Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)


Captain America, the patriotic, science created superhero who first appeared during WWII. Captain America was one of the first comic book heroes and as such had a huge fan following over the years. I didn't read comic books, so I only knew of the character as the dude who wore red white and blue and carried a shield. Having that in mind, I don't know how well the movie keeps to the Captain America comics, but I'm told it does a fairly good job. Anyway...

The USA is deeply embroiled in WWII, with nearly every able bodies male heading to the local recruiters office and shipping off to war. When the small, puny, picked on Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) tries to enlist he is rejected “4F” and sent packing. My step-grandfather was rejected 4F back in WWII and went into a depressed slump for quite a while. Not so with Rogers. He just makes up a new name and keeps trying at different recruiting centers, hoping to finally make it through. What Rogers lacks in strength and size, he makes up for in humility, and perseverance. Rogers catches the attention of a defected German scientist working with the US Government to make a super soldier. By the miracle of modern (1940's modern that is) science and a performance enhancing serum Rogers is turned into Captain America. Had he been made today he would certainly fit right in with half of Major League Baseball. Rogers eventually heads to Europe to help battle the Nazi menace.

Throughout the movie Rogers maintains the same confident, but humble attitude. This stands in stark contrast to all the other super hero movies made in recent memory. Iron Man, Green Lantern, Thor, Wolverine, etc. They are all cocky, arrogant and rude. One of the best lines in the movie is when Rogers asks why him, the doctor responds “A strong man who has known power all his life will lose respect for that power. A weak man knows the value of strength, knows the value of power and knows compassion [paraphrase].” This line applies to of all the other super heroes in the aforementioned movies.

The acting is okay, but not superb. Special effects aren't bad. I especially liked the feel of the integration of futuristic technology with actual period accurate technology/designs. In some aspects the futuristic stuff was taken a bit too far in my opinion, but overall it worked.

The film is rated PG-13 which I think is an accurate rating. The movie is fun and has a protagonist who actually sends a positive message. Well worth seeing. I'm expecting Captain America will be knocking on my door dozens of times this Halloween. I give it a 9 / 10.

Will's Movie Review's - Horrible Bosses (2011)

Three friends (Jason Bateman, Charlie Day, and Jason Sudeikis) find themselves working for bosses that make their respective careers hell. One works for a self centered corporate suit (Kevin Spacey) who lures him on with the promise of a promotion like a carrot on a stick. The second works for a coke addict (Colin Farrell) hell bent on running his father's company into the ground. The third works for a gorgeous nymphomaniac dentist (Jennifer Aniston) who wants to have sex with him. As you can imagine the other two friends don't find his situation all that bad. Hilarity ensues when they decide the only way they can bring the semblance of normalcy to their lives is to kill their bosses.

This is one of those rare comedies in that everything just seems to work. Each character seems to have been tailor made for the person who plays them. The acting is surprisingly good for a comedy. While much of the humor is juvenile and slapstick, it is well executed and funny. There are also subtle jokes that are told with as little as an expression.

Overall I really enjoyed this movie. I would not recommend children be allowed to watch it at all though. It earns its “R” rating. I give it a 8.5 / 10.

Sunday, July 17, 2011

The King’s Speech (2010)

Originally written April 8, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Watching the Academy Awards this year, it seemed like The King’s Speech could not lose. It won four Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Screenplay, and Best Director. The Academy nominated it for another eight. Amazingly, neither my fellow critic Tony Route nor I had seen it. We decided to fix that and headed to the theater.
Colin Firth plays Prince Albert “Bertie” who later becomes King George VI. Bertie is afflicted with terrible stammering and is humiliated when his father, the king, forces him to make public speeches at events and on the radio. He and his wife seek out numerous treatment options to no avail. He eventually ends up at the office of Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush). Lionel secretly helps Bertie to improve his stammer. Fate and circumstance thrust Bertie into the throne just as England is drawn into World War II.
What an amazing movie. It is hard to say enough good things about this movie. The cinematography is beautiful. Every frame could make a photograph. The dialogue and script is intelligent, witty, and believable. The characters are solid, fleshed out and wonderfully flawed just like real people. You find yourself empathizing with each of them as the movie progresses.
The acting was top notch. Firth and Rush both give tremendous performances, each nominated for and worthy of an Oscar; however only Firth walked away with one. Helena Bonham Carter plays Queen Elizabeth (mother of the current queen). Carter seems destined to play a queen. She was the Red Queen in the recent incarnation of Alice in Wonderland. She looks and sounds like a queen. She portrayed understated elegance and gave a great performance.
I exceedingly enjoyed this movie and feel it deserved the awards it received. I highly recommend watching this movie. It is rated R (edited version is PG-13) but is mostly because of some cursing, nearly all of it in a single scene. I would say that it should really just be PG-13. I give it a 9.5 /10.

Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

Originally written March 12, 2011 at 3:31 am
When I heard the title of Slumdog Millionaire, I thought it sounded corny. I only added it to my Netflix DVD queue because I had won the Oscar for Best Picture. The DVD has sat on my desk since the end of January. I had no burning desire to watch it. Considering the Academy also awarded best picture that the drivel that is The Hurt Locker, I don’t trust their judgment all the time. While they had their collective heads up their fourth point of contact when they chose The Hurt Locker, they had it spot on with Slumdog Millionaire.
The movie is about an 18-year-old orphan in India who finds himself on the Indian version of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire”. When he makes it all the way to within one question of the top prize, time runs out and the show is continued until the next day. He is promptly arrested by the police for suspected fraud and tortured to try and get him to confess. While being questioned he explains to the detective how he knew the answers to the questions. He knew them from his life experiences.
The general premise sounds a bit contrived and stupid. However, the execution is superb. The story is not really about the game show. The questions of the game serve more as a narration for the flashbacks to his life growing up. Some of them are funny, some sweet, but the majority are tragic. Three actors/actresses portray each character: as children, young teenagers, and finally as young adults. This gives great character development of not only the lead character, Jamal, but also of his brother Salim and Jamal’s love interest Latika. The acting was superb in this film, yet amazingly, there were no nominations for any of the actors involved. Guys, take a look at Freida Pinto. This was her first performance, but with her amazing beauty, I’m sure she will be appearing in more films soon. Dev Patel has had a major film since Slumdog. Unfortunately it was as Prince Zuko in The Last Airbender, a film which did not live up to the promise he showed in this film.
One area where Slumdog did win awards was in its stunning cinematography. The cinematography of this film was spectacular. Nearly every frame could be a photograph. The movie is beautifully crafted and directed. It also had a cool original song, Jai Ho. If you watch America’s Got Talent then you have heard it by every Bollywood dance troop on the show (Pussycat Dolls bastardized a version of it, but that is not the one in the film). Slumdog was also nominated for a second original song as well; if you have to loose, might as well loose to yourself.
The movie is extremely entertaining, and fun to watch. I started the movie expecting crap, and instead found a gem of a movie. I give it 9 / 10.

Ip Man (2008)

Originally written March 7, 2011 at 4:23 am
Ip Man is a very loose biography of the life of Ip Man (or Yip Man) the Weng Chun Kung Fu master who trained Bruce Lee. The film takes place mostly during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-45). This war was already raging when WWII went into full effect in 1939-45. Research the Rape of Nanking to get an idea of how horrific this war was. Back to the movie however.
This is a Chinese film, in Chinese and Japanese. Don’t worry it is subtitled and amazingly in proper English. The film tells of Ip Man’s life in his 40’s. Ip Man appears to be an affluent, well to do, martial arts expert. Ip is well respected in the community, Foshan, as a man, and for his unmatched skill in Kung Fu. Despite this he refuses to teach, and does not work. He instead spends all his time training and with his family. When the Japanese invade his home town, Ip Man and his family are forced from their home become destitute. When the Japanese General occupying the town begins offering food to those who can beat his troops in martial arts fighting, Ip Man steps up to the plate. Along the way, he gives the Chinese hope and pride. Now when I said the movie is loosely based on his life I mean it was very loosely based. From what I can tell he was actually a police officer, both before and after the war, and eventually a heroin addict. In fact he apparently wasn’t even living in Foshan during the war.
The movie, while not historically accurate, is extremely well done. It was the winner of the Chinese version of the Oscars (Hong Kong Film Awards) for best picture and best action choreography; and was nominated in 9 other categories. For good reason too.
First, the fight choreography is phenomenal. It is fast, fun to watch, and really cool. There are a few cable-assisted moves, but nothing stupid and totally impossible like in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. The cinematography is done very well, and even features some high speed video to show some of the impacts of the fighting. This is put to good effect in contrasting the high speed fighting prevalent in much of the movie. The lighting, set design, and locations were all done very well and accurately set the mood of each scene. The acting was adequate to the best of my knowledge. I have no ear for Chinese or Japanese, so my assessment is based upon inflection, tone and body language.
The story is interesting and entertaining. If you are a fan of Kung Fu movies, this one is sure not to disappoint. I give it 8 / 10.

I Am Number Four (2011)

Originally written March 4, 2011 at 3:39 am
If I told you of a movie about a child born on another world, sent to Earth on the eve of his race's destruction; and as he ages on Earth begins to discover he has tremendous powers, what movie would you think of? Superman of course. However, a grown man in a full body spandex suit with contrasting primary colors is not very popular with today's 13-30 year old market. I am Number Four definitely has a lot of influence from the Superman/Smallville franchise, but is not a remake of it.
The plot of the film is okay but not great. There are logic flaws that are not answered. The movie is definitely set up to be a franchise with at least one sequel. It is unknown if the gaps are to be filled with subsequent movies, but the gaps hurt the film a little. The dialogue is lacking but has a few good lines, all of which come from one of the supporting characters, Sam played by newcomer Callan McAuliffe, who ironically is the only actual teenager in a movie that takes place mostly in a high school.
Alex Pettyfer plays the protagonist, John, number 4 of 9 alien children sent to earth. He was raised and mentored by Henri, played by Timothy Olyphant (Justified, Hitman, etc), who is a soldier sent with John to Earth. Dianna Agron (Glee) plays the human love interest. And of course, Kevin Durand plays the antagonist, a different kind of alien, trying to kill the 9. I swear that guy is in everything recently, other than looking crazy, I can't see why he is so popular.
Now on to what the movie did well. It is gorgeous. The cinematography is as good as you would expect from a cinematographer the caliber of Oscar winner Guillermo Navarro. Steven Spielberg was originally a producer, but his name is no longer on the credits, not sure at what point he left the film. The special effects (CGI) are excellent and done very well. The fight choreography and action sequences are done very well too. It is action packed and moves at a very quick pace.
The movie is visually beautiful, but lacks in depth. It is carried by its action packed pace and cinematography, and for that alone is worth watching. I give it 7.5 / 10.

Drive Angry 3D (2011)

Originally written February 25, 2011 at 1:05 am
The last year or two, 3D has been king. Take any movie and add 3D to it and people flock to see it. At this point Hollywood doesn't seem to have any standards for the actual film, other than film it in 3D. Soon we will see trailers for “Watching Paint Dry and Grass Grow 3D, an IMAX Experience.” Drive Angry seems to be in this genre as well. The posters and trailers even exclaim “SHOT IN 3D.”


They market it like it is another Gone in 60 Seconds, etc. When in reality it is more like a reverse Ghost Rider. Instead of being Hell's bounty hunter, Cage is the escaped soul being pursued by the bounty hunter while Cage tries to save his granddaughter from Satan worshipers. Don't worry, I'm not giving away the plot, it is apparent after about the first 10 minutes.


The acting is atrocious. The plot is worse. The crash scenes are comical. Like when Cage parks his car right in the path of a truck. The truck hits his car, flips over it, landing on the roof. Amazingly the grill of the truck is not even damaged. Then there are the chase scenes. Like when he is in a Charger with a 454, chasing a Winnebago. The Winnebago goes left, so he goes right to take a short cut and catch up to it. Dude, you are in a freaking muscle car, I think you can catch a motor home. Then when bullets disable his engine on the freeway, he ends up calling an old buddy to come pick him up. Meanwhile his granddaughter, whom he broke out of Hell to rescue, is still moving on down the freeway. Hello, you are already sentenced to Hell, why not run out and carjack someone? You don't have to hurt them if you have actually had some sort of paradigm shift in your personality. I won't even get into the way law enforcement is portrayed in the movie, as it is typical Hollywood drivel.


Now the one thing the movie does right is appeal to men. If you like hot nude women, sex, gun battles, and blood; then this is the movie for you. The best example is where Cage is actively having sex while killing a horde of Satan worshipers who attack his room. The pinnacle of this is when one bad guy actually hits Cage in the neck with an electric cattle prod and the woman's face tells you that she is getting a shocking experience too. Of hot women, there is an abundance. But that is good for about 5-10 minutes of the total movie. There are also several comical situations as well.


The special effects are okay, but nothing special. This movie is made to be watched in 3D. It was bad even in 3D. The cinematography, action, etc is all based on it being a 3D experience. I have a feeling this movie is going to be unbearably bad to watch otherwise. The camera focus, placement, etc will probably be very odd in normal viewing. Despite how bad the movie is, it has a fairly fast, action packed pace. It is mildly entertaining but don't go in expecting much. I give it a 5.5 / 10.

Death at a Funeral (2010)

Originally written January 31, 2011 at 3:18 am
Death at a Funeral boasts an all star comedy cast including Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Danny Glover, Tracy Morgan, Luke Wilson and many more.


General hilarity ensues as a family gathers to pay its last respects to the family patriarch at his funeral. Death at a Funeral is full of slapstick and toilette humor but it works. Don't watch the movie expecting witty intelligent zingers; you won't find them. However you will find a hilarious movie. Much of the plot is predictable and the parts that might not have been, were spoiled by the trailers. Despite this the movie still had me fighting to keep my laughs quiet so that I wouldn't wake my family up. It is like listening to a friend or a comedian tell a joke and figuring the punch line out before it is over; its still funny.


Nobody gives a stellar performance, but most of the characters hold their own. The cinematography is acceptable but nothing special. On a purely technical level the movie is mediocre in every way, however as a comedy it works well. I would not recommend letting your kids watch it however.
As a comedy I give it a 7 / 10.

How to Train Your Dragon (2010)

Originally written January 30, 2011 at 8:28 pm
I am a big kid at heart. I enjoy watching the occasional cartoon with my daughter (my son looses interest in the TV after about 10 minutes). So I decided to give "How to Train Your Dragon" a spot on my Netflix DVD queue. I'm glad I did.


How to Train Your Dragon is an animated film about a small, clumsy, teenage viking named Hiccup. Hiccup happens to be the son of the village chief Stoic the Vast (voiced by Gerard Butler). Their village is constantly raided and attacked by dragons, and the vikings view killing dragons as a rite of passage and the measure of ones prowess. Hiccup is nothing like his father, and has been relegated to the apprentice to the blacksmith Gobber the Belch (voiced by Craig Ferguson). When Hiccup uses his inventions to capture a dragon he begins to study it and in so doing learns about himself and the creatures he had been raised from birth to hate.


This film is a delightful family movie. The story is unique, the characters are funny and the voice acting is well suited to each character. I just really enjoyed all aspects of the movie. My 4 year old daughter on the other hand... At one point she was so scared she started crying. She started to stop watching the movie. She came back in a couple minutes later and continued watching. She eventually said "Maybe it is a good movie after all." After watching the movie, I mailed the DVD back to netflix and she got upset the next day because she couldn't watch it again. The movie is rated PG and netflix recommends it for ages 8+. That seems on the safe side. I'd say 6+ should be fine. Younger children may find it a bit too scary.


I'd highly recommend watching it for yourself, and with your kids if they are age appropriate. For a family animated film I give it a 8 / 10.

Gamer (2009)

Originally written January 14, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Social networking takes on a whole new meaning in the 2009 film Gamer, directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor. Imagine a virtual world like Second Life or the Sims, but instead of controlling computer generated avatar's you actually control people in real life. People pay to control a human avatar, and the avatars are paid to allow themselves to be controlled. Nanotechnology turns part of the actor's brain into a Wi-Fi receiver and the player gets to control them like a remote control toy. Of course, this becomes a huge hit and the inventor becomes a billionaire. Remote controlled parties, orgies, etc are the norm for the remote world "Society." A spawn off of that is a remote controlled TV show "Slayers" where inmates on death row are allowed to volunteer for a chance to win their freedom. They are remote controlled by teenage gamers (think Counter-Strike) and if they can survive 30 missions, they are released with a full pardon. The inmates are called...wait for it...."iCons." Very Apple like. This is the stage for Gamer.
With the explosion in popularity of games like Sims and social networking like Facebook, I can definitely see a huge market for people being willing to pay to control a human avatar. I can even see using convicted criminals to fight wars (though not as a TV show) to gain their freedom. Gamer gives a unique look at what might be possible. That is about all I can say good about the movie.
Starring Gerard Butler as Kable, the protagonist, and Michael Hall (Dexter) as the billionaire antagonist, Castle; Gamer certainly brought well-known actors to the leads. However, the acting was forced, the storyline lame and predictable. The combat sequences were laughable. They even included Crouch-Jumping in the combat scenes. For those of you who do not play first person shooting games, to clear hurdles in many games you have to jump and crouch in mid air. This results in a totally unrealistic looking motion where one tucks their legs up under them instead of one leg forward and one back, etc.
There are many sequences in the movie that just did not make much sense and added nothing to the storyline. The movie is a waste of time. Fortunately, it is only 95 minutes long, but that is still 80 minutes too long. Had the potential to be a neat movie, but instead it just sucked and never delivered. Do not waste your time. I give it a 2 / 10.

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Originally written January 9, 2011 at 5:46 pm
Zombies. The stereotypical bad guy used to be the Germans. In the last couple of decades it has become zombies. They are everywhere. They range from lethargic sloths, to indefatigable sprinters, to mutated monstrosities. The only hard and fast rules seem to be that to kill them you have to destroy the brain and that if you are bitten by one you will die and become a zombie too.
Enter Shaun of the Dead, the latest installment of zombie killing to be added to the ever expanding genre. I’ve watched zombie movies since I was a kid. I believe I was about 9 when I first watched the classic Night of the Living Dead. Come to think of it that was the year my mom took my little brother and I to see Total Recall in the theater. My parents must have thought rated R meant “really cool.” Shaun of the Dead has less to do with Night of the Living Dead, than it does with Zombieland. Shaun of the Dead is more of a comedy than a zombie movie. The zombies serve more as props for the comedic antics of the main characters.
The story takes place in London and stars Shaun (Simon Pegg - Hot Fuzz, Star Trek), his freeloading slob of a best friend, Ed (Nick Frost – Hot Fuzz, Pirate Radio) and Shaun’s girlfriend Liz (Kate Ashfield). When zombies attack, Shaun and Ed don’t even notice at first. When they finally do notice they instead use it as an opportunity for a little fun, sorting through and chucking vinyl records at the slow moving zombies. They eventually realize the danger and formulate a plan to rescue Shaun’s mom and Liz then hole up in their favorite bar. The only problem, they are bumbling buffoons.
Their antics are hilarious if not well thought out. I found myself laughing throughout much of the movie. While the movie is totally and completely absurd, it is the good kind of absurd. The Monty Python kind of absurd. I’d highly recommend it for adults, but kids might still have problems due to the zombies ripping peoples guts out etc. I give it 8 / 10.

Valhalla Rising (2009)

Originally written January 9, 2011 at 4:58 pm
Valhalla. The hall ruled by Odin in Norse mythology where half of all those slain in battle go. It has little if anything to do with Valhalla Rising.


In Valhalla Rising the lead character is a silent (possibly mute) one eyed warrior being held prisoner by Scottish pagans. He, later named One-Eye, is constantly bound and chained by the neck. The Scotts pit him against other men in a sort of gladiator, to the death, style combat. From the conversations between the Scotts it sounds as if One-Eye has been prisoner for at least 15 years. One-Eye appears to have stylized visions of the future.


After escaping, he kills all his captors except for the young boy who feeds him and binds his hands between fights. One-Eye and Are, the boy, meet up with a group of Christians preparing to leave Scotland and make for the Holy Land as part of the crusades. One of his visions seems to lead him to join them for unknown reasons.


When their ship encounters a seemingly never ending bank of mist, and the winds and tides still, they men are trapped on their boat and run out of rations. One man takes to drinking seawater and dies. Just as the others are about to die as well, they find themselves floating down (yes down) a freshwater river. They land promptly claim the land in the name of Jesus Christ and quickly begin to be killed one-by-one by primitive natives.


The solution to this is obviously to drink a hallucinogenic draft. After they finish praying, stacking rocks, and raping one another, the group splits on what to do. Stay where they landed, or cross the forest in hopes of finding the sea. One-Eye, still mute, somehow communicates through Are. It is unclear if One-Eye or Are is a prophet, or just making it up as he goes. In the end, everyone is dead and nothing is resolved.


Rarely, if ever, have I seen a movie with less point. The director, Nicolas Refn, seems to be trying very hard to make the film surreal. All he ends up doing is making the film confusing and directionless. The pace of the movie is odd, the musical score is horrible, and the acting is about as expressive as One-Eye’s dialogue. You know the acting is top notch when the main character does not speak a word, and has only one expression the whole movie. V’s Guy Fox mask in the movie V had a broader range of emotions than One-Eye shows. The only redeeming thing the movie has going for it is that much of the cinematography is beautiful and unique.


I am so glad the movie was only 90 minutes long. Watching Valhalla Rising was like waiting at a train station only to find out that the station has been closed for years. I give it a 3 / 10.

The Book of Eli (2010)

Originally written January 6, 2011 at 11:59 pm
The Book of Eli is set in a post apocalyptic world. Regardless the result is the same, humanity is in shambles, no one has really started rebuilding, they are move living off the scraps left behind. Think Mad Max. Eli (Denzel Washington) is one of the few alive who are old enough to remember the world before the apocalypse which occurred 30 years prior.


Eli is on a mission, and focused solely to that end. Eli is protecting a book and heading west. Eli states during the movie that he "Walks by faith." When you combine his name and the full statement of that abbreviated phrase and you will learn something very telling about Eli that might not be obvious when you watch the movie. I won't spoil it for you though.


One town Eli passes through is run by another old timer, Carnegie, played by Gregory Oldman (very fitting name). He is searching for a very specific book that he says has power. The power to help him unite and guide more people toward a rebuild civilization. He is obviously looking for The Bible. Though they don't come out and say it, the title of the movie, the advertising etc, make it apparent. He is ruthless in his search. Though he says he grew up with the book, it is obvious that he no longer remembers its lessons. When he finds that Eli has it he stops at nothing to take it from him. Eli continues on his quest west and picks up Mila Kunis's character, Solara, along the way. Together they fight to protect the book from Carnegie.


The storyline is not bad; the story does grab you and hold your attention for most of the movie. The cinematography is hit and miss. In some scenes it is good, in others it is poor. The fight choreography is pretty good. Washington delivers a good performance, as is normal for him. Some logical things were ridiculously beyond belief, but in post apocalypse movies thats normal. Overall the movie was entertaining. There was symbolism laced throughout the movie that is easy to overlook but adds to the depth of the movie. However most of that will not be noticed by the average person going to see an action movie. It is worth watching but not going to be winning any awards. I give it a 7 / 10.

Black Swan (2010)

Originally written January 5, 2011 at 2:49 am
Ballet. Something men dread seeing, and many women dreamed of being in when they were girls. Gorgeous flexible women in tights...and unfortunately dudes wearing the same. When I took my fellow movie critic Tony Route to see this film he asked what it was about. The second I said ballerina, I thought he was going to revoke my man card. I assured him that I'd heard good things about it. He conceded that he had chosen several "stinkers" of movies of late, and that I would be permitted one. I'm glad to say he changed his mind.


Black Swan stars Natalie Portman (Star Wars) as Nina, a very technical ballet dancer. She dances to perfection, but her dancing is cold and emotionless. Then there is Lily played by Mila Kunis (That 70's Show) who, while not perfect, dances with emotion. When the director of their ballet company announces he is putting the aging lead to pasture and that he is auditioning for a new Swan Queen for the ballet "Swan Lake." Nina sees her chance.


In Swan Lake a virginal princes is cursed by a sorcerer and turned into a swan and needs love to break the spell. The lead plays both the white swan and the evil twin, the black swan. One innocent and fragile, one sexual and predatory. The dancing styles have to match. Nina, who states she isn't but probably is a virgin, can't seem make the transition to the black swan. As Nina starts to explore her sexual side she starts to become two different people.


You start to realize from her relationship with her mother and some of her mother's statements that Nina already has some psychological health issues. As Nina embraces the black swan these mental instabilities start to manifest themselves more and more with delusions, hallucinations and all. This builds and builds till the FINAL climax (although I think the first one was my favorite - you will know what I mean when you see it). Nina and the director metaphorically become the princess and the sorcerer.
The cinematography is dark but beautiful. The special effects are great. The dance choreography is graceful. But the most important part is the acting. I feel that Portman gave an outstanding performance. I'm expecting an Oscar nomination if not a win. Kunis and Vincent Cassel (the director Thomas) also gave great performances. This movie was superb. It was suspenseful, hot, mesmerizing. It is an intense psychological thriller where you can't tell what is real and what isn't. In short it was the best movie I've seen in theaters since Inception. Unless something steps up soon, I think those two films are going to take home a majority of the Oscars this year.


I would highly encourage you go and see this movie. It is rated R for a reason. Leave the kiddies at home unless you want them to have nightmares and come get in between you and your significant other as you try to recreate the hottest scene in the movie. I give it 9 / 10.

Cool Hand Luke (1967)

Originally written January 2, 2011 at 10:47 pm
When Paul Newman died back in 2008 I realized I had not seen many of his early movies that make him famous. I knew him from Cars, Road to Perdition, his food brands and while growing up had heard many middle age to older women talk about how handsome he was. I decided to see some of his movies, then promptly forgot.


That changed the other night when I realized that Netflix's rights to Cool Hand Luke were going to expire on Jan 01. I sat down with no expectation other than to hear the infamous like "What we have here is a failure to communicate." Since this movie is as old as my parents, I'm not going to try to write the review without giving up the plot.


The movie starts off with a drunk Luke (Newman) cutting the heads off of parking meters. He is sentenced to two years hard labor in a chain gang. I couldn't help but laugh at the though of a vandal getting sentenced to two years hard labor today. We can't even get the jail to keep them for a few hours.


Luke is a decorated war veteran who came out the service the same rank he went in, Private. That revelation kind of sets the stage for the development of Luke's character. Which as it turns out is stubborn. Luke will not quit even when he can't win. Luke's disdain for his fellow prisoners is expressed in his cool attitude toward him. When he bluffs in poker and wins with nothing he says that sometimes nothing is a real cool hand. His nickname was born.


Then came the scene that has to be one of the hottest scenes in movie history; when you consider when the movie was made that is really saying something. While working the chain gang a gorgeous blond, Lucille (Joy Harmon), comes out and starts washing her car. This had to be the original car wash scene because I can not imagine this scene making it into a movie prior to this one. Hot is all I'll say about it. Worth seeing the movie just for this scene. LOL


Luke ends up in a boxing match with Dragline (George Kennedy) in which Luke gets the ass kicking of a lifetime. However every time he is knocked down, he gets right back up. Dragline and the other prisoners keep telling Luke to stay down but he refuses. Dragline eventually grabs Luke and carries him off to the bunkhouse. Despite soundly whooping Luke, Dragline and the other prisoners develop a lot of respect for his resolve. This respect builds throughout the movie. Dragline ends up as Luke's biggest fan. Kind of like a reverse of the old Spike and Chester cartoon.


When Luke's mom dies, the warden puts Luke in solitary confinement to ensure he doesn't escape. I don't believe that Luke would have had the warden tried to prevent it. No one pushes Luke around, so as soon as he is released from solitary "the box" he escapes. When he is caught he is beat and returned. He escapes again, this time for an extended period. While gone he mailed the prisoners a photo of him with two beautiful women. The other prisoners look upon the photo and live vicariously through him. When he is brought back he is beaten and made to dig and fill in a ditch several times and beaten some more. Eventually they break old Cool Hand Luke. He plays the role of being totally broken and subservient, right up until his most daring escape yet. Luke is shot by the guards when they corner him and they intentionally let him die. But Luke, cool and stubborn to the end, just smiles as his life trickles away.


The plot and character development of this movie are superb. The main characters are fleshed out, and relatable. You may not agree with their actions, but you can understand them. Newman and Kennedy deliver great performances. Kennedy won an Oscar for best supporting actor and Newman was nominated for best lead.


I greatly enjoyed this movie. It had to have been extremely controversial and provocative for its time. I wish I had seen it sooner. I would encourage you to rent or buy this movie as it is well worth the money. I give it a 9 / 10.

The Bounty Hunter (2010)

Originally written December 29, 2010 at 2:28 am
The Bounty Hunter is a romantic comedy starring Gerard Butler (300) and Jennifer Aniston (Friends). The general premise is that Milo Boyd (Butler) is a former cop turned bounty hunter; Nicole Hurley (Aniston) is a reporter. Boyd and Hurley were once madly in love but divorced. When Hurley misses court to pursue a lead for a story, a warrant is issued for her arrest. Boyd's boss is the bail bondsman who fronted the money, and Boyd gets the assignment to go catch his ex-wife and take her to jail. Along the way someone tries to kill Hurley to keep her from investigating the story she is working on.


Much of the story is very predictable. The overall plot is so far fetched it is ridiculous. However in a comedy that isn't really all that bad. The banter and fighting between Boyd and Hurley is quite funny. The minor characters provide several good laughs throughout the movie, especially Boyd's boss Sid (Jeff Garlin).


Nothing else really stands out one way or the other with this movie. While it is not great, it isn't terrible. It was good for several laughs, but by no means has any real chance of winning any sort of Oscar, etc. I give it a 5 /10.

Tron: Legacy (2010)

Originally written December 21, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Tron (1982) was before my time. I first saw it when I was a kid, and was amazed. The special effects were mind blowing for the time. When previews for Tron: Legacy first showed in theaters, I was stoked. I, admittedly, had unreasonably high expectations. They were let down some, but not too much.


I knew that I wanted to see Tron: Legacy in 3D. My fellow movie critic, Tony Route, decided to go IMAX 3D. At a hefty pricetag of $17.50 I nearly choked, but I'm glad I saw it in IMAX 3D. The huge screen made quite a difference. There were times that it really did feel like I could reach out and touch the action. I think that 3D makes a huge difference in the experience of watching this movie. Now on to the film itself.


Tron: Legacy takes place 20+ years after the first film. Without giving up too much of the story, Jeff Bridges character, Kevin Flynn, has been trapped inside The Grid for over 20 years. His son, Sam played by Garrett Hedlund, is grown up now and has turned into something of an angry rebel. No one, including Sam, knew what happened to his father. Sam accidentally finds his father's lab and gets sucked into The Grid. There he encounters his father's electronic doppelgänger, Clu (Codified Likeness). The plot reveals that Clu, Flynn and Tron had worked together to create a perfect digital world. When Clu staged a coup, Flynn found himself trapped inside. Sam and Flynn work together, along with Olivia Wilde's character, Quorra, to escape from The Grid and prevent Clu from escaping it.


The special effects in this movie are beyond top notch. Flynn and Clu are both played by Bridges, but their appearance is over 20 years difference. Clu is still young, while Flynn is old and gray. The effect to make Bridges look young again is done with CG. While not perfect, it is very good. I can't think of a better example of a human likeness in a movie done by CG. The light cycles, etc are awesome. The architecture, and design of The Grid are beautiful to watch, and in 3D they feel like they are coming right out at you. The movie is stunningly beautiful (as are the women characters LOL).


The plot leaves many questions unanswered, and some parts of it are a bit hard to follow. I'm guessing these areas will be expanded upon when a director's cut (or commentary) blueray is released. There are a few moments that are very cheesy and play to the vast majority of people who have no clue about computers but have watched CSI too much. Like when Sam accesses his dad's computer by typing "backdoor". Instead of being sent to a porn site, he magically bypasses his dad's security and has access to everything. Despite the cheese, and the vague areas, the movie is entertaining and could be much worse (see nearly every other sequel in the past decade).


The performances of the actors playing the main characters were not bad. Bridges's playing both a protagonist and antagonist, young and old, stood out above the rest. Some of the supporting characters were a bit on the bland side. It wouldn't be so noticeable, considering they are supposed to be playing computer programs, except that some of the other characters/programs are extremely emotional and animated.


While Tron: Legacy is not perfect and did not live up to my lofty expectations, it is still a very entertaining movie. One I would encourage you to go and see in theaters on a 3D screen. I give it 8 / 10.


*Edit*
I'm hearing from my buddies that have seen Tron in non-3D format that it doesn't look nearly as good as it does in 3D. Without the stunning visuals, I think an appropriate rating would be 6.5 / 10.

The Hurt Locker (2008)

Originally written December 20, 2010 at 12:10 am
**SPOILER ALERT** In my rant I give away huge chunks of the movie.
When I watched Avatar, I was blown away. It is the only movie I have ever watched multiple times in the theater. When it lost the Academy Awards in almost every category to The Hurt Locker, a movie I had not seen, I assumed it was because The Hurt Locker must have been beyond awesome. I had heard that there was some politics behind it since the director of The Hurt Locker, Kathryn Bigelow is the ex-wife of the director of Avatar, James Cameron. I now firmly believe that Cameron was robbed in some sort of popularity contest. I was excited as I started the DVD. That excitement turned, quickly, into sighs.


The Hurt Locker follows a three man Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) team based out of Camp Victory in Baghdad (October 2004, year after I was there) as they are called out to diffuse numerous Improvised Explosive Devices (IED).


Let us start with the things the movie did well. The cinematography is well done. The sets featuring Iraqi streets were done fairly well. The best I have seen in a movie set in Iraq to date. Jeremy Renner delivered a very good performance as the lead character William "Will" James (great name!). That is about it.


Now for the things that were just beyond ridiculous. The three-man EOD team moves about Baghdad in an HMMWV (Humvee) by themselves. Not in convoy, etc. In fact, there are scenes where they do not even have someone in the turret. Like they are out for a nice leisurely Sunday drive. We did this in blacked out civilian vehicles working with the Iraqi Police, but never in a Humvee. That is just asking to be ambushed which is why standing orders were (and probably still are) three vehicle convoys minimum.


Then amazingly, they seem to be out on long distance patrols for no apparent reason. While out on the patrol they come across a bunch of private contractors (think Blackwater) who happen to have had a flat tire in the middle of the desert while transporting two of the Playing Card members of Saddam's regime. Amazingly, the soldiers cannot tell that they are contractors so they get out of the Humvee, and advance across a great deal of open terrain without cover to disarm one of them. Then they finally realize what is going on. Amazingly, an Iraqi sniper team ambushes them from a distant building. So far distant in fact that the American's can barely make out the enemy through the scope of the Barrett .50 sniper rifle. The Iraqi sniper is using what appears to be a Draganov and has channeled the spirit of Carlos Hathcock, rarely missing a shot. After killing the sniper, they sit watching for the rest of the day, in the sun. They never get reinforcements, air support, etc. When one member tells Will that he sees movement behind them (in the middle of a bunch of goats) the team leader does not look, instead he tells the guy it is his call. The guy shoots (and kills an insurgent), and Will the psychic knows that the insurgent is dead and says good job.


The scene that throws all logic to the wind is one of the first. Will and his crew go to diffuse a bomb. They cannot find the soldiers who called for them. They find their Humvee empty, soldiers nowhere to be seen. Will spots someone waving a small American flag out of a building. He walks over and the entire squad is hiding in the entryway of a building and says that the bomb is down the road. The soldiers fear is plainly evident. Will shuns the use of the robot, and instead suits up. He walks out and deploys smoke on the way. Okay, I could possibly see deploying smoke to obscure your movement so an insurgent does not see you getting close to the bomb to diffuse it, but you would need to put smoke in all directions the guy might be watching from. He then continues down the road, the only ones not able to see him, are the troops. Iraqi's are everywhere watching. Oh, and this is a magic smoke grenade. He keeps walking through smoke even though the grenade is far behind him and not being blown forward. He then walks into an intersection with Americans guarding it. So I guess the cowardly soldiers he is disgusted with, are also the ones furthest from the bomb. Suddenly an Iraqi in a taxicab drives around the roadblock (without being shot at all) and nearly runs Will over. Will draws his US Army issue Beretta. Amazingly it is a Beretta 92 which has not been manufactured since 1976 (obvious because it has no safety) instead of the 92FS. He then gets the driver to back up to the soldiers who promptly take him into custody. He then continues down the road, now probably about 1/4 mile from where he started. He finds and diffuses a bomb. Then realizes it leads to multiple more. He quickly diffuses them all while the insurgent who buried them watches. The insurgent waits to go downstairs and blow the bombs until Will is almost done. By the time he gets down the two flights of stairs, it is too late and Will is finished. Will shows him the blasting cap in victory and lets him go.


Shortly thereafter, a Psychologist Lieutenant Colonel decides to go on a mission with them. An IED in a rice bag goes off and vaporizes him, leaving only his helmet. He is so obliterated that there is no blood, and apparently no body, because one team member is desperately trying to find him. The three-man team is called to collect unexploded ordinance from a building. Amazingly the troops who called them had not actually cleared the building yet. I'm still unclear how the psychic troops knew that there were bomb making materials in the building if they hadn't gone in it yet, but hey this is Hollywood right. Therefore, the three-man team clears the whole building by themselves while the dozens of infantry stay outside. I guess EOD is trained to act as Delta operators in their spare time or something.


The Hurt Locker is Hollywood's extreme left wing biased view of what war is and soldiers are. The most telling moment is the scene where there is a wounded insurgent and the soldiers are ordered to execute him despite the medic's assertions that his wounds are survivable. If this were the case in reality then we would not have to have any debates about Guantanamo Bay because there would not be anyone there.


In short, this movie was so frustratingly illogical that I found it impossible to enjoy. Even looking back at it and trying to imagine watching it as if I was never a soldier, nor an OIF vet, I still do not think I could get past the total lack of logic. Amazingly nearly all the top critics love it. Reading up on it, it seems that many OIF veterans and EOD Techs are quite disgusted with it. I totally agree with them. I give it a 4.5 / 10, which places it on par with GI Joe Rise of the Cobra, which seemed more realistic.

The Expendables (2010)

Originally written December 18, 2010 at 4:07 pm
I've loved action movies since I was a kid. I grew up on Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis etc. When I saw the previews for The Expendables they billed it as all the action legends together for the first and only time. I immediately though this is going to either be awesome, or horrible. Then I asked, how the hell did Schwarzenegger find time to film a movie while Governor. The answer is that his only scene (which was also Willis's only scene) was only about 4 minutes long and had about a dozen lines. So did the movie live up to the hype? Well it had a lot of action heroes in it, but that was about it.


I lost count of the number of times I sighed during the movie. I'm not sure which character was the most annoying. Jet Li never stops complaining about how he needs more money, and about how unfair it is that he is little. Couture goes on a long intellectual monologue about his cauliflower ear. Terry Crews character insists on explaining every detail about his drum fed shotgun and all the ammo he can use in it. And so on.


There were so many consistency, physics, and reality issues with the movie that you didn't even have to look for them, they were exasperatingly obvious. The special effects were just plain bad. By far the fire effects were the worst. I expected to see the credits to list a 5th grade computer science class as having done the CG.


Then there was the acting. The crown for WORST acting goes, unsurprisingly, to Steve Austin. Fortunately he only has a handful of lines in the movie, but those are bad enough that his performance manages to stand out like a hot pink turd in a cesspit. Even though it is surrounded by shit, it is still the most obvious and disgusting piece. I kept expecting him to say "Because Stone Cold said so!" after every line. (If you have ever lowered your IQ and watched WWF, you know what I'm talking about.) Every bit of dialog seemed strained and forced.


Jason Statham was the only one who seemed to give anything resembling an acceptable performance. His choreography in the fight scenes was entertaining. However a large chunk of his performance was in some sort of tangent that fleshed out his character (a little) but had nothing to do with the course of the movie. It seemed a pointless divergence from the main storyline, that contributed little if anything to the movie, except lengthen it.


This movie was one of the worst action movies I have seen in a long time. Fortunately the movie was loaned to me by a friend, and I didn't go see it in theaters, buy or rent it, or waste my Netflix DVD queue slot on it. I give it a 3.5 / 10.

The Blind Side (2009)

Originally written December 8, 2010 at 8:41 am
The Blind Side is based upon the true life story of Michael Oher. The Blind Side tells of how Oher was born in the ghetto and, while in high school, was taken in by an affluent family. Oher went on to be a heavily recruited football player and eventually was drafted into the NFL by the Baltimore Ravens.


The cast is diverse and effective. Sandra Bullock delivers an awesome role as the mom of the family. Oher is played by Quinton Aaron, a relative newcomer to movies. For most of the movie Oher seems depressed. He seems more like like Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh than a teenage guy. Aaron does a great deal of acting with his facial features though which shows much of Oher's inner thoughts etc. All in all a very sound performance by the novice actor. Bullock's character is like a hurricane of will and determination. Reminds me of my wife (even has a great butt too, the similarities are uncanny). Bullock played her character very well, and was rewarded with the academy award for best leading actress. Her husband, played by Tim McGraw of country music fame, is a nice guy and obviously used to bowing down to his wife's forceful character, but is happy to do so. His performance was lackluster. One of their children, Collins, played by another newcomer Lily Collins, is seen only sparingly throughout the movie. Her brother SJ, played by Jae Head of Hancock and Friday Night Lights, on the other hand is shown nearly as much as Oher. He is extremely energetic and quite the scene stealer, making him cute but borderline obnoxious.


While there are a few moments that are over the top, like Oher testing 98% on Protective Instincts for the states standardized tests. What kind of test is there for protective instincts? None; but who needs reality when you have Hollywood. Then there were the scouts showing up after his first game, etc. The Blind Side may not be the deepest and most profound movie, but it is a good movie that successfully ties your emotions to that of the characters. The Blind Side is a feel good movie that delivers on its promise. I would call it a family movie, except that there are a couple of scenes that I would not want my kids watching. There is some racism and bigotry shown as well as gang violence. I'd like my daughter to remain ignorant of those things for now. As the country song says; "Let them be little."
All in all I really enjoyed The Blind Side. I would recommend watching it. I give it 7.5 / 10.