that the attendants make about (and sometimes directly to the face of) their vehicle driving brethren are what makes the movie worth watching. They are more than forthcoming with their personal opinions about the drivers they do battle with on a daily basis. Through listening to the attendants express their own existential crises, neuroses, and even a little bit of psychoses, you quickly become a staunch admirer of the mental and moral fortitude it takes to really endure this job.

You can’t help it, some people are just worthless bags of douche and the guys that are able to put up with them are much better men than I. Go ahead, play that sad, pathetic ASPCA TV commercial with Sarah McLaughlin and the unwanted puppies as many times as you want in an effort to get me to be a better person. It probably won’t do much. But you make me watch this flick and you can be damn sure I’m gonna make the effort to be nicer to my parking lot attendant.

Leon: The Professional

2011-05-10T00:52:00.003-04:00

Leon: The Professional
"Leon is a hitman, and happy with his life. When a young girl comes home to find her family has been killed by a drug dealer, she runs to him for help. When she discovers he is a hitman, she asks him to teach her the skills to take her revenge."

3 Stars
How do you reconcile the contrast that can arise between a piece of brilliant acting and a case of underwhelming story telling? Furthermore, how do you rate a film when you have simultaneous guilt about begrudgingly overpraising a weak script in order to avoid dismissing a bevy of superb performances? Well, in the words of my father, "You just suck it up."

Leon: The Professional is a movie that begins with all the promise in the world. With virtually no exposition, the audience is thrown into the cold, calculated world of contract killing. Leon (Jean Reno) is given an order to hit a group of thieves who are just passing through NYC. We aren't told why they're bad guys, and we don't really need to know. All that matters is that there's are bounties on their heads, and the ill-fated bastards were unlucky enough to have their numbers picked by Leon. The tension created by the opening scene itself is stressful, if not almost palpable. The skill and finesse shown by Leon as he deftly picks off each unsuspecting victim is almost as eerie at it is impressive. Suffice it to say, he makes Jason Bourne and his commendable skills almost look rough and undisciplined. But, the scene also gives us a glimpse into the code that Leon lives by, "No Women. No Children." While it may seem paradoxical, this concept of "moral standards" for a contract killer is necessary for the story line because, how else is the film maker going to get the audience to pull for an amoral leading man who literally kills for a living?

Enter Mathilda (Natalie Portman) who was able to act at a level that no 13 year old girl has any business to be acting. I hurt with every one of her tears and I rejoiced with every one of her smiles. I cannot describe it, but this little girl enthralled to a degree that I found myself genuinely concerned with her safety and emotional state, even though every logical part of my brain kept reminding me that it was all just "for pretends". I know she just won an Oscar for this year's Black Swan, but if I had my way, she would have placed that golden statue on her mantle 17 years earlier.

And it wasn't just the performance of Reno and Portman that carried the team. The supporting cast of Danny Aiello and Michael Badalucco was firing on all cylinders, too. But the highlight outside of the primary duo was unquestionably Gary Oldman in one of his first major Hollywood roles. Oldman plays Stansfield a corrupt, ironically drug addicted DEA agent who is the quintessential loose cannon. These are the types of villains who really get my adrenaline pumping in a movie. These kinds of characters who follow no rules and show no mercy to anyone or anything that stands in their way. You honestly do find yourself convinced that Stansfield is going to kill the 13 year old Portman in the first 15 minutes of the film, even though you're head reminds you that's not going to happen because the movie is two hours long and you may need a protagonist. There is a fine line between a crazed lunatic and psychotic villain that Oldman treads terrifically.

But, alas, the performances (as spectacular as they are) are pretty much the only thing worth praising about the film. While the direction is above average, the story just leaves so much to be desired. The back stories of Leon, Mathilda, and Stansfield are only touched upon, and I found it hard to wrap my head around all that was going without knowing what the characters motives were. The scenes involving Mathilda's "training" almost felt like an afterthought and the subtle undertones of a potential sexual relationship between Mathilda and Leon was just bizarre. While in most situations "less is more", in the particular case I felt that further developing the relationships of all the main characters could have done nothing but enhance the plot.

So, while I wanted so badly for this one to become one of my more revered films, I think it has to fall into the category of a disappointment. Don't get me wrong, I think it's definitely worth watching, but you will have to power through a couple aspects. Because the movie was shot in the early nineties, the wardrobe and hair styles reflect as such. Maybe it's just me and my snobbish ways, but I sometimes have trouble taking seriously the guy in a Miami Vice green suit and Kenny G hair firing off rounds from an Uzi, but maybe I'm just old fashioned that way. But, if you're looking for some shoot 'em up, you're going to find it. The movie isn't gory, per se, but it is most definitely bloody, and I'm talking Tarentino bloody. There is definitely a legitimate argument that could be made implying the movie may have been somewhat diminished by getting sucked in to the explosions and car chases that seemed to permeate the 90s film landscape. So, while one of the final scenes might end (quite literally) with a bang, for me it was just a whimper.

Spread

2011-03-28T23:32:00.003-04:00

Spread
"In Los Angeles, Nikki is homeless, car-less and closing in on 30, but he's amoral, good-looking, and adept in the sack, moving from one wealthy woman of 35 or 40 to another, a kept boy-toy. His newest gig, with Samantha, an attorney whose house overlooks L.A., is sweet, although it's unclear how long she'll put up with him. Then Nikki meets Heather, a waitress. Is the player being played, or might this be love? What will Nikki discover?"

3.5 Stars

Nikki (Ashton Kutcher) is living the kind of lifestyle that any man in his 20s would epitomize, any man in his 30s would question, and any man in his 40s would pity. He spends his days lounging by the pool, his nights partying at posh houses in the Hollywood Hills, and his mornings waking up next to beautiful women. An yet he is, by most definitions, a gigolo. He may not actually receive money for the sex and companionship he provides, but the fact that he is jobless and homeless means that he needs these women just as much (if not more so) than they need him.

When we first meet Nikki, he seems to be at the top of his game. The insight into the gambits he uses for wooing a woman are conveyed through voice over through out the first 20 minutes or so of the film, but they are not necessarily ground breaking. Any guy or girl who has even a relative amount of relationship experience would realize that he is simply "playing the game." Which is why I found it so hard to believe that Samantha (Anne Heche) would be the kind of person to fall for it. Here is a woman in her late 30s who is single, independent, drives a Mercedes, and owns a $5 million dollar cliff side home in Los Angeles. I started to ask myself, how am I to believe that a woman like this would fall so easily into the sophomoric game of smoke and mirrors that is this guy's bread and butter? And then, well, it dawned on me. Maybe she wanted to. The writer does an adequate job of hinting at the personal issues that have brought Nikki and Samantha to their respective points in their lives, and why they may just be exactly what each other needs at the moment, even if it's far from healthy.

Most importantly, the film does a good job of avoiding any kind of glorification of Nikki's life. While he is constantly surrounded by beauty and opulence, there are subtle but persistent feelings of loneliness and dissatisfaction. While any guy would probably trade places with him for a week, I can't think of anyone that would actually want his life. He is in his prime, sure, but there doesn't seem to be a gradual decline in store for him. Instead, there is a looming feeling of a dark of a future with nothing but the hope of rock bottom to eventually and mercifully end his fall.

Enter Heather, played by a thoroughly intoxicating Margarita Levieva. Up to this point in the film, Kutcher does a decent job of playing an emotionally distant narcissist who is trying just a little too hard to make people think that he doesn't care. But when the sparks start flying between their two characters, I think that the acting gets taken to a whole new level. As much as I hate to say it, Kutcher is better when he plays a character that shows heart, and that's what finally comes out when these two characters start their relationship.

But things aren't always what they seem and the realization that Heather is living the same lifestyle as Nikki brings a whole new dynamic to the film that makes the earlier transgressions almost seem tame. These are two emotionally damaged people who are almost beyond repair and their relationship becomes, for lack of a better phrase, fucked up. The actual thought that these people are going to live happily ever after is a pipe dream and any semblance of a "Hollywood Ending" would have completely sunk the movie. Luckily, the film stays true to form and, while I may not think the conclusion was quite harsh enough, there is enough stark reality tied in to make the film worthwhile.

City Island

2011-03-14T00:19:00.002-04:00

City Island
"The Rizzos, a family who doesn't share their habits, aspirations, and careers with one another, find their delicate web of lies disturbed by the arrival of a young ex-con (Strait) brought home by Vince (Garcia), the patriarch of the family, who is a corrections officer in real life, and a hopeful actor in private."

3.5 Stars
Editor's Note: It actually took me a minute when I was tagging this film to truly decide whether or not if it fit more into the Drama or Comedy genre. In the end, I settled on Comedy, but there is a relative amount of depth to this story that shouldn't be ignored.

The Rizzos are a close-nit, fairly stereotypical Bronx family living in the New England-esque town of City Island, NY nestled at the Western end of the Long Island Sound. All of them are guilty, in one form or another, of indulging in little white lies to hide the parts of their lives that they are not quite ready to share with the rest of their family. But, while their lies does have consequences, it's hard to ignore the fact that most of them are created in an effort to protect the ones they love from the truth and maintain the familiar facades they have created for one another. The secrets cover a wide range of importance from the innocuous cigarettes Vince (Andy Garcia) and Joyce (Juliana Margulies) hide from each other, to the more significant realization that the newest inmate at the Corrections Facility Vince works at is actually his long-ago-abandoned son.

The choice of setting the story in City Island, New York (where the newcomers are referred to as "mussel-suckers" while the old blood calls themselves "clam-diggers") was a smart, albeit unutilized one. This is a community where there is only one of each type of store and homes are passed down from generation to generation. The town itself could have played a much more influential role in the definition of the characters and their history. Instead, it almost came across that this story could have been set anywhere along the New England coast. As opposed to a unique place that possesses both the serenity of a sleepy seaside town and the edge that comes from being in the Bronx.

The story itself also failed to deliver the whole way through. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the end seemed just a little too easy. The audience actually starts to buy into this family with all their flaws and real-life relatable struggles, so it really seems like a disservice when everything more or less works out in the end. But, I must admit, the last 15 minutes of the film did result in one of the better movie climaxes I've seen in a while. And there is really nothing bad that can be said about the acting. Emily Mortimer and Steven Strait more than fulfill their duties as supporting cast members, as do Ezra Miller and Andy Garcia's real-life daughter Dominik Garcia-Lorido. I've noticed Ezra Miller's talents in several other films, and apparently I'm not alone. He's a noticeable force from the beginning of the movie, but it's almost as if his part was written just to get him some screen time. So, while I'm glad to see him work, his storyline doesn't much contribute to helping move the plot along, and almost feels forced.

Regardless, this movie can really just be summed up in one word, family. They aren't perfect, in fact they're far from it. And the communication between them can only be described as slightly better than that of the United States and Russia during the Cold War. But, no matter how they show it, they love each other and will always be there for one another. The line that Andy Garcia delivers right before the credits roll is one I won't soon forget:

"Every busy city needs an island of peace, just like every busy soul needs a place of repose."

Brief Interviews with Hideous Men

2011-02-22T07:08:00.001-05:00

Brief Interviews with Hideous Men
"In the film, Sara Quinn (Julianne Nicholson) is interviewing men as part of her graduate studies. Her intellectual endeavor has emotional consequences as the men’s twisted and revealing stories are juxtaposed against the backdrop of her own experience. As she begins to listen closely to the men around her, Sara must ultimately reconcile herself to the darkness that lies below the surface of human interactions."

5 Stars

Whoa. I don't even know what to say. It's like . . . I mean it's kind of just . . . I can't even explain it . . . just, whoa. Is this film going to be of a 5 Star caliber for everyone? Absolutely not, but it damn sure is for me. Let's begin with the obvious reasons why this film is cooking with the right ingredients. John Krasinski in his directorial debut has recruited the likes of Ben Shenkman (Angels in America), Timothy Hutton (Ordinary People), Will Arnet (Arrested Development), Will Forte (SNL), Joey Slotnick (Boston Public), Dominic Cooper (Mama Mia), Christopher Meloni (Law & Order: SVU), Clarke Peters (The Wire), Denis O'Hare (True Blood), Fankie Faison (The Wire), Josh Charles (Sports Night), and Bobby Cannavale (Third Watch) into composing a film out of David Foster Wallace's short story collection of the same name. Now, I must begrudgingly admit that I have yet to pick up any of his works and experience them first hand. But, general opinion AND the fact that every few months something happens to serendipitously bring my attention to his writing must mean that he is someone I need to take note of.

The lone significant female role in this film is played by a stunning Julianne Nicholson. I don't mean "stunning" in the beautiful sense (although she is lovely), but rather in the way that she utilizes a relatively small number of lines and is able to still be the dramatic driving force behind the entire film. Now, attempting to mold a series of short stories together into a cohesive manner on screen is definitely a herculean task. And frankly it's a task that, while noble, still falls a little bit short. But man, not by much.

The film almost plays like two distinctly different Acts to me. The First Act is relatively light and seems to take on a similar tone to movies like He's Just Not That Into You and When Harry Met Sally (a personal favorite) in the sense that we are almost given a set of guidelines or insights into the workings of the male mind and its perceptions. Now, I feel like I do need to take this time to warn some ladies out there. Many of the revelations made by men in the film are things that I find to be fairly universal truths when it comes to the male psyche and behavior. However, many of these insights are, unfortunately, things of which I am not necessarily the most proud. Let's suffice to say that after watching the first half of the film, I don't think any of the ladies out there are going to be particularly fond of their male companions. And fellas, as a warning to you as well, you may want to slide over on the couch in order to be just out of arm's reach, because your girl may be overwhelmed with the uncontrollable need to punch you in the shoulder. Obviously, both sides can do as you wish, but you were forewarned. But, as a person who is perpetually interested in further exploring the human condition, I found most of the interviews in the First Act to be insightful and thoroughly entertaining. And, I would suggest that you actually watch the trailer here to get an idea of what you are in store for.

Conversely, the Second Act takes a decidedly heavier and darker tone. It begins, rather abruptly, with an extended scene featuring Frankie Faison as he, almost disdainfully, recounts the job that his father held as a bathroom attendant in a posh hotel. To be honest, I almost feel like the scene doesn't have any business being in this film, and I mean that in a respectful way. This scene is so gripping and powerful, that I almost wish it was a stand alone piece that could be examined and revered for its own brilliance. Plus, with it's glaring racial overtones, I almost found it hard to relate to the fabric of the rest of the film.

We then jump to a scene between Domini Cooper and Julianne Nicholson that is nothing short of superb. The entire scene is actually an inter cutting of three separate conversations between the characters that is paced so brilliantly, I almost found myself moving to the edge of my chair as the tension grew so tight that it became palpable. This scene is the one is most obviously added for relative shock value, but the entertainment factor alone let's us forgive the director for adding something so brash.

The last major scene occurs between John Krasinski and Julianne Nichiolson in which the audience is finally given a clearer view as to what exactly has been going on throughout the film and why the female character has been performing these interviews with "hideous men". John Krasinki actually delivers a powerful monologue that will make you completely forget that the bread and butter of his career has been portraying the affable Jim Halpert on The Office. He recounts a story that, while the "wires" of it may fray at times in the middle, he concludes with such a blindingly poignant moment that I challenge anyone not to sit back in their seat and say, damn.

So, while I can't predict the reception that each individual person may have to the film, all I can say is that this film was one I whole heartily believe is worth watching, and I hope some of you do too.

Barney's Version

2011-02-20T21:45:00.002-05:00

Barney's Version
"Take a ride through the life and memories of Barney Panofsky, a hard-drinking, cigar-smoking, foulmouthed 65-year old hockey fanatic and television producer, as he reflects on his life's successes and (numerous) gaffes and failures as the final chapters of his own existence come sharply into focus."

4.5 Stars

As the film opens, you may find yourself wondering if you have accidentally stumbled in an infomercial about DI-UH-BEET-US because, whether they meant to or not, the make up artists were able to age the initial antagonist Mark Addy into a spitting image of Wilford Brimley. Now, if you don't understand that reference, don't worry because it wasn't that funny and, I have to admit, a little obscure.

But moving on, let's talk about the movie. First and foremost it's important that you take the title of "Barney's Version" into consideration when it comes to interpreting the accuracy of the events of the film. Barney (played brilliantly in this case by Paul Giamatti) is an unreliable narrator who, although he never actually does a voice over, is giving the audience his recollection and the correlating interpretation of his life. This intriguing framing device might be most evident in the scene where we see Barney fall in love with his eventual 3rd wife while at the wedding reception to his 2nd wife. On the surface, it appears as though Barney falls in love with Miriam based on 3 simple criteria - 1) Her looks. 2) Her appreciation a good Monte Cristo cigar. 3) Her thoughtfulness to update Barney on the final score of a Stanley Cup match he was missing due to the wedding. Now, this may come off as relatively shallow and almost flippant when you consider the fact that a newly married man is pursuing another woman at his own wedding reception. But, the romantic in me likes to believe that Barney is experiencing the extremely rare (if even possible at all) Love at First Sight.

Miriam, the object of Barney's affection is played by a surprisingly powerful Rosamund Pike. I mean, let's be honest, Paul Giamatti can't seem to walk more than 10 feet without tripping over an Academy Award nomination these days. But Rosamund Pike almost gave me the feeling that she was the critically acclaimed actor instead of the relatively green performer that she actually is. And that's a conclusion I cam to in spite of the fact that I wasn't necessarily as infatuated with her as Barney was at their initial meeting. But, even though it took me a little longer, by the end of the movie I was head over heels for her.

There are a lot of other impressive performances in the film too, like that of Rachelle LeFevre and Scott Speedman, but the one I feel I must point out as being superior to all the rest is Dustin Hoffman's. He plays the boisterous, sometimes border-line inappropriate role of Barney's father Izzy to damn near perfection. Izzy is a retired New York beat cop who spent 30 years patrolling the "mean streets" and persisted in the face very thinly veiled anti-semitism by administering his own (slightly law-bending) form of justice. In spite of a hard life, he comes of as a wise, jovial man with no regrets and one I could probably listen to for hours over a glass of good bourbon.

Now, the film does come off as a little left-of-center, but I don't mean that in any sort of negative way. Nor do I mean that as a code word to imply that this is a weird, artsy movie that only a certain niche of movie-goers are going to appreciated. But rather, I guess what I mean is that there does not seem to be one particular, all-encompassing theme or direction for the film. It does jump around quite a bit through various time lines, but the action is never difficult to follow, in fact it's quite the contrary. This is a direct result of the excellent make up done to the aging characters. Make up so good, in fact, that it was nominated for an Academy Award.

But, at its very core, I feel like this film is just a portrayal of the common experience we all share of being human and trying to find our own bliss. Inherently, the mere fact that we are human means that we all have the imperfections and insecurities that have to come along with it, and Barney is no exception. He is just a decent guy trying to do the best that he can, and this is his story.

The Company Men

2011-02-13T18:44:00.001-05:00

The Company Men
"When the GTX Corporation must cut jobs to improve the company's balance sheet during the 2010 recession, thousands of employees will take the hit, like Bobby Walker (Ben Affleck). Bobby learns the real life consequences of not having a job. Not only does he see a change to his family lifestyle, and the loss of his home, but also his feelings of self-worth."

3.5 Stars

One of these days, maybe a few hundred years in the future, the history books are going to look back at this period of American history and, hopefully, they will be taken aback by the lives and work ethics our society has grown accustomed to. It would seem to me that, for most of human history, people have worked to live. But the last 75 years or so seem to exhibit a reversal of that philosophy, because people now seem to just be living to work.

From a very young age, Americans buy into the fact that they are born to pursue that elusive American Dream. That lofty ideal that if we work hard and show others that we are committed to a cause we will, in turn, be rewarded with a big house, fancy cars, and a summer home on a tropical island. Now, don't get me wrong, I like to indulge in the extravagant just as much as the next guy. Like Tommy Lee Jones begrudgingly admits at one point in the film, "I like $500 lunches and $5,000 luxury hotels." But somewhere along the way the American Dream became flawed. We essentially give our lives to our jobs in the belief that everything will pay off in the end. We can justify taking on some debt, because we have a good job and there's no reason to think we won't have it forever. Even more so, our psyches are warped enough to believe that the biggest change that may happen to our status quo is the possibility we'll get a better job with an even bigger paycheck. I mean, after all, this is America. As long as you work hard and take advantage of the opportunities that arise, you can only move up the corporate ladder, not fall down it. We did everything right. We got the college degrees they told us to get and made the sacrifices they told us to make. Now it's their turn to hold up their end of the bargain.

Well, more so than anytime in recent memory, we must face the blunt truth that nothing in the corporate world is guaranteed. While we may be doing exactly what we're supposed to do, it may not be enough. And even the most fortuitous of us can end up on the street passing out resumes and going to job interviews with anyone who will grant us an audience.

But if ever there was a time to appreciate a silver lining, it would be now. Bobby Walker (Ben Affleck) goes through the same situation that millions of American across the country have had to endure over the past few years. A massive and life altering change that leaves him contemplating not only his future, but his self worth as a provider. But a wonderful thing happens along the way, he realizes that once all the opulence and material possessions are stripped away, he is left with one important thing, his family. And, ironically enough, isn't that the reason he tried to chase the American Dream in the first place?

The Company Men presents a refreshingly accurate portrayal of the fear and angst that has become an all too common thread in the lives of people across the country. Now, I will admit that, initially, I had a hard time identifying with the characters and truly believing them as everyday corporate businessmen because I knew (in real life) they were all actors and probably had never seen the inside of a cubicle their entire professional careers. Luckily, they were able to win me over very quickly. Perhaps it was the fact that I got distracted by the mention of Mobile, AL (my hometown) as one the firm's shipping yards they had to shut down. But, more than likely, it was because everyone put forth genuine and heart felt performances.

The cast is full of great actors like Craig T. Nelson, Ben Affleck, Kevin Costner, Chris Cooper, and Tommy Lee Jones. But, to be fair, Tommy Lee Jones could act in a feature film about Depends undergarments and I would probably find it entertaining, but that's besides the point. The script is lean and mean. In his directorial debut, John Wells (of West Wing and ER prominence), has put together a story and a cast that did a sincere and just job in portraying the Great Recession in the most realistic way possible. And he has done it without mincing many words or drawing out many scenes. There are numerous plot elements that essentially happen off screen while the audience is left to assume what happened and fill in their own gaps. But the brevity is sometimes necessary to keep the characters developing and the story lines balanced. Both of which are achieved very well. So well, in fact, that the film almost takes on documentary feel (and I mean that as a compliment). But the added bonus of it being a story of fiction is that the audience is able to see the more intimate moments in the home lives of the characters and the struggles they are having to cope with after being knocked down from their lofty perches.

One criticism of the film might be that the script isn't as realistic as, well, reality. But I think that's okay. Granted, the film doesn't end in happily ever after and there are plenty of tragedies along the way, but I can see why some people may think the characters' journeys aren't as grueling as their real-life counterparts. But we have to remember that it's a movie. It's meant to be a work of fiction and, if nothing else, it's meant to put forth some semblance of hope. If it were completely true to form, then it might be too depressing to watch.

And, thankfully, the film doesn't try to do too much. It doesn't simplify things to the point where the implication is all big corporations are evil and all CEOs have made pacts with the devil. Although I'm not entirely convinced that they aren't and that they haven't. But what it does do is paint a picture of what the new normal is in America. Now, am I naive enough to think that this shake up in the American Dream will prevent us from repeating our mistakes? No. I have no doubt that people will continue to do what they can to buy the McMansions and drive the Porsches. But hopefully this movie can be an reminder of what should be important and what we really should be working for. An hour at home is worth 10 in the office. And, I can only speak for myself, but when I look back on my life, I know that I'll be remembering the times when I was surrounded by loved ones and not the times when I was surrounded by cubicle walls.

PS - I don't mean to cheapen the review in anyway here, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention the fact that Maria Bello has to be one of the sexiest 43 year olds in the world. This isn't a new revelation for me, but it is one that I felt I had to reiterate.

Blue Valentine

2011-01-19T01:26:00.002-05:00

Blue Valentine

"The film depicts a married couple, Dean Pereira (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy Heller (Michelle Williams), shifting back and forth in time between their courtship and the dissolution of their marriage several years later. Dean is a young high school dropout, working for a New York City moving company. Cindy is a medical student living with her unhappy parents and caring for her grandmother in Pennsylvania. They meet by chance and fall deeply in love in a matter of weeks. They rush into marriage after discovering Cindy is pregnant from a previous boyfriend, Bobby (Mike Vogel). The story of their courtship is inter cut with one disastrous weekend near the presumed end of their marriage. Dean is painting houses while Cindy works as a nurse and they care for their young daughter in rural Pennsylvania. In the hope of resurrecting their troubled relationship, Dean brings Cindy to a tacky romantic motel where they only fight more, and Cindy is called away in the middle of the night to work at the hospital. Dean shows up at the hospital angry, leading to a violent altercation which seems to doom their relationship and make divorce inevitable."

4.5 out of 5 stars

Now, this is what you call a rare and beautiful blend of powerful acting and inspired movie making. Blue Valentine will be one of the best movies you will see this year and, if it isn’t, please let me know what kind of stuff you’re watching because I'm going to need to accompany you to a few flicks.

This is the type of film that should garner your respect for the sheer fact that it gives you respect in return. Unlike most of your mainstream love stories that have to cater to the dumbest of movie goers, this film trusts that the viewer is smart enough to figure out some things on their own. At times, a simple look is more than enough to convey to the audience what a character would normally have to actually say out loud. And the transition between scenes is peppered with just enough subtle hints to help the audience realize what may have just happened or where the character is coming from. You really do have moments where you forget you are watching a film and, instead, feel like you are sitting in the character’s living room watching their actual lives fall apart.

Truthfully, I haven’t seen Brokeback Mountain or Shutter Island, so I may be coming late to the party on this one. But, Michelle Williams has some legit dramatic acting chops, way more than I would have initially expected. I already knew this was true of Ryan Gosling (just see Lars and the Real Girl or Half Nelson). But she has absolutely no problem going toe to toe with her formidable co-star and, at times, making him blink first.

I should also take this opportunity to forewarn all the ladies out there, who seem to be so infatuated with Mr. Gosling, about his physical appearance. The film’s framing device is a constant switch back and forth from the beginning of the couple’s relationship to (what would appear to be) the probable end. Now, the reason that this may surprise a few of you, is that the makeup artists obviously aged him a few years with the help of a receding hair line and the addition of a few extra pounds. It isn’t something so drastic that it takes you out of the movie, but his multi-toned, 80s style sunglasses in the later scenes definitely make him border on child molester status.

But back to the framing device. The director does an absolutely phenomenal job of moving back and forth between the time lines sparingly at first and then dialing up the frequency gradually as the tension escalates to a fevered pitch. By juxtaposing the time lines of these two immeasurably different points in their relationship, the director is able to give the audience a much more well-rounded and in-depth look at the characters. They, just like all of us, are flawed and somewhat damaged individuals. Sure, at the beginning of any relationship, things are wonderful and exhilarating. But what happens when we go past the point where most movies end? What happens after Richard Gere climbs up the fire escape to get Julia Roberts? What happens after Tom Hanks meets Meg Ryan at the top of the Empire State Building?

Sure, we want to hope that they lived happily ever after, but life isn't always a fairy tale. In fact, most of the time it's far from it. What this movie does is present a look at two people who found each other at a point in their lives where they each had substantial emotional emptiness that only the other person could fill. Does that connection alone create a strong enough foundation for a marriage to be built upon? Probably not. But is the relationship still an important one worth having? Absolutely. At its core, this movie is just a raw, poignant look at two people who may have been right for each other at one time, but sadly may not be right for each other for all time.

Inception

2010-08-03T22:59:00.006-04:00

Inception

"Dom Cobb is a skilled thief, the absolute best in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state, when the mind is at its most vulnerable. Cobb's rare ability has made him a coveted player in this treacherous new world of corporate espionage, but it has also made him an international fugitive and cost him everything he has ever loved. Now Cobb is being offered a chance at redemption. One last job could give him his life back but only if he can accomplish the impossible-inception. Instead of the perfect heist, Cobb and his team of specialists have to pull off the reverse: their task is not to steal an idea but to plant one. If they succeed, it could be the perfect crime. But no amount of careful planning or expertise can prepare the team for the dangerous enemy that seems to predict their every move. An enemy that only Cobb could have seen coming."

4.5 of stars

This review is probably a moot point because it seems that everyone and their mother has already seen the film, but if you haven’t, here we go. I’m not going to hop on the bandwagon quite as hard as most people (the movie already has the #3 ranking of all time on IMDb). Not to say that movie isn’t good (it most definitely is), but let’s take a minute to let the hype die down before we start throwing out Oscars.

First off, kudos to Chris Nolan as both an artist and a business man. He hasn’t directed many films, but the few that he has (Memento, The Prestige, The Dark Knight) have all been truly worthy of both their critical and financial success. That being said, this film doesn’t stray from that model. We’re heading into the 4th week of Inception dominating the Box Office and, while it may slip, the money is going to keep rolling in. The main reason for this, aside from the film being entertaining, is the subject matter . . . . dreams. If you’re a person who likes to talk or get up and go to the bathroom during the movie, then you’re going to have a hard time watching this. Every scene is important and engages the audience in such a way that makes you feel like you’ve completed a “mental marathon” by the end. But don’t let the cognitive calisthenics scare you. While the subject matter is somewhat complicated, the direction and storytelling is at such a high level that I never had to stop and ask for directions. There may be a few scant moments where you need to repeat what you just heard to yourself to make sure you comprehended it, but then you’re right back in the action. And that’s really saying something seeing as how Nolan basically built this world entirely from his own brain. There aren’t a lot of “rules” once the characters enter the dream worlds, but once they do Nolan does a masterful job of making sure everyone adheres to them.

Character-wise the cast is pretty solid. I haven’t been a Leo-hater like some people. Aside from Titanic, he has had some impressive performances from a very young age (see The Basketball Diaries and The Quick and the Dead), and his portrayal as a tortured soul in this movie really could not have been delivered much better. He is constantly haunted by the appearance of his dead wife in his dreams (played by Marion Cotillard). Aside from her sexuality that almost drips off the screen, the choice of Cotillard as his wife is somewhat ironic. Christopher Nolan claims that this is purely coincidental, but the song that is played in the movie multiple times to alert the dreamers they are about to wake up is "Je Ne Regrette Rien". What makes this ironic is that Cotillard won an Oscar two years ago by portraying Edith Piaf who was the real life singer who made the emotional song so famous. And yet another case of happenstance is the face that she beat out Ellen Page for the coveted golden statuette. Ellen Page, in fact, plays the young architect who Cobb hires to design the world for this most intricate of heists. Now, at first I wasn’t a big fan of the casting choice. I love Page in the things she’s done, but I thought I was going to have a hard time taking her seriously for 100% of the movie. Let’s be honest, her bread and butter is a dead pan delivery of lines that would make John Belushi blush. Nevertheless, she proved to be more than capable of holding her own. I’m not saying someone else couldn’t have done just as good a job, but when I heard they initially wanted Rachel McAdams or Emily Blunt I was glad to see they decided on Page. Mostly because there was no stilted love story that had to be concocted simply because you had two attractive leads. Page is cute, but her age and relative plainness let me focus more in on what was going on around them rather than having to be bothered with the possibility that Leo and Ellen might have a scene where they were knocking boots.

As is often the case, I feel this movie may have a little less edge because it came out after the Matrix. The similarities are undeniable, but are in no way strong enough to really take you out of the movie. As much as I was intrigued that the “rules” Nolan developed for the dream worlds, I was almost as impressed with the things he left out. The basic concept of sharing a dream and the machine that makes it all possible is never really addressed, and it doesn’t need to be. We’re talking about an experience that is unique for everyone, so sometimes a storyteller just has to say ‘You just have to accept this’, and we do.

My only major strike against the movie is probably the lack of character development for the supporting cast. While we are invited to delve deep into Leo’s psyche and learn about his thoughts and experiences, we barely scratch the surface of any of the other characters. I felt like some more weight could have been added to the movie if we had a vested interest in the success of all the players instead of just Leo. But, sometimes, that’s just the way it goes.

At its core, this film really just is a typical “heist movie” wrapped in a mind-blowing blanket of the subconscious world. Set aside my objections about the relevance of time in dreams and a minor plot hole towards the end, and you will have yourself a movie that you are definitely going to watch more than once . . . and probably one more time after that when you’re on ‘shrooms. But the measure of a movie really comes down to whether or not you entertained the audience for the length of time you asked for their attention. And judging by the collective “Awwwww, come on!” that was elicited by everyone in my movie theater at the very end, I think Inception did its job.

City of God

2010-07-29T00:00:00.002-04:00

City of God

"City of God is based on a true story that takes place in the 60's where in the slums of Rio De Janeiro two boys growing up in the neighborhood take on different paths in life. The story is told through eyes of Buscape, a poor young fisherman's son who dreams of becoming a photographer one day. His story narrates the violence and corruption surrounding the city and the rise and fall of one of the city's most notorious boss'. Li'l Ze. As war wages on the streets Buscape's only way out of this violent life is to expose its brutality the world through his pictures. Along the way the lives of other are put into perspective as their stories intersect with the events that take place."

5 stars

This movie has actually been sitting in my 'Coming Soon' folder for a while. The reason that I didn't want to write the review was because I was deathly afraid I wouldn't do the film justice. It's an automatic lock for my Top 10 Films of All Time list, and I'm a guy who has seen A LOT of movies, so that is saying something. Because there is no way to do it justice, I am going to stick with the theory that 'less is more', so this review will be short.

At it's very core, this movie is about the struggle between doing what is right and doing what you have to do in order to survive. From its basic premise, the story develops into one that is as beautiful emotionally as it is visually. It transitions effortlessly from scenes of sweetly tender innocence to moments of heart poundingly intense reality. The lines of right and wrong are instantly blurred in a hellish world that most of us couldn't even begin to comprehend. Add all of this to the fact that this film is based on a true story, and I find it hard to believe that anyone will walk out of the theatre without opened eyes and a dropped jaw.

As difficult as this film is to review, it's ever more difficult to categorize. After some serious thinking, this is what I have decided on. When trying to anticipate the scope and theme of this movie, imagine that the movies Snatch and Goodfellas had a baby. Then imagine that this baby grew up a hard, sobering life but was lucky enough to eventually meet a beautiful, sophisticated woman who was the result of a single drunken night of passion between The Lord of the Flies and Blood Diamond. Now, if these two star-crossed lovers (born from greatness) were to have a child themselves, City of God would be it. You don't have to understand that convoluted analogy, you just have to watch the movie.

I've Loved You So Long

2010-07-26T22:47:00.005-04:00

I've Loved You So Long

"Former medical doctor Juliette Fontaine travels to Lorraine to live on probation with her younger sister Léa and her family. The bitter, introspective and reclusive Juliette has spent her sentence without any visitors and totally forgotten by her family and now she has problems interacting with her brother-in-law Luc and her nieces. She has to visit every other week her probation officer Captain Fauré and seeks a job to rebuild her life. As days go by, Juliette gets closer to the family of her sister and befriends Luc and Léa's friends, specially Lea's colleague Michel. She slowly changes her behavior until the day Léa discovers the truth."

4.5 Stars

Well kids, it looks like you’re going to have to rely on my review for this movie because Robyn decided to read a synopsis before watching it. I usually do the same thing, but the synopsis she read unfortunately gave away an integral plot point that pretty much ruined the whole thing for her.

That being said, I would highly recommend that you avoid reading anything similar before you watch the movie because you really will be robbing yourself of a great film. You probably need to be in a certain headspace when you watch it as well. The pacing is somewhat slow, but it doesn’t really hurt. In fact, I actually think it adds a great deal to the depth and seriousness of the subject matter. The average viewer’s attention span is so short these days that many movies speed through a characters development in an effort to keep the audience interested. All too often, in my opinion, the pace is so fast that it makes development unbelievable. A character can’t be suckin’ dick for blow in one scene and then be driving the kids to soccer practice in a mini-van 10 minutes later. Sorry, was that analogy a little too on the nose? If a movie asks us to buy into a character they have to make his or her development believable.

But don’t think that you will be bored waiting for something to happen in this film. The mystery and intrigue are very strong and the director does a good job at only revealing small bits of information at a time leaving the viewer desperate for the next piece of the puzzle. When the truth is finally revealed, it is definitely a WHOA moment and one that truly causes an introspection by the viewer as to what they would have done in the same, tragic circumstances.
Now, I don’t say this too often, but no one really could have played this role but Kristin Scott Thomas. Aside from the fact that she had to speak in French for the entire movie, the role was so emotionally complicated only a veteran actress like her could even attempt to take on the material. Needless to say, I think she did an exceptional job (one very worthy of the Oscar nomination).

There aren’t a lot of films today that really make you think the way that this one does. You may have to work a little bit for it, but the reward in the end is definitely worth it.

Paris, Je T"aime

2010-07-22T23:30:00.002-04:00

Paris je T'aime

"Paris, je t'aime is about the plurality of cinema in one mythic location: Paris, the City of Love. Eighteen filmmakers have five minutes each; the audience must weave a single narrative out of eighteen moments. Each transition begins with the last shot of the previous film and ends with the first shot of the following film, extending the enchantment and the emotion of the previous segment, preparing the audience for a surprise, and providing a cohesive atmosphere. There's a reappearing mysterious character who is a witness to the Parisian life. A common theme of Paris and love fuses all."

5 Stars

Paris je T'aime is the first in a series of movies produced by (Tristan Carne). They all follow the similar format of being a collection of short films rather than one long, cohesive film. However, the one unifying theme is love. I recently reviewed New York I Love You, which is the second film in the series. Now, I hate to sound like an old man on this one, but the first one was the best and, unfortunately, I really can’t explain why.

The format in this film is similar to NY I Love you, but instead of compromising of ten 8 minute segments, this version contains eighteen 5 minute segments. And it’s very possible that this format change is the reason why I liked this film so much more. Since each short is directed by a different person, the film is inherently very eclectic. This serves a dual purpose. If you are not really getting drawn into the current vignette, you really don’t have time to get bored with it because once you start to, it’s on to the next one. By the same measure, several of these films draw you in very quickly so, when it ends it just leaves you wanting more. One would think that this paradigm would not work when you first conceptualize it on paper, but once it translates to the screen the results are brilliant.

Obviously because this film has 16 separate parts, I am not going to try and review each segment like I did with NYILY. All I can say is that, after seeing this film, I can see why so many people in other countries have tried to emulate it. It may range from the sweet to the intriguing to the weird, but then again so does Love.

New York, I Love You

2010-07-19T22:56:00.004-04:00

New York, I Love You

"Ten vignettes in New York City: a pickpocket meets his match; a young Hasidic woman, on the eve of her marriage, reveals herself to an Indian businessman; a writer tries a pick-up line; an artist seeks a model; a composer needs to read; two women connect; a man takes a child to Central Park; lovers meet; a couple takes a walk on their anniversary; a kid goes to the prom with a girl in a wheelchair; a retired singer contemplates suicide. There are eight million stories in the naked city: these have been ten of them."

4 Stars

This isn’t a movie for the casual viewer. Hell, this isn’t even a movie, it’s a film. It’s very important that your understand that going in. It’s not going to have your normal plot lines and story arcs, and there isn’t really going to be a resolution at the end. The way that I interpret it is that this is a snap shot of several lives. This is a film compiled of 10 very different segments directed by 10 very different filmmakers with one unifying theme, the hope for love. Because of this, your opinion of the film needs to be based on the whole thing instead of each segment because it truly is a sum of its parts.

Technically this is a “sequel” to the film Paris je t’aime (Paris, I Love You). I haven’t seen that film, but I do plan to because I think it will give me a better perspective on this film. Because the stories are so different, I think each viewer’s experience will be unique. Some people may end up taking different things from the stories than I did. Some segments that I hated may be the ones that you most connect with, and I think that’s really the point of the movie. That being said, here is my quick rundown of the stories:

SEGMENT 1 – This one is forgettable. Andy Garcia still plays the role of “intimidating man” to a T. If God himself were to square off with Andy Garcia, I truly think he could make the Almighty cry. Unfortunately he’s the only good thing in this segment. As usual Hayden Christensen exemplifies the stereotype that you don’t have to be a good actor as long as you’re pretty. Rachel Bilson tries to make her performance memorable, but it feels forced and she and Christiansen just look like rookies in the presences of a veteran Garcia.

SEGMENT 2 – This one is confusing. It feels like it is trying to convey something meaningful, but I just can’t discern what that is. Natalie Portman and Irrfan Khan portray two people who seem imprisoned by the life paths they have been forced to choose. Their only way of coping with the suppressed sadness is trough witty, sometimes sexual banter they exchange in their business dealings with one another.

SEGMENT 3 – This is another one that’s just forgettable. Orlando Bloom does a good job at playing the starving artist trying to stay true to himself, but the mysterious chemistry that he and Christina Ricci develop through a phone relationship completely fizzles to me when they finally meet face to face.

SEGMENT 4 – This one is GREAT! The entire story is just a dialogue between Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q on a New York street corner, but it stands head and shoulders above the rest. The writing is at a level I haven’t seen in a while in any film, and the back and forth between Hawke and Q really develops it into something poignant. Plus there is a slight twist at the end that really makes it one of if not THE best vignettes out there.

SEGMENT 5 – Can’t say too much about this one. Don’t get me wrong, I think Anton Yelchin and Olivia Thirlby are two solid up and comers in Hollywood, but I can’t see any reason that they included this story line other than for comedic relief.

SEGMENT 6 – This is the ones that seems the most “real” to me. Bradley Cooper and Drea de Matteo separately re-hash the one night stand they just spent together and struggle to decide if they should risk ruining a perfect memory with an attempt to recreate it.

SEGMENT 7 – I really need someone to explain this one to me. It seems like a very artsy, dramatic story full of metaphors, but again I wasn’t able to get my head around it. I almost found myself going out and buying the Cliff’s Notes just so I could figure out what exactly happened in the story. Visually, though, I have to admit it was beautiful.

SEGMENT 8 – This one was very different than all the rest in the sense that “love” in this story was really about the platonic love between a father and daughter. It was pretty brief, but definitely carried enough weight to be able tug at the heart strings a little bit.

SEGMENT 9 – Another artsy-er segment and, ironically enough, this one centered around an actual artist. It’s kind of interesting because neither the artist nor the muse that he has chosen can really communicate because they don’t speak the same language. Even without words, though, they seem to have a relationship that connects them more than most.

SEGMENT 4 (PART II) – I’m not sure why these two stories were considered the same segment because they don’t really tie in together which is why I am saying it is Part II. In this portion of the segment, Chris Cooper and Robyn Wright Penn have an intriguing conversation about how relationships can change over time and whether marriage really is for everyone.

SEGMENT 10 – This may take the title as my favorite. Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman are old school Hollywood icons that I could watch anytime. Their portrayal of an aging married couple is definitely one that will make you smile, laugh, and even maybe cry.

So, with all these different stories, what can you really say about the film? For starters it’s unique. It’s fun but sad. It’s random but precise. It’s overwhelming but lacking. It’s narcissistic but humble. It’s eye-rolling but tender. It’s vibrant. It’s desolate. It’s uplifting. It’s depressing. It’s intense. It’s dull. It’s real. It’s fake. . . . It’s New York.

The Book of Eli

2010-07-18T22:02:00.006-04:00

The Book of Eli

"In a violent post-apocalyptic society, the drifter Eli has been wandering to west across North America for the last thirty years reading a unique book that he brings with him. He survives hunting small animals and seeking goods in destroyed houses and vehicles to trade in villages for water and supplies. When he reaches the village ruled by the powerful mobster Carnegie, the man offers a job to Eli to join his gang. Carnegie presses his blind lover Claudia to send her daughter Solara to convince Eli spending the night with him. The girl sees the book of Eli, and when Carnegie beats up on Claudia, she reveals that Eli has the sought book. Carnegie sends his gang to take the book from Eli, but the man is up for protecting the book with his life."

3 stars

The Book of Eli is yet another tale of a lone hero trying to survive in a post apocalyptic wasteland. As much as I hoped that this film would stand on its own, the similarities i t shares with Kevin Costner's Waterworld are hard to ignore. While Waterworld was set in a place where nothing but water existed, Eli's world is a vast desert where water is the most precious resource around. And in this version, there are still roving gangs preying on the weak, but instead of wave runners, these marauders do their duty on motorcycles.

One aspect of the movie that I probably liked was that they didn't delve too deeply into what created the wasteland. They mention that there was a "big flash" about 30 years ago, but any other details are left up to our own imaginations. I feel like it's a good artistic choice because it doesn't really matter to us why the world is the way it is. It doesn't really drive the plot, so there is no sense in wasting important time on it. The only pertinent information we do find out is that all religious texts were burned after the "big flash" because they are believed to have been the reason for the supposed great war that took place. This is really the point where the movie hit a crossroads. I believe that, had they expounded more on the religious undertones, it could have been a very interesting movie. Unfortunately they only touch on the issue briefly, instead choosing to waste more screen time on action sequences that really aren't that exhilarating to begin with.

The fact that all the bibles have been burned, makes Eli's possession of one all that more valuable. He believes that the book contains a message that could prove the be the saving grace of all mankind, while Gary Oldman's character is a tyrant who wants to use the book's words and influence as a way to increase his empire and become a despot. Again, another interesting point about modern religion, but one whose subject matter is dismissed almost as quickly as it is introduced.

The movie itself is just okay. Aesthetically speaking it is somewhat appealing, but that alone does not a great film make. We've all watched super hero and other action movies where we buy into the fact that our lone hero can take on a gang of 20 men and easily dispose of them with an array of well choreographed fight sequences. But this movie puts that faith to the test. After Eli manages to dodge about 200 bullets, he is miraculously able to take out 12 men (each with one shot a piece) almost making the viewer want to roll their eyes.

The pace of the film is almost unbearable for the first hour. While it's obvious the directors were trying to create a sense of drama with long, lingering takes, it instead has the opposite effect and in all truthfulness, made me glance more than once at my watch. Thankfully, Denzel (who had been "phoning in" his performance for the first half) finally comes alive and pulls off a memorable performance in the film's final 60 minutes. Mila Kunis does as good a job as I guess she can. While I respect her comedic ability, I've yet to see her in any dramatic roles that don't seem to be a casting choice based solely on her looks. But the best performance of all is given by Gary Oldman who just seems to be great in nearly every damn thing he does.

The ending does provide a couple twists, but they're more of the caliber that make you simply raise your eyebrows than jolting you to the edge of your seat in a sense of, well, . . . WTF.

Couple's Retreat

2010-06-23T23:58:00.004-04:00

Couple's Retreat

"Dave and Ronnie, Jason and Cynthia, and Joey and Lucy are close. The group used to include Shane and Jennifer, but they divorced and she's gone. Jason and Cynthia announce that their marriage is in trouble, and they beg their friends (and Shane's young girlfriend) to join them on a couples' retreat, at the package rate, on a tropical island. The others reluctantly agree, planning to play while Jason and Cynthia work on their marriage with an island psychologist. To everyone's surprise, the package is inflexible: each couple must participate in the couples' exercises. Soon fault lines appear in all four relationships. What's in store for each couple?"

2 stars

I wasn’t expecting too much from this movie and that’s exactly what I got. I have to say I was a little disappointed though because Jason Bateman, Vince Vaughn, and (to a lesser extent) Kristen Bell have some pretty respectable comedic chops. But the weird thing was that not only did they not use those chops, it seems like they didn’t even try to. The writing was a little heavier than you would expect for a comedy. In the couple’s therapy sessions in particular I thought I was going to laugh pretty hard. But the advice the therapists gave actually ended up being pretty good and meaningful, and there’s just no place for that.

The story is pretty bland and the plot is more than predictable. However, it was shot on location in Bora Bora and the visual aspect of the movie is ridiculous. I am officially putting it on the list of places I want to visit before I’m 40. But the cascading waterfalls aren’t the only nice lookin’ scenery around, if you know what I mean. Let’s face it, the ladies are pretty damn hot. There is no other proof required that God loves America than the fact that 4 over-weight, above-average looking guys can have 4 bangin’ wives. And, shockingly enough, Kristin Davis is the oldest woman in the movie by a good 13 years but she is BY FAR the sexiest. If nothing else guys, watch the scene towards the beginning of the movie when the couples strip down to their underwear. I don’t know if it’s possible to wear down a DVD like you can a tape, but let’s just say that I hit on that scene more than once.

The movie ends up having kind of a sweet ending, but nothing that would redeem it enough to make it a good movie. From a strictly shallow perspective, the hot women and tropical locale make it work renting on a Sunday night and having on in the background while you clean the house.

Yes Man

2010-06-20T16:27:00.005-04:00

Yes Man

"The banker Carl Allen is a lonely man with low self-esteem after his divorce with Stephanie, for whom he still yearns. He avoids his best friend Peter. He has a boring job, stalled in a bureaucratic position in the loan department of a bank; and he spends his spare time watching DVDs. When he meets by chance his former high school mate Nick, he is convinced to participate of a self-help program called "Yes Man" leaded by the guru Terrence Bundley. The basic principle of the program is to say "yes" to new situations, leaving the negativism aside. Carl misunderstands the concept and says "yes" to every question. While leaving the encounter, he helps a homeless man and in the end of the night he meets the gorgeous Allison that helps him with her scooter. His life completely changes with his new attitude."

2.5 stars

This is a stupid little movie with a decent message. The concept of Carpe Diem seems to have itself personified by a movie every few years or so. There's Dead Poets Society, The Emperor's Club, Last Holiday, The Bucket List, and the great Ferris Bueller's Day Off just to name a few. Each of which takes its own stab at reminding us that life is just a series of moments and the more we capture, the more we'll enjoy it. While it may sound cliche, I have to agree with the message of all these films. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they're worth watching.

The one thing about Yes Man that I will say surprised me is the lack of similarity it had to Carrey's previous Liar, Liar. I fully anticipated Carrey's character to be hypnitozed (or something to the like) early on in the film during the YES motivational seminar. This would, no doubt, lead him on a series of whacky adventures and place him in situations that are just downright silly. But that wasn't the case here, so kudos to the writer for actually adding a little weight to the film and some heart along with it.

It was also painfully clear that Carrey was trying to go back to the "slapstick well" that initially lifted him to A-list status during the 90s. Something he really hasn't done since Me, Myself, and Irene 10 years ago. The goofy faces, comedic voices, and wildly flailing arms are back in full force as the 48 year old Carrey tries to win the affections of the 30 year old Zooey Deschanel who could basically be his daughter. While his physical comedic prowess is still better than most, I would prefer he continue the dramatic stuff that has resulted in some great films like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Man on the Moon.

All in all, this movie will result in a few chuckles and a few moments that will make you smile, but there really isn't too much to it. I'm just glad that this time he refrained from bending over and talking out of his ass. Actually, now that I think about it that was pretty funny.

Secondhand Lions

2010-06-15T00:10:00.004-04:00

Secondhand Lions

"13 year old Walter has had a hard life, with his no good floozy of a mother getting together with many equally despicable men. Before going on yet another husband-hunting trip, she drops him off at the house of his great-uncles Hub and Garth. They disappeared for quite a while in their youth, and are rumored to have acquired a great fortune, which Walter's mother hopes to get her hands on if he can ingratiate himself enough to the two cantankerous men. Though reluctant to put up with him at first, Hub and Garth grow to accept Walter, and even tell him fantastic stories of what they were up to while they went missing. When his mother returns, Walter must take charge of his own life, and decide what he's going to do with it."

2 stars

Now, I know what you're thinking, "Todd, what the hell are you doing reviewing this movie? It doesn't really fall into the category of movies you spend your immensely valuable time on." To you sir, (not ma'am because lets face it, a woman's opinion doesn't matter) I say don't judge so quickly! Wouldn't you like it if a quiet little movie like this were able to fly under the radar and then somehow, as if pulled by the hand of fate, find its way into your life at the exact right time? A time at which, due to your emotional state, you were able to identify so much with it that it automatically becomes a touching, personal favorite that is down right life altering. And a movie that had such an impact that you will be sitting in your living room one day years from now with your starry-eyed grandson on your knee while you play this wonderful film in an effort to connect with your kin and hopefully share a moment that he will remember long after you've passed into the Great Beyond? Well, friend I too share that dream, but unfortunately this wasn't it.

Secondhand Lions is probably pretty much what you think it is, and anyone that has graduated the 4th grade would probably be able to guess the entire plot based on just reading the summary blurb above. I can't say I'm that disappointed because I really didn't have any desire to see it in the first place. I actually only saw it because it was playing during Jury Duty. Between trying to strike up an conversation with the hot girl next to me and vehemently praying to Allah that I didn't get selected to actually sit on the "exercise in human de-evolution" that is an American Jury, I really had nothing better to do than watch the movie that County Clerk Bernice (I swear that was her name) told us Judge Roberts had hand-picked for us.

The plot actually wasn't unbearable and maybe could have managed a little entertainment if anyone involved with the film actually gave a flying fuck. As legendary as they are, Michael Caine and Robert Duval probably wouldn't disagree with you if you accused them of "phoning in" their respective performances. They also weren't able to create enough of a dichotomy between the characters. Michael Caine was supposed to portray the younger, more timid brother. But, as anyone who had seen in him in other films knows, he pretty much owns any room that he walks into, so both Duval and him pretty much ended up playing the same role. Conversely, it seemed like Haley Joel Osment was actually trying, and it was almost unwatchable at times. He looked like he was attempting to remember everything he possibly learned in the acting courses that he undoubtedly had to take once his voice finally cracked and he realized he couldn't make it on his boyish looks and creepy one-liners to Bruce Willis. But it just wasn't that good and frankly it made you feel like you were watching something at a community theatre. Wait, what's that?! Listen children, if you're very, very quiet you may just be able to make out the sound of a child actor's career being quietly suffocated in its sleep.

Again, while it's not horrible, I can't really justify telling you to spend any of your time watching it. If you accidentally end up with the DVD in your possession, maybe it's worth fast forwarding through just to see Emmanuelle Vaugier (one of the sexiest women in Hollywood today) spend some scenes as an Arab harem girl. But overall, the dialogue makes most Disney movies look like a Tarantino film and the pace is about as dull as a party at Sad Keanu Reeves' house.

Vantage Point

2010-06-06T16:47:00.006-04:00

Vantage Point

"The President of the United States is in Salamanca, Spain, about to address the city in a public square. We see a plain-clothes cop, his girlfriend with another man, a mother and child, an American tourist with a video camera, and a Secret Service agent newly returned from medical leave. Shots ring out and the President falls; a few minutes later, we hear a distant explosion, then a bomb goes off in the square. Those minutes are retold, several times, emphasizing different characters' actions. Gradually, we discover who's behind the plot. Is the Secret Service one step ahead, or have the President's adversaries thought of everything?"

1 star

I had almost forgotten about this movie until I saw a preview for it coming up on the FX network this weekend. After re-watching about 10 minutes of the movie, I realized that I hadn't forgotten about it as much as I had intentionally blocked its lackluster existence from my memory. This movie is bad, like eye rolling bad. There are plenty of movies out there that are awful, but some of them are at least aware of it (American Pie 4,5,&6 I'm looking at you). But because a movie is aware of its shittiness, it doesn't take itself too seriously and sometimes it can actually pass for watchable fare. Unfortunately someone forgot to tell this to the filmmakers of Vantage Point because the movie's own pretentiousness does nothing more than add to the already copious amount of nails in this particular cinematic coffin.

Once again I was disappointed by a movie whose trailer looked bad ass. The premise seemed to have a lot of potential and the fact that the movie was set in Salamanca (where I studied for a summer) made this a movie I actually went to see in theaters. If only I had known . . .

The film, predictably, relies too heavily on the "replay gimmick". The assassination is basically a 10 minute segment that is replayed 8 times from 8 different perspectives. Had the plot been halfway intriguing or at least provided enough mystery to keep the audience engaged then maybe the movie could have been saved. Instead it's just dull, so much so that the audience I was with actually started laughing by the time the 5th replay started. It was clear we all knew that this was a piece of crap and the mood changed to everyone trying to guess in their heads just how much longer this exercise in futility was going to take to roll over and die. As you might have guessed, the "twist ending" wasn't a "twist" at all and had it come about 45 mintutes sooner, we would have all been a lot happier.

I'll go ahead and make a statement that I will stick by in ALL future reviews. There are only 2 movies out there that revolved around a distinctive narrative style and were still able to be thoroughly entertaining despite the fact that they contained relatively mediocre plot lines. Those film would be Pulp Fiction and Memento. Everything else, this movie in particular, just couldn't quite pull it off. I hate panning this movie so hard especially since Forest Whitaker is in it and I'm a big fan of his. But luckily he had the good sense to pass on directing this one so his sin was only limited to the acting arena.

Scent of a Woman

2010-05-20T01:43:00.003-04:00

Scent of a Woman

"Charlie Simms is a boy from Oregon who attends Baird School a Boys boarding school. Not unlike most of the other boys who come from affluent backgrounds Simms is there on a scholarship. He hangs around with George Willis, who's a daddy's boy, and his friends. Now George's friends decides to pull a little prank on the pompous headmaster. The headmaster learns that Charlie and George know who pulled the prank and they refuse to say who. He gives the Thanksgiving Holiday to think about it. He also tells Charlie that he's recommending him to an Ivy League College. Charlie then goes off to a Thanksgiving job--taking care of retired Colonel Frank Slade who's blind when his family goes to visit some family for Thanksgiving. After they leave Slade tells Charlie that he's taking him to New York for his own Thanksgiving celebration."

4.5 stars

Lt. Colonel Frank Slade: Clear them little bottles off. And when I get off the phone here, call the bell man and tell him I want it wall to wall with John Daniels.

Charlie Simms: Don’t you mean Jack Daniels?

Lt. Colonel Frank Slade: He may be Jack to you son, but when you've known him as long as I have...

This was one of the quotes from the first 30 minutes of this film. Needless to say, after this line I WAS IN. Not only does Lt. Colonel Slade (Al Pacino) appreciate the finer things in life like the decadence of a hotel room at The Plaza or the taste of a freshly cut Montecristo cigar, he shares my infatuation with all the mysteries that are women; the way they move, the way they laugh, and (most important to a blind man) the way they smell.

Now, I realize this is an old movie, but I have really never seen the entire film. Sure, I have caught pieces of it while flipping through the channels on a Sunday afternoon, but that is the television version. A version, apparently, that director Martin Brest has disowned because it suffers from censorship and time editing. That’s why I wanted to watch the unabridged, unadulterated version to see what the fuss was all about. Needless to say, the movie did not disappoint. Everything worked in this movie ranging from the setting (New York, New York) to the writing to the music to the acting. Pacino was superb in his portrayal of a tortured War Hero and was able to evoke scenes of such raw emotion that I found myself going 3-4 minutes without blinking. I do feel that I was slighted a little bit just because I am so late to the party in viewing this film. His exclamation of “Hoo-wah!” and unique speaking style in the movie have been emulated and parodied so many times since the movie was released in 1993 that it almost elicited a comedic reaction for me at several points that should have come across as more dramatic. But I can’t place any blame on him because if I had seen the movie when it actually came out I probably would have had a more appropriate response. Then again, I was only 8.

The only two complaints I have with the film are relatively minor. For about 2 hours of the movie, I thought that Chris O’Donnell was the perfect casting choice for the role of Charlie Simms. His boyish demeanor and glaring insecurities were consistent with that of a small town kid from the wrong side of the tracks trying to assimilate into the world of over-privileged children and their powerful families. But the whole point of the movie is to witness Charlie’s transition from adolescence to manhood. While I think O’Donnell did the best he could, the transition is supposed to be exhibited in the penultimate scene of the movie. Well, Pacino definitely puts forth his all and THEN some in the scene, but O’Donnell just doesn’t dig quite deep enough and it left me wanting. My second complaint is about the nature of the “crime” itself. The final scene has a great message about leadership and integrity, but I felt like the actions of Charlie’s colleagues could have been more sinister and, in turn, produced a more complicated and powerful moral dilemma for him. As it stands, the “crime” is just pouring paint on the car of the Headmaster.

Nevertheless, it is a great film worthy of our time and appreciation, if only for the appearance of Gabrielle Anwar. Honestly, I thought she was going to be in the entire movie based on her billing and the fact that she is the main thing I remembered about the movie before watching the entire version. It turns out she is only on the screen for literally 5 minutes. But, needless to say, she makes the most of them.

Pacino basically personified the term “pimp” when it came to his dealings with women in this movie and I think every guy out there would admit either openly or just to themselves that his swagger is something we all want to have. This personification may best be described in the advice he give his cat when Charlie and he are about to leave the house for New York. “When in doubt . . . fuck.”

This Film is Not Yet Rated

2010-04-28T23:56:00.003-04:00

This Film is Not Yet Rated

"Documents a history of the MPAA ratings board. Talks to numerous directors and actors about the censorship of their movies before they could be released. Includes directors, Kevin Smith, Matt Stone, John Waters, Darren Aronosfsky, Maria Bello, Atom Egoyan. Director, Kirby Dick hires a lesbian family of private investigators to find out the names of the MPAA ratings board and see if the raters are actually parents of children 5-17 like the MPAA tells American parents they are."

DISCLAIMER: My 3 Star rating of this film is soley based on the artistic nature. It is my firm belief that everyone should see this film.

3.5 Stars

I don’t think this film is really going to SHOCK anyone. In this day and age, we have come to realize and (unfortunately) accept that many aspects of our day to day lives are controlled by large corporations, and the film industry is no different. But even though it may not shock you, the things revealed in this documentary will present you with some very sobering facts.

Filmmaker Kirby Dick tries to expose the hypocrisy and secrecy of the MPAA ratings board who assign the ratings to all movies released in the United States and he does a pretty good job. One major drawback for me was the private investigator he hires to try and gain access to (and later gather more information about) the MPAA. She is, in one word, amateur. Just from watching television and movies, I could have done a better job than this woman. And there is even a random, seemingly pointless conversation in the movie where she talks about how she thinks she may be a lesbian . . . huh? How does that relate to anything?

Regardless, she more or less gets the job done and is able to find the information that the filmmaker is looking for, most importantly the true identities of the MPAA raters. The MPAA goes to such lengths to keep their identities secret because, they claim, it prevents the people from being harassed or influenced (a fact that is contested later in the film). This was my only major disagreement with the filmmaker. I got over the fact that Kirby is a bit of a prick and that the film seemed to be a little more “dramaticized” than a documentary needs to be, but he hurts the wrong people with the information. The raters themselves are just parents making a whopping $30,000 per year. While I am not so glib to assume that the raters don’t know what’s going on or that they may not be getting other forms of compensation under the table, I really don’t think he needed to expose them. Screwing the people at the bottom of the totem pole doesn’t result in hurting the big guys, it just results in NEW people at the bottom of the totem pole.

One of the most interesting points in the movie, though, is the argument made about the way sex and violence are dealt with in the ratings. While we have all heard the arguments over and over about how American society is downright Puritanical when it comes to sex, it never really hit me how much disparity there is in dealing with sex versus violence. Case in point, the movie Saw can show dismemberment, castration, and many other acts of graphic violence and receive and R while a movie whose only offense is to show a woman’s vagina receives an NC-17. I could go off on a tangent here about what’s a bigger social problem today in America violence or nudity . . . but I won’t. The disparity in ratings of love scenes between homosexuals and heterosexuals is also glaringly obvious, but that’s almost worth an entirely different film.

As you would expect, the filmmaker eventually submits his documentary to the MPAA for a rating and (surprise, surprise) it comes back with an NC-17 rating. So, he goes through the appeals process to try and get an R rating. One of the most ironic moments in the film comes at the end where we find out the identities of this “appeals board”. While I shouldn’t have been surprised by who the people ended up being, I still had to shake my head in disbelief.

Now, you might ask what’s the big deal about an NC-17 rating? It’s just a guideline for parents and if the film is still good people will hear about it. Well, unfortunately that’s not the case. If you get the NC-17 no major studio is going to produce the movie or advertise for it or even really promote it. On top of that, Blockbuster, Movie Gallery, and all the other chain video stores won’t carry it. So, while you may not realize the importance of the MPAA ratings, after this film you will come to realize that they have the American filmmaker by the balls.

100 Girls

2010-04-28T23:23:00.003-04:00

100 Girls

"This sexy, teen-comedy is about a freshman, Matthew, at college who meets his dream girl in a dorm elevator during a blackout. He never sees her face, but instantly falls in love. In the morning, the power is restored, but the "dream girl" has vanished. All Matthew knows is that she lives in an all-girls dorm. He sets out on a semester-long journey to find his mystery girl amongst a hundred female suspects. Could it be Wendy? Dora? Arlene? Patty? Cynthia? Or the 95 other girls, any of whom could have been in that elevator with Matthew."

1 Star

“Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God, Oh my God.” This is the mantra I kept repeating to myself out loud while watching this movie? Why did I do this you ask? Well, the simple answer is I had to preoccupy my mind with something so that I wouldn’t grab the ball point pen laying two feet across from me and proceed to jam it in my eye. I’m still new to Netflix but Robyn has hyped it up so much, that I finally thought I would give it a try. One of the features they offer is suggesting movies you may like based on previous movies that you have rated highly. Well, someone needs to check the algorithm that produces these suggestions because the damn thing’s broken.

It was bad, and I mean BAD bad. Some of the reviews I read afterwards said that it was a Teen movie, but should have been more geared towards adults. I’m gonna go in the exact opposite direction. It was as if the writer was a 12 year old boy, and all he really knew of college was the stereotypes he garnered from, well, other teen movies. Now, don’t get me wrong, I know that all teen movies are chocked full of stereotypes, but most of them are at least somewhat self aware of this fact. This movie tried to paint itself as penetrating and insightful. I hate to break it to the writer, but every “revelation” that he tries to convey to us through the main character is one that 99.9% of college freshmen guys have come to realize by the third month of school. Hell, most guys probably have made these revelations by their senior year in high school. It just takes some of us a little longer because we weren’t in the Ultra-kid cool clique in high school. Instead we were pretty involved in clubs and student government. And, come on, that’s just as cool in its own right. I mean, I’m not talking about me, I’m just saying hypothetically . . . shut up.

Anyway, I wish I could recommend this movie just so the guys out there could see Jaime Pressly, Larisa Oleynik (remember Alex Mack? Don’t lie, you had a rush on her too), Katherine Heigl, and Emmanuelle Chriqui in the same place at one time. Let’s be honest, when Sloan from Entourage is in ANYTHING, you suck it up and go see the movie. Alas, I still can’t bring myself to do it. If you do see this movie you will end up wanting the same thing I did . . . your hour and a half back.

Post Grad

2010-02-20T12:27:00.001-05:00

Post Grad
"Ryden Malby (Alexis Bledel) always assumed it would be easy to find a job with a college diploma. But when nothing materializes after graduation, she's forced to move back in with her dysfunctional family and work full-time at maintaining her sanity. The only bright spot is her steady relationship with her best friend, Adam (Zach Gilford), but even that's starting to feel a little awkward."

2.5 of stars

A pretty standard movie with a pretty standard storyline. Naive girl with big plans, forced to adapt when things don't go her way, with a 90-minute-mark revelation of true love.

I like Alexis Bledel, but she plays the same character all the time (variations on Rory Gilmore). Michael Keaton and Carol Burnett as the father and grandmother were entertaining, though written as caricatures. Jane Lynch is seriously miscast the mother - does she strike you as maternal at all?! There's also an extraneous little brother, a sexy next-door neighbor, and a surprisingly funny scene about burying a cat in a pizza box. But that's about it. Inoffensive and unmemorable.

Run, Fatboy, Run

2010-02-14T20:13:00.000-05:00

Run Fatboy Run
"After leaving his pregnant fiancée, Libby (Thandie Newton), at the altar five years ago, a remorseful Dennis (Simon Pegg) tries to repair the damage and win Libby away from her sleazy new boyfriend (Hank Azaria) by training for a marathon. Trouble is, he's hopelessly out of shape. Will losing the pounds and catching his breath be enough to get her back?"

3 of stars

Tonite's review is in honor of Valentine's Day (and Simon Pegg's birthday!). I didn't realize this was a romantic comedy - I figured since it was starring Simon Pegg it was going to be raunchier. But I was pleasantly surprised. It's got a Nick Hornby flavor, told from the man-boy's point of view.

Dennis (Pegg) has always regretted leaving his pregnant girlfriend (Thandie Newton) at the altar five years earlier. He's a bit of a screw-up, working as a security guard, when his ex starts dating Whit (Hank Azaria). Azaria plays the nice guy/smarmy asshole well - and after a scene in the locker room, who knew he was so ripped?! Dennis decides that anything Whit can do, he can do better, and decides to run a marathon (despite a pack-a-day habit and a three-week deadline). Typical training montages and hilarity ensue, with a heartwarming, if predictable, ending.

In Bruges: Robyn's Response

2010-02-09T10:13:00.002-05:00

(Todd's review here)

4 Stars

I was in love with Colin Farrell when I was younger. Three friends and I even formed the CFFC: Colin Farrell Fan Club. As I grew older and wiser, I realized that Colin is a hit-or-miss actor, with mostly misses (Miami Vice, Alexander, and The New World, just to name a few). But there are a handful of movies where he really shines: Tigerland (one of my few 5 star movies), Phone Booth, and In Bruges.

In Bruges started off slow for me, and I was just starting to lose interest when things started picking up. I originally thought this was going to be another fast-paced British crime story, but it's grittier and more realistic than that. It has it's violence and dark humor; it's got layers. I loved the interaction between Colin Farrell (Ray) and Brendan Gleeson (Ken). And while Farrell is good, Gleeson is the one who really carries the movie. Ray has baggage, but Ken is helping him shoulder it.

The ending was great, and not what I was expecting. I love it when that happens.

Amelie

2010-02-08T23:43:00.003-05:00

Amelie

"Amélie is looking for love, and perhaps for the meaning of life in general. We see her grow up in an original if slightly dysfunctional family. Now a waitress in central Paris, she interacts curiously with her neighbors and customers, as well as a mysterious Photomaton-image collector and one of his even more mysterious photo subjects. Little by little, Amélie realizes that the way to happiness (and yet more subtle humor) requires her to take her own initiative and reach out to others."

4.5 Stars

If I had to describe this movie in two words, it would be “Wonderfully Weird” because that pretty much sums it up. I haven’t seen a movie make so much out of just the simple pleasures of life in a long time. The director really does a great job of seamlessly intertwining the simplicity of the real world to the fantasy world that Amelie has created in her head. But I think one of the best things about the movie is that it doesn’t take the daydream aspect too far. True, there are some strange fantasy sequences here or there, but they don’t overpower the story SO much that you forget what the film is really all about . . . taking chances.

Like many of us, Amelie watches television, movies, and most importantly the lives of other people. She becomes very interested in how people react to situations and, in turn, each other. She maintains a childlike curiosity of the human condition and how it perpetually defies predictability. Amelie also take on a personal mission to better the lives of those around her through both direct and indirect contact. But, as the movie goes on, we start to realize how sad she may really be inside. While she is always surrounded by people, she never truly seems to be connected to any of them. When it comes to relationships she really plays the role of observer more than participant.

This longing for contact manifests itself through the games she plays with a man whose scrapbook she has found. She is in love with him (or at least the idea of him) and decides to engage in a playfully romantic game to learn more about him and hopefully bring herself closer to actually making a true human connection. She tries to convince herself that she is being brave and taking risks that other people wouldn’t dare take, but she is really just fooling herself. I say that because when it finally comes time for the wild goose chase to meet its end, she balks. She hasn’t built up the courage to finally put herself out there and, just like the metaphorical “girl with the glass of water” that her shut-in neighbor struggles to paint, she acts cowardly.

I don’t blame her, though. The reason she acts cowardly is the same reason that most of us might act the same way, because we don’t want to be let down. While the lives of the people around her really shouldn’t be described as sad, they are (for lack of a better word) real. They aren’t like the fantasies she has. The lives are real and are subject to all the disappointments and heart breaks that are a part of life. And that is what scares her most, that when the bubble bursts, will what is left be enough? Luckily her shut-in neighbor gives one final piece of advice and makes her realize that if her heart is never subject to BOTH the joy and pain of love, then it will become just as dry and brittle as his old body.

Now, this movie is visually dazzling and the music does a lot to support the fantasyland motif, but I take something different away from the film. For me, it makes you feel good about believing in the hope of true love. Now, that’s not to say that Amelie necessarily found it. The movie ends where most romantic films do, with a picturesque montage of the happy couple. And you really hope that they ended up staying together for a long time and had a great life, but there is no way to be sure of that. Then again, that’s life and no one can ever really know. That’s why I think this film is saying that it is important to continue to have that hope. Things may not always end up the way we dreamed or planned, but if we continue to put ourselves out there, then hopefully we will eventually get what we need.

Robyn's Response
5 Stars

I love this movie. This movie provides everything the movie-going experience should: visually and musically beautiful, with a unique storytelling style and characters you can't help but fall in love with. Todd said it best when he wrote that this movie does so much with the simple pleasures in life.

In Bruges

2010-02-08T23:32:00.005-05:00

In Bruges

"The Irish hit-men Ken and Ray are sent by the Londoner mobster Harry Waters to the medieval Belgium city of Bruges in Christmas after an awry job in a London church. Ray bungles it. While Ken enjoys the historic city, Ray feels completely bored and misses his home. Ray meets the small time drug-dealer and crook Chloë, who sells drug to the cast and crew of a movie that is filmed in Bruges, and has an incident with a Canadian tourist and later with Chloë's boyfriend. Meanwhile Harry, who has an stringent code of principles, gives Ken special orders."

4 Stars

I completely admit that I may be biased because I was actually in Bruges about a month ago, but I really like this movie. It is definitely one of those weird-in-a-good-way films. Colin Farrell plays a wet behind the ears hit man under the tutelage of Brendan McCann. The movie opens interestingly enough with them engaged in witty banter that you really have to pay attention to. Not only is the writing smart, but both actors’ accents are so thick that you sometimes wonder if they’re talking gibberish just to see if you’re paying attention. The mentor/mentee relationship is evident and amusing, especially since Ken is absolutely enamored to be in the “fairy tale” like Bruges while Ray is bored out of his mind and can’t wait to get back to the much faster pace of London.

Unfortunately, Ray can’t go back to London because he has committed a terrible mistake. In his first job as a hit man he was sent to assassinate a priest, which he did. What he didn’t plan on was one of his stray bullets killing a nearby 8 year old boy who was getting ready to take confession. This clearly haunts Ray throughout the movie. Even with the heavy subject matter of the movie it does a good job of keeping a humorous attitude that doesn’t let the inhumanity involved in the men’s work overshadow the entire movie. Plus, I don’t think I have heard the name of a movie be actually spoken in that movie more in my life.

There is also an intriguing “code of the hit man” that is explored. Even though their profession would cause a knee jerk reaction of disgust because they take human lives for a living, Ken and Ray bring an aspect of humanity to it. They justify it to themselves by saying that they have only killed bad men or only killed in self defense. And they have a strict code about when and where they kill. In essence, they treat it like an actual job and try not to let it consume them.

Chloe (Clémence Poésy) is another bright spot in the film. I really can’t put my finger on it, but there is something incredibly sexy about her. At first glance she’s not drop dead gorgeous, but something about her personality just draws you in. Plus, she has one of the coolest/sexiest moments that I have seen in a long time. When Ken initially asks her out to dinner she just laughs and walks away, leaving us to believe that she is blowing him off. But after she gets about 20 feet away she drops a card with her phone number over her shoulder without even glancing back or breaking stride. I don’t know how to explain it, but watch the scene and tell me you don’t have the same reaction that Colin Farrell does.

If you still aren’t convinced to rent this movie, then I have three words for you: Midgets, Hookers, and Cocaine. If that doesn’t get your Spidey Sense tingling, nothing will. Now, I will admit that the ending fell a little flat for me. There is a metaphor involving some miscommunication that just feels forced. And, I don’t think I’m giving anything away, the movie ends on sort of a cliff hanger. While I think the last scene is executed very well, I don’t like the fact that a movie ends on a cliff hanger. You can do that with a TV show or a movie where a sequel is inevitable, but rarely can you get away with that in a standalone movie.

The Puffy Chair

2010-02-08T23:22:00.005-05:00

The Puffy Chair

"Josh and Emily are in a relationship, but he can be inattentive and unromantic and she can shift her focus from small things to emotional issues in a moment. He invites her to drive from New York City to somewhere in Virginia to pick up a chair that he's bought on eBay for his father's birthday. On the way, he stops at his brother Rhett's, outside Philly, and invites him along. Josh tries to save money at a motel, has to negotiate with the seller of the chair and with an upholsterer, and faces tough questions from Emily. He calls her "Dude," he's moody, and it looks as if the relationship will end soon. Is there more than meets the eye here? How do people decide?"

1 Star

I wanted to like this movie SO much, I really did. It had a couple of the same actors of my new favorite TV show “The League”. It is also considered part of the new mumblecore movement which is predicated on the idea of filmmakers shying away from big studios and making the films they want to make, hopefully without compromise. No big studio, though, means no big money so you have entire productions being made for less than $5,000. All I can say it if you’re going to rely that heavily on the story because you can’t hide dazzle with amazing shots and special effects, then you better have a hell of a story or be able to write some amazing dialogue. Unfortunately this movie had neither.

Kevin Smith actually is the litmus test for this genre. He made his signature film “Clerks” for less than $5,000. The difference was that Smith is pretty damn good with dialogue and he made sure his actors stuck to the script. The Duplass brothers admitted that the story line was planned, but much of the dialogue was improvised. This really doesn’t work for a drama. Once in a while we see great comedy movies with a large degree of improvisation, but it’s just hard to create the same magic with drama.

The movie tried to be more than it actually was. It tried to come off as an in depth exploration of the relationships between fathers, sons, and girlfriends. Unfortunately, none of these attempts are developed enough to really be sustainable. The blatant attempts at humor feels forced and the characters are hard to get attached to. Josh’s brother (Rhett Wilkins) is the stereotypical detached stoner that is fun for 15 minutes, but makes you want to punch him in the temple after that. Josh’s girlfriend (played by Mark Duplass' real life wife Katie Aselton) finely dances that line between crazy/psycho/bitch and annoying as hell. And Josh (Mark Duplass) himself is just a lazy unfocused sack of shit who (and I don’t know why this bothered me so much) kept calling his girlfriend "dude".

I have to respect what young filmmakers are trying to do, but it also makes you appreciate the diamonds in the rough that are able to rise to the top and garner the appropriate attention. This movie ends very abruptly and leaves you scratching your head. Unfortunately, instead of leaving the viewer wanting more I found myself flipping to the other channel without much hesitation.

Defiance

2010-02-08T23:12:00.002-05:00

Defiance

"On the run and hiding in the deep forests of the then German occupied Poland and Belorussia (World War II), the three Bielski brothers find the impossible task of foraging for food and weapons for their survival. They live, not only with the fear of discovery, contending with neighboring Soviet partisans and knowing whom to trust but also take the responsibility of looking after a large mass of fleeing Polish Jews from the German war machine. Women, men, children, the elderly and the young alike are all hiding in makeshift homes in the dark, cold and unforgiving forests in the darkest times of German occupied Eastern Europe."

4.5 Stars

This is what a film should be. From top to bottom, this is one of the best film’s I have seen in a long time. There are so many layers and aspects to the story that come together beautifully.

It has sort of a Lord of the Flies feel to it, except this story is actually true and not about children. It could almost be a study in sociological behavior. What happens when everything is taken away from you by an evil adversary? How far would you go to survive? Would the situation actually arise where it might be necessary to sacrifice your own humanity to save the lives of others? These questions and many more just scratch the surface of the moral dilemma that permeates through the plot of Defiance.

I really felt like this could have been a novel because there were so many different story lines. The most obvious was the nature of humanity and its perseverance in the form of a community. These were real people and no one was perfect. Mistakes were made by everyone even Tavia (Daniel Craig). So many times in movies we are used to seeing the infallible leader who may have a slight crisis of confidence, but conveniently enough is able to overcome it just before his defining moment. That isn’t really the case here. Tavia actually falters in several of his key moments and falters BIG, but his brothers are able to pick up the slack when it’s needed and the group pushes on, the group does the only thing it can do, it survives.
I think there are an endless number of topics that can be debated on what occurred in these majestic woods. Just how far do people need to go in order to survive when they are being persecuted by a tormenter that has absolutely no regard for their life? Is that even a valid question? Should the immediate response be that there is no limit? As sophisticated as we may like to think we have become as a society, we all have basic animal instincts for survival and that may be one of the few times that our true characters are exposed. At one point, Tuvia shoots and kills a man in front of the group because he was conspiring against him. First off, the situation is much more complicated than it sounds so you have to see the movie. But in this case I think the military state he had created in this community was necessary. Any faction or flicker of fracture within the leadership may have had devastating effects on the morale of the group and, in turn, their future. And it’s easy for us to debate the fact now, when we are so far removed from it. Truth is, these people stared into the face of death everyday and had only one choice, to lower their heads at death and move forward.

Another intriguing aspect was that of the Baglia brothers and their family dynamic. They were brothers in every sense of the word, but had plenty of both similar and conflicting ideologies. Tuvia was more concerned about maintaining a sense of humanity while Zus wanted revenge (and rightfully so) for a slaughtered wife and daughter. But in the end, their mutual respect for one another led them in different paths, but helped them to learn crucial lessons.

The character study in this movie was just amazing. There wasn’t enough time to delve into the complexity that was these people lives and emotions. One of the first things to be wiped away was social status, they were no longer poor or rich, educated or not, spiritual or apathetic, they were just people who came together in an effort to survive. And no one, to me, was predictable. They were so human. Yes, as in real life, you can tell when certain people will make particular choices over others, but that wasn’t always the case here. I couldn’t fit any particular character into a box and stick a label on them because it was too hard. Just when you thought you had a character pegged, they would do or say something that just left your head spinning. You start to think about what you may have done, but I think that’s impossible. Seeing what these people lived through is so harrowing that I don’t think anyone could walk a mile in their shoes.

The movie hit all the aspects of basic human nature like food, shelter, community, and love. But one area that I thought wasn’t touched on enough was sex. Now before you think I just wanted to be a voyeuristic horn dog, hear me out. It is actually touched on (ever so slightly) in the movie a couple of times, but it is never really explored. Pregnancies were forbidden in the group. Now, that may sound harsh, but it was necessary because they could not accommodate a child in their surroundings. But some of the undertones hinted that they were having sex. And they HAD to be. They were in the forest for 3 years and it’s only human nature to want to act on sexual desires, especially when your existence seems to be getting continually more primal. On character does mention briefly that “She knows what it expected of the women.” But that is all that is said. I honestly think the movie would have been a little more well rounded if the physical relationship between the men and women was explored a little more. Even the emotional side was only touched on enough to satisfy a need for the audience to have hope.

Anyway, by the length of my review so far, I bet you can tell that I could probably go on and on about this because there is so much to discuss, but I will spare you and let you decide for yourself. In closing I will touch on the only real objections I had to the movie, and there weren’t many. Some critics have come out saying that some of the details were left out concerning the possible brutality that the Briglias implemented to raid from the local farms. I don’t think it’s that big a deal, though. This wasn’t a documentary; it was a movie with the purpose of telling a story and, in that, I think they fully succeeded. The final battle scene did feel a little forced a couple times and a little predictable, but that happens. By far the rest of the movie does not feel formulaic and I think that is what is so refreshing.

The Ugly Truth

2010-02-08T23:05:00.004-05:00

The Ugly Truth

"In Sacramento, Abby Richter produces a morning news show that's about to be canceled. To boost ratings, her boss hires Mike Chadway, a local cable call-in host who promotes the ugly truth: sex is the only glue in a relationship, men can't change, and they only respond to women's looks. Mike offends Abby's sensibility: she has a checklist about the perfect man, and she's found him in her new neighbor, Colin, a hunky doctor. Mike offers to help her reel in Colin if she'll work with Mike on the show; she accepts the deal, ratings go up, and, with Mike's help, so does Colin's interest in her. Craig Ferguson, a hot air balloon, and the ugly truth help this take on "Cyrano" play out."

3 Stars

I have to be honest; I really struggled over renting this movie. Not because it is a chick flick, I have not made it any secret that they are one of my guilty pleasures. The reason that I wasn’t sure if I wanted to rent it was because Katherine Heigel was in it. I find her to be one of the most irritating women in the film business today and I really can’t stand her opinions. She gets paid to act and look pretty, and I could really care less about her opinion on politics or moral dilemmas. None the less, she seems more than happy to spout her moronic dribble even when no one is asking her any questions. But, I decided to be fair. Just because I hope she chokes on her own self satisfaction doesn’t mean that I should write her off as an actress. I’m glad I did decide to think about it because I realized I actually enjoy her as an actress.

Granted, I have a very limited exposure to her “body of work”. I think I have only seen about 3 episodes of Grey’s Anatomy and I really wasn’t paying attention because I was more concerned with getting in the pants of the she-devil who was making me watch the show instead of Sunday Night Football . . . but I digress. I have seen her in The Ringer in which she was pretty good, and Knocked Up in which I thought she was great. I’m sorry but the point in the movie when she is trying to help Seth Rogen’s website by watching pornos made her one of the coolest movie girlfriends ever. I’m serious. Just hearing her yell, “2 minutes in, BOOBS AND BUSH! BOOBS AND BUSH!” almost brought a prideful tear to my eye.

With all of that, I decided to watch The Ugly Truth. The male lead played by Gerard Butler gave me less pause about renting the movie. I don’t care how much this makes me sound like a 13 year old boy, but 300 was one of the most badass movies to come out in my lifetime. King Leonidas can be in damn near any movie and I will be happy to pay my $8.50! Well, except for P.S. I Love you, but that is just because Hillary Swank should never be the lead in a romantic comedy because she looks like a man. So much so that she actually won an academy award for playing one because the role didn’t require that much acting. But again, I am getting off topic.

I wouldn’t put The Ugly Truth up in the realm of Knocked Up or The 40 Year Old Virgin, but it’s pretty damn funny none the less. The film gives a pretty good representation of modern day relationships and the hypocrisies that are associated with them. Heigl even impressed me so much that I would almost compare her slapstick comedic prowess to that of Lucille Ball. In one particular scene she accidently goes to a formal dinner with a pair of remote controlled vibrating panties on. I don’t care how sophisticated you think you are, I challenge anyone to watch that scene and not laugh til you cry. And, as much as I dislike her as a person, she really is good looking. Shockingly enough, it turns out guys are into that kind of thing because we’re shallow and that might be just enough to get us to go see a movie. The end is predictable, but I don’t think anyone who rents this was expecting Citizen Kane. All that matters is that the writing is pretty sharp and the social commentary is relatively fresh. All of that adds up to a movie worth seeing.

Slackers

2010-02-01T20:50:00.007-05:00

No, not Slackers the movie. But us, your friendly movie reviewers. Todd at least has kind of an excuse - he recently moved and doesn't have his internet hooked up yet. But me? I guess I've just been lazy.

To make up for it, here are some rapid-fire reviews:

Angus, Thongs, and Perfect Snogging

'The story of a 14-year-old girl who keeps a diary about the ups and downs of being a teenager, including the things she learns about kissing.'

1 star

Just because a movie is targeted towards 14-year-old girls doesn't mean it will suck (see Mean Girls). This is not one of those exceptions. The characters are one note, and the main actress makes the same face for every emotion: the patented Joey Tribbiani 'Who farted?' face (crinkled lip and raised eyebrow). I finished the movie, but I fast-forwarded more than once.

American Teen

'A documentary on seniors at a high school in a small Indiana town and their various cliques.'

3 stars

A lot has been said about this movie, about how the storylines were contrived and edited to make certain outcomes happen. I didn't mind, since the stories were entertaining. I got surprisingly invested in the 'characters'. Worth watching if you like documentaries and/or movies about teenagers.

(500) Days of Summer

'An offbeat romantic comedy about a woman who doesn't believe true love exists, and the young man who falls for her.'

2 stars

This movie tries too hard. The bones of the story are interesting, and the two leads are good, but the movies drowns in cutesy indie gimmicks. These include but are not limited to: an omniscient narrator who speaks directly to the audience; a timeline shown out of order (jumping from Day 8 to Day 371 to Day 94); a group musical number to a popular 80s tune; a split-screen alternate reality bit; and a black-and-white foreign film fantasy. Puh-lease.

Extract

'Joel, the owner of an Extract plant, tries to contend with myriad personal and professional problems, such as his potentially unfaithful wife and employees who want to take advantage of him.'

3 stars

This is the 'follow up' to Mike Judge's cult hit Office Space, and it's got similar dry and juvenile humor. I loved Jason Bateman and Kristen Wiig, but Ben Affleck as Bateman's best friend seemed like stunt-casting, and I couldn't get past his weird hair and beard. If you clear your mind of expectations, the movie is fine and enjoyable.

Boogie Nights

'The story of a young man's adventures in the Californian pornography industry of the 1970s and 1980s.'

1 star

How this movie got to have cult status when it is one of the most depressing things I have ever seen, I have no idea. Just fast-forward to the end if you want to see Mark Wahlberg's (fake) penis.

Star Trek (2009)

2010-01-08T16:16:00.001-05:00

Star Trek
"On the day of James Kirk's birth, his father dies on his ship in a last stand against a mysterious alien vessel. Twenty years later, Kirk has grown into a young troublemaker inspired by Capt. Christopher Pike to fulfill his potential in Starfleet even as he annoys his instructors like young Lt. Spock. Suddenly, there is an emergency at Vulcan and the newly commissioned USS Enterprise is crewed with promising cadets like Nyota Uhura, Hikaru Sulu, Pavel Chekov and even Kirk himself thanks to Leonard McCoy's medical trickery. Together, this crew will have an adventure in the final frontier where the old legend is altered forever even as the new version of it is just beginning."

5 stars

When I saw the preview for Star Trek in theaters last year, I was with Colin. They showed this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Subdp7dnlZ0 When the cop asks the boy his name, and he answers with "James Tiberius Kirk!", I yelled "YEAH!" and even did a fist pump. In the middle of the movie theater.

Colin has accused me of being a closet Trekkie. I'm not - I'm just a pop culture junkie. Yeah, I know a bit of the background of Star Trek. I got most of the 'in-jokes' in the movie. But I know just as much about Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the X-Men, and Batman.

The first time I saw the movie, I went with my dad. He's the exact right age for growing up with the Star Trek TV series. He's known to get easily choked up at movies, and there was a tear in his eye when we get the shot with the entire crew all together for the first time. I was a bit verklempt myself.

Do you need to be a Trekkie to enjoy this movie? Not at all. Will some of the jokes, sight gags, and famous lines slip by you unnoticed? Probably, but that won't affect your movie experience. This is simply a great sci-fi action movie. And with J. J. Abrams directing, it's also a cool sci-fi action movie. The special effects are excellent, especially when you compare to what Gene Rodenberry had to work with back in 1966. And it's less computer-generated than you might think. The lens flares are flashlights being shined into camera lenses, and the parachuting scene was filmed by the actors standing on a mirror that reflected the sky. The action scenes (and there are plenty, even before the opening credits) will keep you on the edge of your seat - Kirk seems to have a knack for almost falling to his death. That's another bonus (in my eyes) of revamping a well-known story: you know none of your favorite characters are going to die. Unless they are wearing a red shirt, of course.

My favorite part of the whole movie is that J. J. Abrams handled the time-travel element quite well. And now he has introduced the concept of an alternate Star Trek reality, he can get away with diverging from the canon in the future. And I'm looking forward to many, many sequels.

I will end with my only nitpick: Winona Ryder as Spock's mother?! What, you couldn't get an actual 60-year-old woman to play the part of an old lady?

Up In The Air

2010-01-06T18:50:00.002-05:00

Up in the Air
"Ryan Bingham's job is to fire people from theirs. The anguish, hostility, and despair of his "clients" has left him falsely compassionate, living out of a suitcase, and loving every second of it. When his boss hires arrogant young Natalie, she develops a method of video conferencing that will allow termination without ever leaving the office - essentially threatening the existence Ryan so cherishes. Determined to show the naive girl the error of her logic, Ryan takes her on one of his cross country firing expeditions, but as she starts to realize the disheartening realities of her profession, he begins to see the downfalls to his way of life."

4 stars

I would watch a movie of George Clooney reading the phone book. And I bet I'm not the only one. His charm and likeabilty carries this movie - and that's not bad thing. His character Ryan fires people for a living, and we sympathize him!

The script for the movie is based on a book written back in 2001, mere months before September 11 changed flying forever. Ryan had the same job back then, but it's even more powerful in today's economic climate. And all those people he fires in the movie? With the exception of one or two recognizable actors, they are all real recently laid-off workers.

The firing isn't really what this movie is about, though. It's about people and our connections. Ryan has none (unless you count his assistant) until he meets a fellow (female) jet-setter. Meanwhile, he's schooling young Natalie about life on the road, which has its own effects on him as well as her. It comes to a head (or so you think) at his sister's wedding in his hometown.

The ending is not cookie-cutter, and for someone who ALWAYS sees it coming, I didn't see it coming. It wasn't shocking or out of left field, just different.

Pretty enjoyable.

The Visitor

2009-12-14T20:16:00.002-05:00

The Visitor

"In Connecticut, the widower and lonely Professor Walter Vale has a boring life. He teaches only one class at the local college and is trying to learn how to play the piano, despite not having the necessary musical talent. Walter is assigned to attend a conference about Global Policy and Development at the New York University, where he is to give a lecture about a paper that he is coauthor on. When he arrives at his apartment in New York, he finds Tarek Khalil, a syrian musician, and Zainab, a Senegalese street vendor living there. He sympathizes with the situation of the illegal immigrants and invites the couple to stay with him. Tarek invites him to go to his gig in the Jules Live Jazz and Walter is fascinated with his African drum. Tarek offers to teach Walter to play the drum. However, after an incident in the subway, Tarek is arrested by the police and sent to a detention center of immigrants. Walter hires a lawyer to defend Tarek and out of the blue, Tarek's mother Mouna appears at Walter's apartment from Michigan. He invites her to stay in Tarek's room and while trying to release Tarek, Walter and Mouna get close to each other and he finds a reason to live an exciting life again."

4 Stars

If you can get past the initial premise to this movie, then it opens up a whole bevy of emotions and really ends up being a beautiful film. The reason that I say that you need to get past the premise is that I think it is somewhat improbable. Walter (Richard Jenkins) returns home from a semester teaching in Connecticut to find two illegal immigrants living in his New York City apartment. It is really no one’s fault as Tarek (Haaz Sleiman) and Zainab (Danai Jekesai Gurira) were duped by a man posing as a landlord to the building through whom they thought they were leasing the apartment legally. In an act of extreme kindness (and slight stupidity) Walter allows the couple to stay with him until they find somewhere else to go. This is, in my opinion, the improbable aspect of the movie. How many of us would feel safe or comfortable with ANY stranger living under the same roof in this day and age? I don’t think I’m paranoid to think that I wouldn’t be as gracious as Walter. None the less, he does offer his hospitality and the movie goes on from there.

Walter is shown as a very simple man who has become more and more detached from people and his job since the death of his wife. His indifference is shown when he simply whites out the year on his college course’s syllabus rather than putting forth the effort of creating a new one for the semester. Even the reason for him returning to New York shows the lack of passion he feels for his job. He is forced to present a paper (for which he is the co-author) at a conference in New York. It turns out that he didn’t actually do any work on the paper; he just lent his name out to a colleague since he has such a solid academic reputation. Walter tries to convince himself that he is so unengaged with the course he is teaching because he is so focused on writing his own book, but he even has trouble convincing himself of that. The only glimpse of internal struggle we see is the fact that he apparently is trying very hard to learn the piano, a desire probably resulting from the fact that his late wife was a concert pianist.

His very mundane life is turned on its ear with the appearance of Tarek and his girlfriend. Walter immediately becomes very close to Tarek, a relationship that I think is based on the common feeling that both men have of being an outsider. Tarek is an outsider in the country and Walter seems to be an outsider in his own life. Zainab and Walter don’t have as strong of a connection, but they do get along. Walter is fascinated with the African Drum that Tarek plays every day in Washington Square park, so much so that Tarek eventually offers to teach him how to play. Things turn badly though when Tarek is arrested for a minor offense and, in turn, faces possible deportation back to Syria. Tarek’s arrest brings Tarek’s mother into Walter’s life and they experience a very interesting relationship, one that is probably the most sincere that Walter has had in a long time.

The best thing about this movie is that it doesn’t really follow any formula. I’m not saying that there are shocking plot twists, but more than once I was expecting a generic plot element to happen and it never did. The aspect was either left to the imagination or a completely different plot aspect was introduced. The acting is also brilliant. There is a constant feeling that the emotions that actors are trying to convey are raw and real. I can’t really explain why the performances stand out the way they do other than to say these people truly understood the material they were working with. So much so that Richard Jenkins was actually nominated for an Academy Award for his role. That really says something because his film was substantially less widely known than any of his fellow nominees’. The Visitor is just a movie about a guy who seems to be lost in his life at an age where most people seem to have everything figured out. It turns out this uncertainty is really a blessing in disguise in the fact that Walter ends up meeting people and doing things that he might never have had the chance to otherwise.

Big Night

2009-12-14T19:24:00.004-05:00

Big Night

"Primo and Secondo are two brothers who have emigrated from Italy to open an Italian restaurant in America. Primo is the irascible and gifted chef, brilliant in his culinary genius, but determined not to squander his talent on making the routine dishes that customers expect. Secondo is the smooth front-man, trying to keep the restaurant financially afloat, despite few patrons other than a poor artist who pays with his paintings. The owner of the nearby Pascal's restaurant, enormously successful (despite its mediocre fare), offers a solution - he will call his friend, a big-time jazz musician, to play a special benefit at their restaurant. Primo begins to prepare his masterpiece, a feast of a lifetime, for the brothers' big night..."

4 Stars

I will tell you one thing for sure about this movie, it will make you hungry. Big Night is a story of a failing Italian restaurant on the Jersey Shore in the 1950s. It is run by Secondo (Stanley Tucci) and his chef/older brother Primo (Tony Shaloub). If you speak Italian or Spanish, you will get the irony of their names.

To be honest, there is not a lot of flash or style to this movie, but I still think it’s really good. At the heart of the film is the relationship of two brothers. Secondo constantly wrestles with the business side of the restaurant and is perpetually getting closer and closer to selling out in order to have a successful business. He can pander to the locals and give them the “Americanized” Italian food that works so well for their competitor restaurant down the street or he can stay true to his Italian heritage and produce good quality food. For Primo the issue is much clearer. He will see the restaurant close and move back to Italy before he compromises even the slightest degree of quality of his food. Because of this, they do what brothers do and butt heads constantly over the future of the restaurant. In the end though, they prove that family is the most important thing. The final scene is about 5 minutes long, but there are no words spoken. Instead, they speak volumes with just their actions and you are left with a truly heartwarming feeling. If you appreciate good acting, this is definitely a movie I would recommend seeing.

Paper Heart

2009-12-09T09:34:00.001-05:00

Paper Heart

"Paper Heart follows Nick and Charlyne on a cross-country journey to document what exactly "love" is. Interviewing ministers, happily married couples, chemists, romance novelists, divorce lawyers, a group of children and more, the determined young girl attempts to find definition and perhaps even experience the mysterious emotion. But as they travel across the United States and even venture to "The City of Love" her pessimistic denial may hinder her chances at finding real happiness."

2 stars

I've read that the makers of this film are calling it a "hybrid documentary," since it blends traditional documentary with fictional story telling. A good idea in theory, but hard to pull off. It's a thin and awkward line, one that Charlyne does not walk well, and it's really obvious which scenes are staged and which are real. Michael Cera is famous enough now to be distracting rather than acceptable in his 'role' as Charlene's love interest.

My favorite parts were the real documentary - interviewing people about love (a middle-aged divorcee, a biker gang, a couple who married when they were 17). There's the straight-forward conversation, followed by a cute and entertaining puppet version of an anecdote. Trust me, it sounds weird but it works.

If this was an honest documentary in the style of This American Life, it would have been enjoyable. Or if it was a fictional movie about a girl making a documentary, it would have been enjoyable. But trying to do both at the same time just doesn't work.

84 Charing Cross Road

2009-12-04T20:27:00.003-05:00

84 Charing Cross Road

"When feisty New York City writer Helene Hanff (Anne Bancroft) mails a note to a small London bookshop asking for some rare English classics, reserved bookseller Frank Doel (Anthony Hopkins) answers her request, beginning a touching and humorous correspondence. Across two continents and over the course of 20 years, Frank and Helene come to rely on the extraordinary friendship stemming from their intimate missives."

4 stars

This is a movie for book lovers, period. Anyone else will find it too slow, too boring, too gentle. But as a book lover, I greatly enjoyed it. The epistolary style (think You've Got Mail) is a favorite of mine, and the fact that the movie is based on the book which is based on the actual letters between Helene Hanff and Frank Doel just makes it all the sweeter. And I love Anne Bancroft, who is great in this role (but then, when isn't she?). There's no contrived romantic tensions, just the simple, honest story of genuine friendship. Enjoyable, stress-free, and comforting to watch.

Phoebe in Wonderland

2009-11-24T23:14:00.003-05:00

Phoebe in Wonderland

"Whether at home or at school, 9-year-old Phoebe (Elle Fanning) always seems to get in trouble for breaking the rules. When her drama teacher casts her in a production of "Alice in Wonderland," Phoebe begins to receive personal advice from the play's characters."

2 stars

Good child actors are rare, and there are a lot of children in this movie. Do the math.

Elle Fanning (Phoebe) is one of the good ones, but the material she has to work with is all over the place. We never can tell whether we are supposed to support Phoebe as free-thinker or pity her for her mental disorder. As for Phoebe's parents, Felicity Huffman just seems tortured the whole time, and Bill Pullman is about 15 years too old for the role. The kids are extra cruel. The teachers are extra ignorant. The drama teacher is extra quirky. The movie tries to be imaginative and whimsical (and what's with the two Swan Lake scenes?), but ends up playing like a made-for-TV Lifetime movie of the week.

The Express

2009-11-18T23:26:00.003-05:00

The Express

"This biopic focuses on the relationship of Ernie Davis (1939-1963), a gifted African-American athlete, and his coach from 1958 to 1962 at Syracuse University, Ben Schwartzwalder (1909-1993). Schwartzwalder recruits Davis with the help of All-American running back, Jim Brown. The civil rights movement is gaining steam; Davis experiences prejudice on campus, in town, and on the field, sometimes from teammates. How he handles it and how he challenges Schwartzwalder to stand up for his players provide a counterpoint to several great seasons that lead first to a national championship and then to the Heismann Trophy."

3.5 of stars

I feel like this movie is a victim of timing. Don't get me wrong, it's a good movie and it can stand on its own laurels, but it's just too late for me. After the gold standards like Rudy and Remember the Titans, I think it's hard to put forth a really good football movie that doesn't seem formulaic. Unfortunately, this one does, but it really shouldn't diminish the movie as a whole. The film is pretty accurate as to what happened in Ernie Davis' life, so it's hard to count that as a strike against it. And the story itself is a very important one to tell. Ernie Davis was the first black man to win the Heisman Trophy. That happening in a sport that has so many strong ties to the 'Old South' really makes the accomplishment the biggest cultural event in sports since Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier. But everything just doesn't come together in SUCH a way that it makes you feel like you're seeing a sports epic for the very first time.

I've been a fan of Rob Brown ever since Finding Forrester, and he delivers another solid performance. By his own right, Denis Quaid does a very good portrayal of legendary Syracuse coach Ben Schwartzwalder. But again, it's just not enough to push the movie over the top for me. Inevitably it will be on TNT or TBS in the next year or two, and I definitely recommend sitting down for it, but it's just not one I would run out and rent the next chance I got.

Robyn's Response: Layer Cake

2009-11-18T22:23:00.000-05:00

(Todd's review here)

2 stars

There's a subset of movies known as 'British Crime Films.' Snatch, Rock'nRolla, Layer Cake. You know the drill - British mobsters with an extensive network, guys all named One Two, Turkish, and Mr. Lucky. A caper gone hilariously and violently wrong. A pretty girl or two. Everything working out for our anti-hero in the end.

I loved Snatch. I liked Rock'n'Rolla. If I saw Layer Cake first, it might have a higher rating. But it's more of the same, and it doesn't even do 'the same' well. I wasn't really into the storyline (drug dealer pulls one last con before going straight), and I kept losing track of the characters. (Is it weird to say that British people look the same to me?) Sienna Miller (who I don't think is that hot) was on screen purely for some T&A. At one point, the characters say 'So you killed (X) because he did (Y).' Normally I hate it when the character vocalizes what the audience has concluded on their own, but this time I needed it. And I didn't even pick up on the fact that Daniel Craig's character's name was never mentioned. There was too much random shit going on.

One Day in September

2009-11-18T21:06:00.002-05:00

One Day in September

"The 1972 Munich Olympics were interrupted by Palestinian terrorists taking Israeli athletes hostage. Besides footage taken at the time, we see interviews with the surviving terrorist, Jamal Al Gashey, and various officials detailing exactly how the police, lacking an anti-terrorist squad and turning down help from the Israelis, botched the operation."

4 stars

For those of you who don't know, this film is an Academy Award winning documentary of the horrifying events of the 1972 Summer Olympic Games. If you've seen Munich, these are the actual events that caused to the retaliatory Jewish team to hunt down the responsible Palestinians.

The story is just sad and tragic because so many things could have prevented the deaths of these athletes. The German government was actually intentionally lax on their security around the Olympic Village because they were still trying to shake the infamy of the Nazi regime that had misused the Berlin Olympics four decades earlier. In a cruel twist of fate, some American athletes actually helped the terrorists climb the wall to the village because they themselves were sneaking back in after a night out on the town. Even after the kidnapping began, the German government basically botched every possible decision they could even allowing the games to go on while the police were negotiating.

The event also marked an important turning point in broadcast journalism that really can't be fully understood by anyone who is younger than 45 years old. This was really the first time that a major international event had gone down live on 24 hour television. Today we take that for granted because there are a plethora of 24 hour cable networks, but this was something completely new to the world. The gathering of information, however, doesn't seem to have changed in 37 years because everyone seemed to stumble through the same kind of misinformation and false reports that cause so much confusion today. Even the broadcast itself stalled one rescue attempt by a German police squad because, yes, the terrorists were actually able to see the planned attack on the television they had in the hostages' apartment. The younger of us have still probably seen the chilling footage when the late Jim McKay, anchor for ABC news, looks into the camera and somberly says, "They're all gone."

The documentarian did a great job and some unbelievably exhaustive research. He was even able to get an interview with the sole remaining terrorist who had to give the interview with a blurred face and altered voice. The movie doesn't hold back either. It is very matter-of-fact with what happened minute by minute and is able to convey the simultaneous fear of the people who knew what was going on and the obliviousness of the surrounding athletes who still had no idea. He also makes some good selection with the music that keeps the pace moving pretty well. You need to be prepared though, because a few scenes contain some pretty graphic images. In the end, you are really just left scratching your head at how an event meant to be so peaceful and politically neutral could turn into such a scene of hate and violence.

Gigantic

2009-11-18T20:42:00.004-05:00

Gigantic

"Do we ever get what we want? Brian sells mattresses in a warehouse store. His father and older brothers have material success; he wants a child. He's applied to adopt a baby from China. A man who appears homeless seems to be stalking Brian with violent intent. He meets Happy, the daughter of a rich, quirky customer. She doesn't stick to anything, but she and Brian hit it off, except for her vomiting when she learns about his adoption idea. He wants her to meet his family, and there's a call about the adoption. What will Happy do?"

1 star

This movie had SO many great actors, that I'm actually pissed it sucked so bad. I like Paul Dano. I really like Zooey Deschanel. I think Zack Galifianakis is hilarious. And I think John Goodman has done a good job since 'Roseanne' in picking roles that legitimize him as a real actor. That being said, this movie blew big 'ol donkey dick.

Let me summarize the first 30 minutes: Brian (Paul Dano) goes to visit his scientist friend who apparently researches something by trying to get rats to drown. Then he goes to work at the Mattress Store that he works at in an abandoned warehouse. Oh wait, first a homeless guy (Zack Galifianakis) randomly tries to beat him to death with a pipe. Then he gets to work and sells a $8,000 bed to Al (John Goodman) who can barely speak in full sentences. Then Al's daughter, I can't believe this is her name, Happy (Zooey Deschanel) comes in a few hours later to pay for the bed and ends up sleeping on it in the middle of the store for 3 hours. Then Brian fucks Happy in the back of her station wagon. Then Brian tells Happy that he is trying to adopt a little baby from China . . . I'm sorry WHAT?! My brain just crawled out of my head so it could reach down and punch me in the nuts.

I would tell you more about the plot, but I couldn't force myself to watch anymore of the craptastic adventure in weirdness. Look, I like weird. I think its pretty obvious that I like weird. But there is GOOD weird and then there is just weird for the sake of being weird. This movie was the latter. So, sorry Paul Dano, in this instance I don't think I will 'drink your milkshake'.

Taking Chance

2009-11-18T20:06:00.005-05:00

Taking Chance

"In April, 2004, casualties mount in Iraq. At Quantico, choices focus on increasing troop strength or only replacing casualties. Lt. Col. Mike Strobl crunches numbers. Stung by his Superior's rejection of his recommendation because he lacks recent combat experience, Strobl volunteers for escort duty, accompanying the remains Pfc. Chance Phelps, killed at 19. From Dover to Philadelphia by hearse, from there to Minneapolis and on to Billings by plane, and then by car to Phelps' Wyoming home - person after person pays respects. Kind words, small gifts, and gratitude are given Strobl to deliver to the family on this soul-searching journey. What are his own discoveries?"

4.5 stars

If it has been a while since you have reminded yourself of the amazing capabilities of our men and women in uniform, then you need to do yourself a favor and go see this movie like . . . yesterday. Now, before anyone gets their panties in a bunch with their own opinion of the war in Iraq I have 4 words for you, "Shut the Hell UP!" That is not what this movie is about in the slightest. In fact, its apolitical nature is one of the big reasons that I am so high on this film.

You might initially think that this movie is going to be nothing but praise for a fallen soldier, and to some extent you may be right. But in reality the movie is not about Chance Phelps, it is about the internal struggle of Lt. Col. Mike Strobl (Kevin Bacon). We all have friends or know someone that has friends in the military , so we know that no one is perfect. But I still have to think that there is a certain amount of inherent respect that comes with being an American soldier, and that realization is not lost on Strobl. The movie covers his round-a-bout journey with Chance's body from Dover AFB to Chance's hometown in Wyoming. And at every turn Strobl makes it his highest priority to ensure that Chance's body is treated with respect and dignity.

The awe inspiring thing is that he doesn't have to go to the lengths that he does. Most of the time, no one is around that knows military protocol. So, he has no reason to stand at attention whenever the casket is moved or stand watch over the body by night when he is forced to spend an extra evening in a Montana airplane hanger, but he does it anyway.

And it's not just Strobl. This movie was based off of his own journal that he kept, so most of it is true. That's why it makes me so proud to see how the everyday citizens reacted to seeing Strobl and the mission he had undertaken. The respect and admiration that they treated Strobl and the casket with makes you really want to step back and appreciate that, while people piss us off everyday, most of us are inherently good and we know the right thing to do.

There are so many moments in this movie that you just get lost in, and Kevin Bacon does a great job of conveying the fierce internal struggle of a conflicted man without saying much at all. Soldiers are just people too and it doesn't make them any less committed to really just wanting to be with their families. So, you really feel for this guy who is just beating himself up inside while everyone else around him is putting him up on a pedestal.

From the marines who take care of his body, to the people Strobl meets on the way, to the family and friend that loved Chance so much, there are just so many points in the film that you just get goosebumps, and if you DON'T get them, you need to check your pulse.

Todd's Response: Sita Sings the Blues

2009-11-17T21:53:00.006-05:00

(Robyn's Review Here)

3.5 Stars

So, I seem to be in a certain mood about movies lately and that is "Everything Has Been Done Before". Because of this funk, I found this movie very refreshing. Like Robyn mentioned, you really can't say anything bad about the visual effects because they are REALLY impressive. What impresses me the most about them is how unique the four different narrations are. When I was watching the movie, I assumed that four different animators had come together to layer their films, but it turns out that they are all done by the same sad lady. It's really saying something when you consider that most animators pick a certain style and stick with it. It becomes their signature and you can almost tell who did the movie before you read the credits. But this director is actually brave enough to try her hand at 4 distinctive styles and she does them very well.

I think the genius in the movie comes from two concepts. The idea of having 3 actual Indians recount the story (as best they can) brings a very comfortable feel to the movie. They aren't always sure of the details and sometimes even argue about what really happened, but it gives you the feeling that you are sitting around the dinner table with friends, drinking good wine, and listening to a great story. The other cool concept is having one story line being completely driven by 1920s music. The 2D Vector animation used in this segment is probably the most advanced of all the segments, so pairing it with music from the 1920s gives it a really interesting feel that hooks you from the beginning.

My criticisms of the movie are only a few, but I think they hurt the movie a good bit. While the Vector animation and 1920s music is cool initially, it is grossly overused. The concept is intriguing at first, but there are like 10 to 12 songs (and they almost all sound alike) so it leads you to check your watch on occasion to see how much time is left in the movie. Then there is the director's "almost" autobiographical story line. I understand that this is supposed to explain how the director came upon the story and the desire to make the film, but it is really unnecessary. Its entirety probably only adds up to 5 minutes (so it is not very developed) and I found myself being taken out of the movie trying to figure out just how this particular segment was supposed to relate to the rest of the film. In my opinion, this story about how the director was dumped by her husband really just needs to be in the commentary or added as a bonus material segment because it really has no place in the actual film. Lastly, I wasn't a big fan of the plot itself. While some may see it as an example of true love and devotion, I just see it as an incredibly sexist story about how women are second class citizens and should be subservient to their husbands. But then again, I could probably say the same thing about much of the stories from Christian mythology. (Side note: If you were just offended by the fact that I referred to some Bible stories as mythology, you need to get out more . . . seriously.)

All in all though, I think I'm on the same page as Robyn (doesn't happen too often). I'm not putting this on my all time best list or anything, but it's definitely worth checking out. Any if you smoke the ganja, then get some friends together, light up a bowl, and have a good damn night.

Robyn's Response: Wristcutters

2009-11-13T09:41:00.002-05:00

(Todd's review here)

2 Stars

All of the reasons Todd liked this movie are the same reasons that I didn't. I don't like Tom Waits. I think Shannyn Sossamon always plays the same character. And for me, the movie tried too hard. The metaphorical stuff shouldn't be so obvious, and make you think "Hmm, I bet this is supposed to symbolize something but I don't know what." Effective symbolism should be subtle and natural. The movie gets two stars soley for the redeeming Eugene Hutz, aka the lead singer from Gogol Bordello (also cameod as his backing band in the film). I love that crazy motherfucker - see Everything Is Illuminated if you want more of him.

The Seventh Seal

2009-11-12T23:55:00.006-05:00

The Seventh Seal

“A Knight and his squire are home from the crusades. Black Death is sweeping their country. As they approach home, Death appears to the knight and tells him it is his time. The knight challenges Death to a chess game for his life. The Knight and Death play as the cultural turmoil envelopes the people around them as they try, in different ways, to deal with the upheaval the plague has caused.”

4.5 stars

If you consider yourself a movie buff, this is a movie you have probably seen. If not, you need to put it on the top of your list because you don’t know shit about the history of cinema until you have experienced this film. The fact that this move was made in 1957, literally dumbfounds me. Everything about it from the cinematography to plot elements are light years ahead of its time. It is the calling card and first major success of the legendary director Ingmar Bergman. If you don’t know who that is, then I suggest you go sit quietly at your desk and put your head down until the bell rings.

This movie literally wrote the book on the use of lighting and shadows for all subsequent films. I’m serious; you would be hard pressed to find any film school worth its salt that doesn’t show this as an introductory requirement. The film comes off (like its director) as very pretentious, but in a good way. The story is very straightforward, but it tries (successfully) to be so much more. A disillusioned Knight returns from the crusade angry and confused. These feelings are further manifested by the fact that he is returning to homeland ravaged by the plague where people are dying by the thousands. He then engages in a lengthy game of chess with Death (both figuratively and literally). And that’s really the entire story; there is not much more meat to the plot than that. But it’s Bergman’s exploration through the human condition and dissection of the human psyche that leave you thinking about the movie days after you’ve left the theater.

And the themes really are timeless. How many different generations can identify with the questions about the futility of war and the morality questions that go hand in hand with it? Or the inevitability of death and, to an extent, life’s own inherent futility? Even the most opinionated amongst us would find themselves at least thinking twice about their own beliefs on life and death. Most of the time you go to the movies just to be entertained, but every once and a while you see a film that really makes you think. THIS is one of those movies.

SPOILERS: The Knight makes his journey home and, along the way, meets a wide array of characters that facilitate him reexamining his own purpose in life. He really does come full circle from a person who believes in nothing to a person that believes in the most powerful of human ideas . . . hope. Unfortunately not even his transformation can save him from an inevitable end. So, he shares a ‘Last Supper’ with his new found brethren and accepts his fate. The last scene is beautifully eerie and ends with the only words spoken the entire movie by a mute girl. She looks into the eyes of death and chillingly whispers, “It is finished.”

It really is a tale that, again, we can all identify with. I say this because, as much as we try to avoid losing our own game of chess with Death, in the end it seems Death wins . . . as it always does.

The Lookout

2009-11-12T23:51:00.002-05:00

The Lookout

“An admired high school hockey player (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) with a bright future foolishly takes a drive in the night with his girl friend and two other friends with his headlights off with devastating results. The former athlete is left with a brain injury that prevents him from remembering many things for extended periods of time. To compensate, he keeps notes in a small notebook to aid him in remembering what he is to do. He also lives with a blind friend (Jeff Daniels) who aids him. Obviously, with the mental incapacitation, he is unable to have meaningful work. Thus he works as a night cleaning man in a bank. It is there he comes under the scrutiny of a gang planning to rob the bank. The leader (Matthew Goode) befriends him and gets him involved with a young woman (Isla Fisher) who further reels him in. After they get close and after reeling him in with his own failures, the bank plan unfolds. Confused but wanting to escape his current existence, he initially goes along with the scheme. After realizing he is being used, he attempts to stop the robbery, which of course immediately goes awry. Bruce McGill and Alberta Watson also co-star as the young man's parents, who still search for the person that was there before the tragic crash.”

4 stars

Let me start out by saying that this is a good movie. Scratch that, this is a really good movie. If you’ve seen the great movie that is ‘Memento’, then you will identify with this movie immediately. They have very similar feels and plot lines. But it’s not fair to say that this is a ‘Memento’ knock off because this film has a personality all its own. We open up with Chris Pratt (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and three of his friends driving down a country road the night of prom. It’s a really beautiful scene in which Chris turns off his headlights so everyone can see the wave of fireflies that lines the countryside. His arrogance is obvious, though, and eventually causes a wreck with a stalled combine in the road that leaves two friends dead, Chris’ girlfriend without a limb, and Chris with major brain damage.

The story really begins a few years later with Chris living in a dump of an apartment with a sage-like blind roommate played by Jeff Daniels. Chris is functional and his memory loss is not as prevalent as the protagonist in ‘Memento’, but he has a major problem with sequencing. Because of this, he must write all of his daily routine down in a notebook so he can remember how to get through the day. The good news is that he does seem to be progressing, but the internal conflict is gut wrenching. In an instant he went from being a smart, charming, promising athlete to a guy who can only handle the monotonous job of being a night janitor at the local bank. Further layers are added when we learn that Chris’ family is very rich and his father VERY demanding. Chris has chosen to live in squalor, however, as penance for his selfish actions which also include him visiting the site of his crash every week to remind him (as he puts it), “. . . just how big a piece of shit . . .” he is.

Enter Gary Spargo, a supposed former classmate of Chris’ older sister. Unbeknownst to Chris, Gary knows absolutely everything about him, the way he feels about himself, how the injury has affected him, and the routine he repeats daily. Gary (played by an astounding Matthew Goode) uses all of this information to masterfully manipulate Chris into becoming an unwitting accomplice to their planned bank robbery.

The performances really stand out in this movie. Gary makes his manipulation effortless, so much so that I almost wanted to join up with his bank crew. His ability to make all of the people around him do exactly what he wants is impressive and a bit unsettling. Jeff Daniels also did a spectacular job of playing a convincing blind man. So many time people turn a blind person into a cartoon and it really detracts from the movie. This is not the case here. Last, but not least, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is just awesome. Apparently he would deprive himself of sleep and work out intensely right before scenes in order to give the character a very disoriented feel. Needless to say it worked because we totally buy Chris as a mentally damaged young man.

As with any movie, it is not without its drawbacks. To me the heist itself and the ensuing actions by Chris lack the intelligence that had been prevalent in the entire movie leading up to that point. There are also several storylines that are left open ended regarding Chris’ father, Chris’ love interest (Isla Fisher), and the police officer who brings Chris donuts every night during work. But when you look at the film as a whole, these are only minor critiques and shouldn’t detract from the film’s effect. Ultimately the movie is about anger, remorse, and eventually redemption, and it’s one of the better ones that I have seen in a while.

Wristcutters: A Love Story

2009-11-12T23:45:00.000-05:00

Wristcutters: A Love Story

“Despondent over his breakup with Desiree, Zia slashes his wrists and goes to an afterlife peopled by suicides, a high-desert landscape dotted by old tires, burned-out cars, and abandoned sofas. He gets a job in a pizza joint. By chance, Zia learns that Desiree offed herself a few months after he did, and she's looking for him. He sets off with Eugene (an electrocuted Russian rocker) to find her, and they pick up a hitchhiker, Mikal, who's looking for the People in Charge, believing she's there by mistake. They're soon at the camp of Kneller, where casual miracles proliferate. They hear rumors of a miraculous king. Can Zia find Desiree? Then what? Where there's death there's hope.”

3.5 stars

Hmmmm, I’m still thinking about this one. It was definitely not your normal movie, but then again what is? From the beginning I was pretty into it. Tom Waits is one of my favorite musicians. So, when the main character Zia leans over and starts playing his record in the opening scene, I’m starting to have high hopes. Then, not shockingly at all based on the name of the movie, we make a hard left turn as we see Zia dead on the floor from slicing his wrists open. Then everything starts to open up and we’re introduced to this world of Limbo-esque Purgatory. But it’s not the boring Purgatory that we all think of. This world works just like the living, except that everyone is dead. And not in the creepy zombie way where people are rapidly decaying, people have jobs, live “lives”, and (for some very fucked up reason) have families that have also off-ed themselves. Because you know what they say, the family that commits mortal sin together, stays together.

But the concept was really interesting and it really stimulated the part of your brain that deals with outside thought. What if this whole other world were possible? What if it exists and we don’t know it? And the real burning question for me ‘What happens in this world if you kill yourself again?’ The director does a phenomenal job with the details. Everything from color to clothing to the most minute prop has been thought out to remind us that this world is NOT the one we live in, it is something completely different and not fully understood by anyone “living” in it.

Another big plus for this movie was Mikal (Shannyn Sossamon). If you look up “sexy” in the dictionary, there is a picture of Shannyn. Ever since ’40 Days and 40 Nights’ I’ve been in love with her look and her style of acting. She really becomes the driving force of the movie that really makes the other character’s relationships work. She embodies the naiveté and innocence that makes this bleak and desolate world bearable enough that the viewer doesn’t want to slice his own wrists (yes, I get the irony).

And if I was excited that the movie had Tom Wait’s music in it, I got even more into it when the man himself showed up to play a major role. His character Kneller runs a camp for people who have lost their way. But there is something magical about the camp because everyone keeps performing tiny miracles, but only when they aren’t trying. This is the point in the movie where I had my 10th grade English Literature class flashback. It seemed like there was real genius in this move that I was missing, like the broken headlights, and starless nights, and color changing fish were actually a motif or metaphors for something much deeper. I guess I just wasn’t open minded enough to get the true meaning, or maybe I just hadn’t smoked enough pot.
So, ¾ of the way through the movie I’m still digging it. It’s weird, but good weird. And then . . . Will Arnet shows up (think Gob from Arrested Development).

And that’s the point where it completely went off the tracks for me. Up until then things worked, especially the casting. I thought everyone fit their role very well and had just enough weird in them for the scenes to really work, but Wil Arnet’s casting as the Messiah was a body blow to this movie. Don’t get me wrong, I like the guy and find him very funny, but he is almost too well known as playing a certain type of comedic character that there was no way for me to take him seriously as ‘The Messiah’.

The funny thing is, once his scene was over, everything went back to normal (well as close to normal as this movie can get) and the movie ends with a smile . . . literally.

If you’re going to watch this movie, you have to check your morality questions about suicide at the door. The movie is not about that, and if you cloud your perception by making it about suicide you’re going to miss out on a good flick. As much as I want to give the movie 4 stars or maybe even more, the Gob scene just won’t let it be so.

Management

2009-11-12T23:36:00.002-05:00

Management

“Mike works at his parents' motel in Kingman, population 27,000, on old Route 66. Sue sells art for a Baltimore firm to corporations for office walls. He takes one look at her from behind as she registers at the motel and determines to connect. He's sweet, but hapless, with no ambition other than spending time with her. She's enigmatic - rarely smiling, occasionally impulsive, committed to helping homeless people, feeling the clock tick after a breakup with a boyfriend who could have provided security. Is there any way he stands a chance with her? What can he offer?”

3.5 stars

This is not your typical romantic comedy, and that's clear from the very beginning of the movie. Mike (Steve Zahn) is a quiet, lonely guy working as the night manager for his parent's rural motel. But when Sue (Jennifer Anniston) shows up looking for a room for the night, he proves that he's got more cajones than we might initially expect. He knocks on her door one night to offer her the "complimentary bottle of wine" they give to all guests . . . yeah right. It's clearly a line, but he delivers it with such honesty that Sue plays along . . . for a little while bit before politely kicking him out. This is where the movie really could have gone one of two ways. It could have been the romantic comedy it turned into or it could have easily taken a Norman Bates turn and become an awful horror flick. Luckily it was the former. After checking out of the motel, Sue doubles back to find Mike in the motel laundromat. In an inexplicable moment of desire Sue jumps Mike and they, um, 'do some laundry'.

On the surface the movie seems pretty predictable, and for the most part it is. We're left to assume that Sue is tired of the fast, somewhat fake life in the big city and is intrigued by this humble small town guy. However, she thinks it is a onetime fling but Mike, just like a puppy, decides to follow her back home leading to some obviously odd situations.

Even though the story may not knock you out of your seat, it does send a pretty good message. There is a constant theme of persistence and going after what you truly want, but the bigger message is shown through the evolution of Sue's character. She comes to realize that she has spent so much of her life focusing on other "causes" that she has neglected her own self and sense of purpose. And that can be true for many of us who may focus on the outside world as a way to avoid exploring own inner selves.

A high point of the movie, though, is casting. It is spot on. No other person could have pulled off this role other than Steve Zahn. He has to walk a very fine line to keep his character endearing and affable because it could easily slip over to creepy and weird. He also has to chops to complete Mike's transformation in the end into a much more strong and capable person. As actors go, I think he's pretty underrated. Woody Harrelson also does a good job walking a tight rope as the man who is competing with Mike for Mike's affections. He's enough of a jerk that the audience pleads for Mike to win, but he shows enough heart that we actually feel for him in the end. I also think Sue has another really good performance. In the big picture, I think she has done a good job in selecting roles since Friends. She is not completely trying to go to the opposite spectrum of Rachel Green, but she has picked parts that inch farther and farther away so that eventually, she will be considered in the class of actresses that really can run the gambit from dramatic to comedic.

In the end, the film isn't anything to write home about but it's another one of those that you could put on your list for watching on a Sunday evening.

Notting Hill

2009-11-12T23:31:00.005-05:00

Notting Hill

“Every man's dream comes true for William Thacker, an unsuccessful Notting Hill bookstore owner, when Anna Scott, the world's most beautiful woman and best-liked actress, enters his shop. A little later, he still can't believe it himself, William runs into her again - this time spilling orange juice over her. Anna accepts his offer to change in his nearby apartment, and thanks him with a kiss, which seems to surprise her even more than him. Eventually, Anna and William get to know each other better over the months, but being together with the world's most wanted woman is not easy - neither around your closest friends, nor in front of the all-devouring press.”

1.5 stars

Why are so many people high on this movie? I don’t understand. I mean, I like Julia Roberts and the only thing I really know about Hugh Grant is that he likes to get BJs on Sunset Boulevard from skanky prostitutes. But they seem like they should put forth an enjoyable movie. And the writer, I’m told, was supposed to be very good because he did 4 weddings and Funeral. All of these ingredients coupled with the fact that this film was such a commercial and critical success when it came out should mean that I would enjoy it right? Guess not.

Both of their characters just bothered me. Anna (Julia Roberts) is basically a stereotypical spoiled actress who treats William (Hugh Grant) like a toy that she occasionally like to play with while she’s in London. She comes off as an incredibly self involved person with no regard for William’s emotions. But it’s not just her fault. William is one of the biggest pussies I’ve ever seen on screen. He never calls Anna out on her shit, and when he finally gathers up enough testosterone to say “No” to her, he ends up caving about 5 minutes later. I gotta say I had high hopes during the first few scenes of the movie, but when Alec Baldwin made his cameo as Anna’s American actor-boyfriend things got about as screwed up as a phone call Alec would make to his daughter.

And don’t get me started on the soundtrack. We’ve all seen movies that had soundtracks which helped the film (ie Almost Famous), but it takes a lot of shittynes to have the music hurt a film. Separately, the songs in the movie are all pretty good and some of them are classics. But they are used in such places that they almost describe exactly what is going on in the scene. It’s ridiculous. At one point Anna leaves England after she and William have an argument. I was just waiting for them to use another blatantly obvious track like “Ain’t no Sunshine When She’s Gone” . . . AND THEN THEY DID!!!

I’m not sure what’s going on. Romantic Comedies are my guilty pleasure, but I can’t like this one. Maybe I’m missing something but the movie just comes off as frustrating, predictable, and a little bit sad. And just to put the final nail in the coffin, the movie inexplicably spends an extra five minutes at the end showing the two characters getting married and then Anna being pregnant. Really?! Excuse me while I got throw up.

Sita Sings the Blues

2009-11-12T09:59:00.002-05:00

Sita Sings the Blues
"India's ancient epic Ramayana gets a fresh, funny makeover in this award-winning animated film. With song and humor, director Nina Paley juxtaposes the split between Rama and Sita with her own divorce to tell "the greatest break-up story ever told." Original 1920s recordings of singer Annette Hanshaw give musical voice to Sita, while amusing shadow puppets provide the narration for the colorful story."

4 stars

You have to pay attention when watching this movie, especially if you aren't at all familiar with the Ramayana. The storyline is told four ways, each with its own distinctive style. The visuals are really beautiful, and when paired with the music (a combination of traditional Indian music and 1920s tune by Annette Hanshaw), the movie is really breathtaking. The director tries to lighten up the movie a bit, and the story is told with some levity that helps to lighten the rather dark story of Sita. "LOLspeak" is even a caption option! Overall, this movie is fun to look at and listen to, but it helps to do some research first or else you'd be really lost.

Layer Cake

2009-11-11T23:27:00.010-05:00

Layer Cake

“The successful drug dealer Mr. X plans his criminal career intermediating business with drugs without calling the attention, working with a small gang and honoring his payments with the suppliers. On the day planned for his early retirement, the powerful mobster Jimmy Price gives two assignments to him: find Charlie, the addicted daughter of his associate Eddie Temple and negotiate um million pills of high-quality ecstasy with the stupid smalltime gangster Duke. Mr. X hires two acquaintances crooks in a night-club to find Charlie, and he unexpectedly meets Duke's cousin Sidney with his sexy girlfriend Tammy and flirts with her. But Mr. X discovers that the ecstasy was stolen from the dangerous and wild Serbian drug lord Dragan that wants the head of Duke and the drugs back. Further, Eddie shows a tape proving that he has been double-crossed by Jimmy, and also wants the ecstasy. The smart Mr. X plots a scheme to resolve the situation and meet Tammy.”

3.5 stars

This film ain’t easy; you really got to pay attention because there is a lot going on. It has a feel of Snatch, but with a little more reality. By this I mean that Snatch, to me, is very tongue in cheek. The deaths are very over the top so they don’t have as much weight to them, but that’s intentional. This movie is much more down to earth and gritty.

It’s kind of odd to see Daniel Craig play this kind of role. As an American, I am very much a Johnny-come-lately to his career so I have really only seen him in the Bond films. Obviously in those movies he is the epitome of cool and always seems to be in control of the situation. But in this film, that is not the case. While his character is intelligent, he constantly seems to be adapting to outside factors that keep throwing him off his game. The feeling that his character is “in too deep” crosses your mind several times. Just when you think he is a step ahead of his antagonists, the plot will take a hard left turn.

There is one glaring problem with this movie, and I am not even going to pretend that my argument is unbiased or has any intellectual validity at all, but here goes. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH SIENNA MILLER!!! For me, she is one of the ten most beautiful women in Hollywood today and the fact that her screen time is limited to a combined 10 minutes is almost a crime against humanity. Granted, she does take full advantage of her all-too-tiny amount of screen time. In one scene she seductively dances with a cigarette just dangling from her lips and in another we get the great pleasure of seeing her change in to a black teddy with attached garters and askldjhsfdah;sd;asjk;ghd; . . . sorry, I passed out on the keyboard.

Anyway, in the end I think most people would be satisfied with this film. I didn’t think it was the greatest, but it did a well enough job of keeping my attention for the 105 minutes. And the ending will probably feel refreshing to those of us that are tired of the dull way that most of these shoot ‘em up flicks conclude. As the boss puts it, “Welcome to the Layer Cake.”

Men In Black & Men In Black II

2009-10-24T23:09:00.011-04:00

Men In Black and Men In Black II
"Men in Black follows the exploits of agents Kay and Jay, members of a top-secret organization established to monitor and police alien activity on Earth. The two Men in Black find themselves in the middle of the deadly plot by an intergalactic terrorist who has arrived on Earth to assassinate two ambassadors from opposing galaxies. In order to prevent worlds from colliding, the MiB must track down the terrorist and prevent the destruction of Earth. It's just another typical day for the Men in Black."
"Kay and Jay reunite to provide our best, last and only line of defense against a sinister seductress who levels the toughest challenge yet to the MIBs untarnished mission statement: protecting the earth from the scum of the universe."

5 stars

While I was writing up my review of Wolverine, I had TBS on in the background. And TBS plays MIB and MIB2 all the time, and I watch it all the time, and tonight is no exception. These movies are pure entertainment, and they are funny. Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones have perfect chemistry and play off of each other beautifully. Smith (Jay) might get the funny lines, be Jones (Kay)s' reactions are just as great. Plus there's a ton of cameos (Biz Markie as the beatboxing alien!), and I love a good cameo.

Kay: All right, Beatrice, there was no alien. The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.
Jay: Wait a minute. You just flash that thing, it erases her memory, and you just make up a new one?
Kay: A standard issue neuralyzer.
Jay: And that weak-ass story's the best you can come up with?
Kay: On a more personal note Beatrice, Edgar ran off with an old girlfriend. You're gonna go stay with your mom a couple nights. You're gonna get over it and decide you're better off.
Jay: Well, yeah, you know, 'cause 'cause he never appreciated you anyway. In fact, you know what - you kicked him out. And now that he's gone you're gonna go into town, you go to Bloomingdale's and find some nice dresses, get yourself some shoes, you know, find somewhere, maybe you can get a facial. And, uh, oh - hire a decorator to come in here quick, 'cause... damn.
(No one says 'Damn!' like Will Smith)

Jay: K! He's a Ballchinian!

Kay: [Explaining how most of the aliens are in Manhattan] You remember "Casablanca", right?
Jay: Yeah.
Kay: Same thing, just no Nazis.
(that one's for Todd)

Wolverine

2009-10-24T22:09:00.003-04:00

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
"It's the story of how Wolverine became Wolverine. Do you really need a summary?"

4 stars

I love movies based on comic books. There's action and comic relief and great characters. I especially like origin stories and prequels because you get to learn the backgrounds of your favorite heroes.

Wolverine (the movie) is a little melodramatic and anvil-y*. But it's based on a comic book, so what did you expect? The good thing is, since Wolverine (the character) is basically part of the pop culture canon, we don't get a lot of unnecessary exposition and explanation. Yes, essentially the whole move is exposition, but the movie doesn't waste time on things like what a mutant is or explaining the whole X-Men universe. If you don't know who the X-Men are or if you don't care, this movie isn't for you. If you're like me, you'll love seeing cameos from your favorite mutants (Hi Gambit!), no matter how much the actor's accent wavers (Hi Taylor Kitsch!), and you might even squeal a little bit at the final scene (after the credits).

Is this movie gonna win any Oscars? Hell no. But it's enjoyable, and that's good enough for me. Not every movie needs to change my life - I'm happy to be simply entertained for a few hours.

*Anvils, anvil-y, anvilicious: Referring metaphorically to the cartoon practice of dropping a big, heavy anvil onto a character. When I use the term, it means that a movie uses really heavy-handed and obvious plot points or movie techniques to get a point across, rather than giving the audience some credit for being able to figure out subtle nuances.

Bang the Drum Slowly

2009-10-23T00:29:00.006-04:00

Bang the Drum Slowly

"The story of a New York pro baseball team and two of its players. Henry Wiggen is the star pitcher and Bruce Pearson is the normal, everyday catcher who is far from the star player on the team and friend to all of his teammates. During the off-season, Bruce learns that he is terminally ill, and Henry, his only true friend, is determined to be the one person there for him during his last season with the club. Throughout the course of the season, Henry and his teammates attempt to deal with Bruce's impending illness, all the while attempting to make his last year a memorable one."

3.5 stars

I may sound like a spoiled little brat here, but it seems like movies didn’t have to be as good 30 years ago to be considered Oscar worthy. There was still a period where an idea could be really fresh because the movie medium itself was still relatively new. In addition, society still didn’t talk about certain things that were taboo, so a movie coming out and dealing with that issue very bluntly was considered a break through. And back then it probably was. But we’re really getting to the point where almost everything has been done, and we’ve seen it all before. That’s why I wasn’t blown away by this movie, but I guess I have to put it in perspective.

The story covers the final season of a dim-witted, Hodgkin’s diagnosed catcher for the ficticous NY Mammoths (basically they’re the Yankees in almost every way; I guess they just didn’t want to or couldn’t get the naming rights). His roommate is the Ace pitcher and all-American pretty boy Author Wiggin (Michael Moriarty). After being diagnosed, Author does everything he can to make sure Bruce (DeNiro) doesn’t get sent down to the minors, even giving up a substantial salary in the process.
I think the movie does a good job of capturing the feel of a major league club house in the 70s. It’s one of camaraderie and mutual respect that is usually left unsaid and mostly manifests itself through good humored ragging. But the movie is very sad. Bruce is ragged on pretty hard in the beginning and only do his fellow teammates start to give him respect when they find out about his illness, so we really don’t know if the care is genuine.

The comic relief comes in the form of the fiery manager who spends half of the movie conducting his own “investigation” to find out where Author and Bruce went during their trip to the Mayo Clinic. Author does a pretty good job of changing the story as he goes to keep the illness a secret as long as possible. As might be expected, the team finally comes together in the end to win the pennant, but a visually ailing Bruce is unable to travel with the team to the World Series. The movie ends pretty abruptly with Bruce dying and then jumping to the cemetery where Author is the only teammate to show up, which may answer the question about how genuine the teammates’ concern was.

All in all though, the movie delivers. We really do end up caring about Bruce and see the true devotion that Author has for him. And DeNiro’s acting is amazing. For those of us that have seen him in Goodfellas, the Godfather, and Analyze That you almost wouldn’t recognize him. He completely transforms himself into a dim witted southerner and he is completely believable. It is almost MORE impressive to me to see him this role after his more famous ones because it shows you just how big his range really is.

If nothing else watch the movie for the titular scene in which a silenced clubhouse listens to Piney Woods (the only teammate unaware of Bruce’s fatal condition) sing the stirring ballad of a cowboy: “Bang the drum slowly, play the pipe lowly / To dust be returning, from dust we begin / Bang the drum slowly, I'll speak of things holy / Above and below me world without end.”

The Proposal

2009-10-23T00:26:00.006-04:00

The Proposal

"For three years, Andrew Paxton has slaved as the assistant to Margaret Tate, hard-driving editor at a New York publisher. When Margaret, a Canadian, faces deportation for an expired visa, she hatches a scheme to marry Andrew - he agrees if she'll promise a promotion. A skeptical INS agent vows to test the couple about each other the next Monday. Andrew had plans to fly home that weekend for his grandma's 90th, so Margaret goes with him - to Sitka, Alaska - where mom, dad, and grams await. Family dynamics take over: tensions between dad and Andrew, an ex-girlfriend, Andrew's dislike of Margaret, and her past color the next few days, with the INS ready to charge Andrew with fraud."

2.5 stars

So, let me explain something to you. I have been in love with Sandra Bullock for quite some time now. Ever since I saw “While You Were Sleeping” I knew that one day she would be my wife. And she held out a long time for me (trust me the Jesse James thing ain’t gonna last). For this reason, I will go to see absolutely ANY movie that she is in, no matter how mundane it looks. And coincidentally enough, I’m actually a fan of Ryan Reynolds too (I am already anticipating the gay joke, so don’t even bother). I have seen most of the stuff that he has been in and, in my opinion, he’s one of the better actors of his generation. So, you would think The Proposal would get me all excited. It should be a beautiful convergence of my future wife, one of my favorite actors, and the romantic comedy genre that is my guilty pleasure. Even with all of this, I wasn’t expecting too much from this movie and man did they deliver on that.

The movie isn’t good. That’s not to say that it’s bad, it’s just not good (the word ‘meh’ comes to mind). If you saw the preview, you pretty much could write the movie. It just takes you through the motions of a typical romantic comedy and ends as expectedly as you might, well, expect (my 8th grade English teacher is rolling over in her grave right now). If you’re looking for something easy and light on a Sunday night, then this movie would be adequate.

My only real beef with the movie is the hypocrisy. A Romantic Comedy, by definition, is supposed to tout romance and the power of love but, in my opinion, this film cheapens it. It basically says that if you throw any guy and girl together for a weekend they can fall in love enough to get married. Really? And it’s not even that fantasy that some people have of meeting someone, having a whirlwind romance, and getting married on the spur of the moment. Literally at 12:00 PM on Sunday the couple loathes each other and at 8:00 that evening they decide they are meant to be together. Again I ask, really? Don’t get me wrong, and this may sound weird, but the movie would have been much better if it were a dark comedy. The story briefly touches on Sandra’s abandonment issues and Ryan’s Oedipus complex with his father. There actually was a lot of meat there that, if it had been explored, might have made for some interesting story telling. But, alas, that’s not the angle they were going for. So, the movie is just adequate.

One saving grace that I might give it is the setting, the entire movie was shot on location in Alaska and the scenery is just amazing. I sometimes found myself ignoring what the actors were saying and just focusing on the picturesque landscape.

Fans of The Office might get excited to see Oscar as the town’s only erotic dancer. But their excitement would quickly fade as his performance feels very forced and simply not funny. Let’s be honest, this movie is a 2 star movie at best. BUT, because of Sandy I am bumping it up to a 2.5.

COMING SOON

2009-10-23T00:18:00.005-04:00

Munich

"After Black September's assassination of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972, Prime Minister Golda Meir okays a black-box operation to hunt down and kill all involved. A team of five gathers in Switzerland led by Avner, a low-level Mossad techie whose father was a war hero and whose wife is pregnant. It's an expendable team, but relying on paid informants, they track and kill several in Europe and Lebanon. They must constantly look over their shoulders for the CIA, KGB, PLO, and their own sources. As the body count mounts -- with retribution following retribution -- so do questions, doubts, and sleepless nights. Loyalties blur. What does it mean to be a Jew?"

3 stars

Anvil! The Story of Anvil!

2009-10-21T20:10:00.006-04:00

Anvil! The Story of Anvil
"Formed by two 14-year-olds in the 1970s, Canadian heavy metal band Anvil influenced the great acts that followed, such as Anthrax and Metallica. This documentary joins Anvil's now middle-aged founders as they recover from a disastrous tour of Europe. Hoping to end their youthful dreams and careers on a high note, Robb Reiner, Steve "Lips" Kudlow and the band set out to record their 13th album, "This Is Thirteen.""

3 stars

This film is pure love letter. It's a love letter to the band (the director's been a fan since 1982), and a love letter to rock and roll.

We open on concert footage from Japan in the 80s with voiceovers from heavy metal stars (Lars Ulrich, Slash, Scott Ian), all proclaiming Anvil as one of the greatest metal bands of all time. And therein lies the movie: who has ever heard of Anvil?

At first you aren't sure if this movie is for real or if it's Spinal Tap in the 21st century. The main focus is on Lips and Robb, the two founders of Anvil, now in their 50s. They've never given up on that rockstar dream. They've got fans (even superfans - watch for the scene where one pours beer up his nose) and are waiting for their big break. It's a common story in the music industry, but the fact that they haven't given up after 30+ years is either extreme dedication and faith, or insanity and arrested development. There's a lot of focus on the brotherly relationship between Lips & Robb, which is textbook rock-and-roll bandmate relationship. The main story follows Anvil as they try to go on tour in Europe, record their 13th album, and get a record label. It becomes clear that Anvil (and Lips especially) occupies two spheres: both band and fan. Lips strikes out with some so-called 'famous' musicians he shares a gig with, who clearly see him as some kind of fruitcake, but he gets love (and respect) in return from others.

With documentaries, you need a really good subject and a really good story and really good editing to be a really good movie. I think it got so many positive reviews out of guilt, in all honesty. The band certainly makes for an interesting subject, but in the end the movie is just good, not great. Poignant piano playing over images of Lips & Robb's return to Tokyo (they really are big in Japan) belittles the moment. I'm rooting for Anvil, but the film drags a little in the middle. We get it: the only ones taking this seriously is the band, and everyone else thinks they are a joke. And maybe they are. But they're following their dream, cliche as it is. And you've got to give the movie credit: there's a scene in the recording studio with the amp turned up to 11.

Trainspotting

2009-10-20T15:27:00.011-04:00

Trainspotting
"A wild, freeform, Rabelaisian trip through the darkest recesses of Edinburgh low-life, focusing on Mark Renton and his attempt to give up his heroin habit, and how the latter affects his relationship with family and friends: Sean Connery wannabe Sick Boy, dimbulb Spud, psycho Begbie, 14-year-old girlfriend Diane, and clean-cut athlete Tommy, who's never touched drugs but can't help being curious about them..."

4 stars

"Good thing comes to those who wait." That's the concept that came to mind while I was watching Trainspotting. If you're not ready for this movie, it's going to knock you on your ass. The story hits the ground running and immediately throws you into a life of squalor and hardcore drug use. Luckily, there's a tongue-in-cheek feel to some of the scenes that keeps us from falling into a deep depression over the stark reality of what exactly is going on.

The first half hour is not for the faint of heart. There is a scene at "The Worst Toilet in Scotland" that is sure to make Grandma and Grandpa switch over to Wheel of Fortune, and another scene at the breakfast table that has equally shocking "fecal comedy". But in looking back, I think the movie was written this way on purpose to weed out casual movie goers who are not going to appreciate (and in this case deserve) the brilliance of the film.

At about the halfway point, you start to realize two things. The first is that this movie is visually astounding. The influence of "A Clockwork Orange" is evident both literally (in one bar scene) and figuratively with regard to the ingenious camera angles and usage of lighting and reflection. The second thing you realize is that EVERYONE in the cast really can act. You almost forget that you're watching a movie and let yourself slip into the notion that it's actually a documentary. The range of emotion goes from boyishly silly to disturbingly dark almost seamlessly, and the actors pull it off very well.

Now, it's not without its drawbacks. The "love story" between Renton and Diane is grossly underdeveloped and not necessarily even needed in the plot. And the fact that no one in the group ever stands up to the sociopathic, ultra-violent Begbie leaves some sense of incompleteness. But the film tends to stay true to itself and the cult-classic novel it is based off of. In the end, like in life, the characters haven't changed much. There is some progress made, most notably in Renton, but most everyone remains the same. It doesn't fall into the trap of Hollywood movies that take a protagonist from near-death-drug-addict all the way to picturesque-family-man in a mere 90 minutes.

It's real, almost too real. And you come to realize that this movie had to be made in the United Kingdom because a puritanical American production would have butchered it until it had the same emotional significance of Half Baked. In fact, two pivotal scenes were actually removed for the US release because they were deemed to graphic. So, make sure to get the director's cut and see why BAFTA has ranked this movie as the 10th most significant British movie of all time.

Robyn's response:
3 stars

I watched Trainspotting over two years ago, and there are certain images that are burned in my mind. The diarrhea and the suppositories, the filthy apartment that causes Tommy to die of toxoplasmosis (from the cat's litter box), Tommy's dead body, the baby's dead body, and the most scarring of all, the dead baby crawling on the ceiling.

On the other hand, I had to go to wikipedia to read a plot summary and refresh my memory. So does this mean it's a good film or a bad film? Am I just remembering the shocking scenes for their shock value? Or was it good cinematography? Did I block the story from my memory because it was so damn depressing? Or because the story just wasn't that memorable?

Casablanca

2009-10-19T23:56:00.010-04:00

Casablanca
"In World War II Casablanca, Rick Blaine, exiled American and former freedom fighter, runs the most popular nightspot in town. The cynical lone wolf Blaine comes into the possession of two valuable letters of transit. When Nazi Major Strasser arrives in Casablanca, the sycophantic police Captain Renault does what he can to please him, including detaining Czech underground leader Victor Laszlo. Much to Rick's surprise, Lazslo arrives with Ilsa, Rick's one time love. Rick is very bitter towards Ilsa, who ran out on him in Paris, but when he learns she had good reason to, they plan to run off together again using the letters of transit. Well, that was their original plan...."

6 STARS (reserved only for this movie)

So, I figured I couldn't do this blog justice without making my favorite movie of all time the first review. There is almost nothing about this film I don't love. It's filled with some of the most memorable quotes in cinema history and, odds are, you know all of them but you just may not realize where they come from. SIX quotes from Casablanca are listed on AFI's List of Top 100 Movie Quotes of All Time. One of them ("Round up the usual suspects.") even inspired a movie of its own.

But its not just the quotes that make this movie. Once in a very long while a film just seamlessly comes together with direction, acting, writing, and music . . . this is one of those movies. The key elements are an intertwining love triangle and the plight of thousands of refugees trying to escape the persecution of Nazi europe. Bogart portrays surly bar owner Rick as only he can. At first we are led to believe that Rick is a self centered anti-hero who "sticks his neck out for no one". But as the story develops we discover the layers to his character and the broken heart that has led to his life of eternal bachelor-dom. This wound is reopened when his former lover Ilsa coincidentally walks into his "gin joint" . . . with her husband.

Paul Henried portrays Ilsa's husband, Victor Laszlo, who is the head of the underground movement in Europe aiming to topple the Nazi regime. Ilsa is forced to choose between the man she believes in and the man she truly loves. The chemistry between Ingrid Bergman and Humphrey Bogart is almost palpable and the flashback of their love affair in Paris is one you won't soon forget ending in the now famous line, "Kiss me, kiss me as if it were the last time." Do you have goosebumps yet?

I guess I love this movie so much because of how intriicate it is. Seeing it once will only scratch the surface, I find something new everytime I watch it. The casting is spot on and the acting will make you wish the movie wouldn't end. And speaking of the ending, it will definitely not be one that you are expecting, but it will be one that makes you understand why the film is so revered.

In this day and age of Mega-Budget action movies and dwindling attention spans, I completely realize that I am in the minority for my generation in loving a movie that is so "basic". But if you give this movie a chance and really pay attention to what it is saying, I believe you will have the same reaction as the people of Casablanca, because in the end "Everybody Comes to Ricks."

Sugar

2009-10-18T14:58:00.004-04:00

Sugar
"After he catches the eye of a scout while playing in his native Dominican Republic, baseball prospect Miguel "Sugar" Santos is recruited to play in the minor leagues in the Midwest, where he has difficultly adapting both on and off the field. As much a story about the promise of the American dream as it is about America's national pastime, this film dramatizes the hard lessons learned when hope and reality clash."

4 stars

I love baseball movies, but this isn't a movie only about baseball. It's the story of going from a big fish in a small pond to a very small fish in a very big pond. It's heartbreaking to watch Sugar more or less alone in a country where he doesn't understand the language (except for "fly ball," "home run, " and "I got it! I got it!"). The movie kind of derailed from my expectations in the end, but I like it when movies don't follow the canon. Because of this movie, I'll look at the guys in my local minor league games with a lot of respect. And even the major league guys - they work hard to get where they are.

Minus one point for using a cover of Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah (even if it was in Spanish). That song has become a crutch for directors wanting to convey something emotional and weepy. It's a good song but over used.

Away We Go

2009-10-17T20:45:00.011-04:00

Away We Go
"A couple who is expecting their first child travel around the U.S. in order to find a perfect place to start their family. Along the way, they have misadventures and find fresh connections with an assortment of relatives and old friends who just might help them discover "home" on their own terms for the first time."

4 stars

I love John Krasinski, and I love Maya Rudolph. John Krasinski played a less-full-of-himself version of Jim from The Office, which is a good thing. And who knew Maya Rudolph could play it straight? There were a couple surprisingly funny scenes (Jim Gaffigan has a role), but there were moments that were too cliche and obvious (I'm looking at you, Maggie Gyllenhaal). The soundtrack tried a little too hard to be "indie," but the movie was overall enjoyable and I recommend it.

How do you even make a list like this?

2009-10-17T19:08:00.000-04:00

I'm trying to make a list of my top movies.

According to Netflix, I've rated 1000+ movies. Only 64 of those have a rating of 5 stars, so that shows that I don't hand out five stars lightly. But that also means I've got SIXTY-FOUR movies that I love. Some are movies from my childhood: Anne of Green Gables, Clueless, the Sandlot, and The Mighty Ducks. There are musicals (Guys and Dolls, High Society), foreign (non-US) films (Amelie, the Princess and the Warrior, Whale Rider), and screwball/satire comedies (Super Troopers, Clerks, Robin Hood: Men in Tights and half-a-dozen other Mel Brooks movies). I enjoy a good indie movie and movies that are unconventional: Big Fish, Conversations with Other Women, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Memento, Snatch, and pretty much every Wes Anderson movie ever made.

So I'll have to think about this a little more before I start making lists. Or just wait and see how Todd tackles this and copy what he does.