Vantage Point

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.

100 Girls

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.

The Puffy Chair

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.

Slackers

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.

Gigantic

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'.