2009 Review #63: The Brothers Bloom

The Brothers Bloom

Rated PG-13
(violence, some sensuality and brief strong language)
1 hour 54 minutes

Storyline:
The Brothers Bloom are the best con men in the world, swindling millionaires with complex scenarios of lust and intrigue. Now they've decided to take on one last job - showing a beautiful and eccentric heiress the time of her life with a romantic adventure that takes them around the world.

Starring:
Rachel Weisz
Adrian Brody
Mark Ruffalo
Rinko Kikuchi

Critics Grade:
C-
(Consensus: Despite strong performances The Brothers Bloom ultimately does not fulfill its lofty ambitions.)

My Grade:
B

The Brothers Bloom is a pretty a standard con man movie with a few good laughs. It doesn't stray to far off the normal formula of this type of story, a lot of the plot line is fairly predictable. That being said, it's not a bad movie at all. I actually liked this movie a lot! I thought it was just quirky enough for me to look past the blandness of the overall plot. I think it was mainly the characters that make this movie really entertaining.

It has a good cast. Oscar winner Adrian Brody (The Pianist, King Kong) has always been pretty dependable, but so far not that profitable of an actor. He's one of those good actors that not many people really know about. His movies don't make bank at the box office (well with the exception of King Kong, but that wasn't because of him). I liked him here in this movie, he has this quiet charm about him that makes him appealing as an actor. That sounded totally gay, haha! Mark Ruffalo (Zodiac, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) is also one of those actors that people can't quite get their finger on as to exactly what he's been in. He plays the 'way in over his head' character in this film that you are supposed to dislike but kind of root for in a weird way. He's good, he's usually always good. He just typically goes quiet into that good night when it comes to people recognizing him for doing good work. The best part of this film, hands down, was Oscar winner Rachel Weisz (The Constant Gardner, The Mummy series). She plays a very eccentric, off the wall character which was totally fun to watch her come out of her shell so to speak. She was so engaging and charming. She was funny. Her performance was so addicting, if that makes any sense. I loved it whenever she was on screen. To bad this movie went under the radar, or else she could have been looking at another Oscar nomination. Maybe.

It's hard to review this movie based off the storyline and technical aspects, because it all kind of...typical. Not in a bad way, just not in a fresh take kind of way either. It's definitely good enough for me to recommend that you go out and rent. For sure! I may even buy this movie sometime soon. It's charming and quirky and entertaining. It has some really fun performances. It just lacks in the story department, but that's OK...right?

2009 Review #62: The Road

The Road

Rated R
(some violence, disturbing images and language)
1 hour 59 minutes

Storyline:
A post-apocalyptic tale of a man and his son trying to survive by any means possible.

Starring:
Viggo Mortensen
Kodi Smit-McPhee
Robert Duvall
Charlize Theron

Critics Grade:
B
(Consensus: The Road's commitment to Cormac McCarthy's dark vision may prove too unyielding for some, but the film benefits from hauntingly powerful performances from Viggo Mortensen and Kodi McPhee.)

My Grade:
A-

OK yes, The Road is one heck of a dark and bleak film. A holiday release may have been a bad time to put this movie out there, because it isn't all that uplifting and for the most part it's pretty grim. There isn't much color to this film, it's all pretty morose and bland looking. The performances are subdued and low key. The pacing is slow and there isn't much of any back story to these characters. To some people, it may sound like I'm describing a movie that is just OK but not all that great. Well for me, I thought The Road was one of the best movies I've seen this year, and I know that a lot of people won't agree with me on that. But that's OK, because that is why we all have separate opinions.

The Road has a very simplistic story, in fact there isn't to much of profound storyline at all. I've never read the book by Cormac McCarthy (who also wrote the novel in which No Country for Old Men was based), so I don't know how much of the book story transferred over to the film. I know the book is just as dark as the film however, that much I've heard by word of mouth. But here we have a post-apocalyptic world and there aren't many human's left (as far as we are shown at least). We follow the story of a father, played by Oscar nominee Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises, Lord of the Rings trilogy) who is constantly on the move with his young boy played by Kodi Smit-McPhee. They have no home, the world has been taken over by destruction. It is constantly dark and cold and rains a lot. They are just trying to survive the weather, hunger and the crazies (the bad guys as they call them in the film).

Not much really happens in this movie, I'll be completely honest about that. There isn't much excitement and virtually no "action" type movies. This isn't a "2012" type end of the world movie. In fact, it's the polar opposite. While some people may find that to be a bit dreary and even boring, I found it to be quite engaging and somewhat captivating. We don't have a large cast to focus on here, it's mainly this father and son. I was never bored. I was hooked from scene one and it never let me go. There was something about this father son relationship that was so moving and I thought it really elevated this film to a beautiful level. Sure we don't know a ton about them before this apocalypse, but to me it didn't really matter. You get to know their characters well enough throughout the film's pacing and I couldn't help but feel for both of them. I thought the writing here was excellent, it may even entice me to read the book eventually. But I didn't need much background for me to enjoy these peoples tale of survival.

Again, this is a post-apocalypse film. However, I will tell you right now that you pretty much never learn what the heck happened to the world. It's never told to us, and maybe it is in the book I don't know. Something awful clearly happened, but there didn't appear to be any toppled over buildings and stuff like that. It was implied that there may have been some severe earthquakes, but again it's never officially told to us. Again, that might bother some people. To me though, it didn't really effect my view of the movie. Why should it matter what happened? That's not what THIS story is about. Sure in movies like 2012, we need to see the 'what', but here we just care about the after effects. This apocalypse was just the even that set the story in motion. They did a good job though at creating this after world. I'm sure most of it was done with some computerized effects, and they looked damn convincing if you ask me. Set designs were totally foreboding and grim and they accented the film beautifully. This world had to look convincing, it had to look dark for us to believe these characters journey. So however they pulled off the look of the film, whatever they did, it was brilliant!
The movie also has two very strong performances. Viggo Mortensen has typically been one of those under appreciated actors. He's always doing great work and rarely getting recognized for it. Now I'm not saying he should get an Oscar nomination for this performance, but I am saying he did a really fantastic job with this part. I mean I believed the love this guy had for his son. I believed his protectiveness and his heart ache. Mortensen proves in this film how truly great he is at playing that every man we can all relate to in some way. His performance here is so quiet and toned down, but it was just so amazing at the same time. He deserves Oscar attention for this performance, but I don't think he will get it. Backing him up brilliantly and shockingly was young Kodi Smit-McPhee who plays his son. You don't get a lot of Oscar worthy performances from kids his age, but this kid tugged at my heart strings with his acting in this film. I mean this was a real kid. He did so well at playing this kid as scared for his life, scared for his fathers life. He bonded so beautifully with Viggo, there were times where you swear they really were father and son. McPhee does a superb job at delivering real emotion and authentic fear that you can't help but get choked up at certain moments of his performance. Because you really being to fear for his safety. Solid performances!

So my overall consensus on The Road is that it is one hell of good movie. You have to go in knowing you are about to see a low tone, grim film though or else you might be off put by it all. This is a slow film, there is no big explosions. No gun fights. Barely any blood. This is a story based film that takes place AFTER a earth shattering destruction of some sort. This is a film about a journey of a father and son who are trying to stay sane together, and who are trying to survive together. Every aspect of this movie was done so brilliantly in my mind. This is a move that had me reeled in from the very beginning. I loved this film, and maybe everyone won't feel the same way I did, but I still highly recommend you see it! Definitely one of the best 2009 has had to offer so far!

2009 Review #61: The Blind Side

The Blind Side

Rated PG-13

(one scene involving brief violence, drug and sexual references)

2 hour 8 minutes

Storyline:
Oversized African American Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), the teen son of a murdered father and a crack-addicted mother, is homeless at age 16. Taken in by an affluent Memphis couple, Leigh Anne (Sandra Bullock) and Sean (Tim McGraw), Michael embarks on a remarkable rise to play for the NFL. Based on Michael Lewis's bestseller, this inspirational sports tale also stars Kathy Bates as Michael's persistent tutor, Miss Sue.

Starring:

Sandra Bullock

Quinton Aaron

Tim McGraw

Critics Grade:

B-

(Consensus: It might strike some viewers as a little too pat, but The Blind Side has the benefit of strong source material and a strong performance from Sandra Bullock.)

My Grade:
A-

I wasn't 100% sure about this movie when I saw the previews. I don't really know why I wasn't sure if I'd like, but I still wanted to give it a shot. I'll let you in on a little secret, I've always been a fan of Sandra Bullock (Crash, The Proposal). I don't know why she get's a lot of crap from people, but she's reliable when she picks the right role. So yeah, 85% of the reason I ultimately saw this movie was because Bullock is the star, and a $35 million weekend at the box office next to "New Moon" means that a lot of people probably have the same feeling I do.

I'm glad I went and saw The Blind Side. I actually thoroughly enjoyed this movie as a whole. The consensus at Rotten Tomatoes is right, this movie has a strong source material which makes the film that much more better. It's not the same old football story about a crappy team that never wins that defies all the odds to win a championship. This is a remarkable story about one man who never had any real love on his side, find love from a family who help him get through school and ultimately drafted by a pro football team. It's a pretty solid tale, and a true one at that. You can tell they "Hollywood-ized" the story however, and that's where most of it's flaws come from.Mainly it's littered with cliches. There are many moments that I don't know actually happened in the real life story. Some of things only happen in movies to make it more appealing and to add more drama. Lines like, "I'm not changing his life, he's changing mine" sounded kind of corny. Mainly because we don't really know how he affected this woman's life because for we know she was already a very loving, strong willed woman. We don't know much back story of the family, so when we hear lines like that it all sounds too "scripted" and not very authentic. There are a couple lines like that in the film that just added on the cheese factor.

That being said, this has quite a moving story to tell. Overall it was very well written. It has this engaging, fun spirited quality to it. You really love these characters, they make you smile, they make you think about your own inner self. They make you wonder if YOU could do what this family did. It kind of inspires us to think about our situations in life. Makes us wonder how much of ourselves we focus on, as opposed to thinking for and caring for others. We have to care for ourselves of course, but there are tons and tons of people out there who need that love to be focused on them and not our own selfishness. Maybe I'm getting off track here, but these are the things this movie made me think of after my trip to the theater. Is it going to change my life drastically? No, sadly not. I wish I could be as selfless as that woman. I wish I had her courage and inner strength.

That being said, let me move on now. Sandra Bullock probably gives her very best performance here. I thought she deserved some award attention for Crash, where she proved she has dramatic acting chops. She takes that ability to the max in this film. Her whole performance feels so true to life and authentic. You believe her as this woman, she becomes this woman. We pull for her, we root for her, we love her. At least I did. If she got an Oscar nomination for this film (which yes, there IS talk of) I would certainly not complain. I just don't know if it was powerful enough to garner a nod, but we will see. She held her own though, she deserves attention for this performance. Finally she comes out of that romantic comedy shell and shows us what she can really do. Bravo to her! The guy who plays Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), doesn't do such a good job at acting here. He's actually kind of bad, which makes me feel bad for even saying that. He doesn't really get much time to speak in the film though (kind of weird since the story is about him). We learn a lot about his past, but we don't really get to much of an insight into the guy. The few lines he does get, I think Aaron could have done a better job at bringing this character to life. We still like him though, and we want him to succeed.

This movie won't appeal to most manly men out there. This is NOT your normal football movie. In fact, football doesn't become to much of the story until about mid-way through. This is more of a story about how a Christian family selflessly takes in an orphan that no one wants to give a rat's ass about, and shows him love. They show him the kindness of people. They give him a new life. It really is a touching story that I just loved. Stick around after the credits to see the real life pictures of these characters and it all comes together. It did for me. It hit me when I saw those pictures how real this story is, and I'm glad I got to see this tale come to life. This movie is carried by a solid story and career best, award worthy performance from Sandra Bullock and I would say to anyone to go and see it!! I thought it was one of the better movies of the year. Not the BEST, or even in the top five, just one of the better ones I've seen. Solid flick!

2009 Review #60: Disney's A Christmas Carol (in 3D)

Disney's A Christmas Carol

Rated PG
(scary sequences and images)
1 hour 36 minutes

Storyline:
An animated retelling of Charles Dickens' classic novel about a Victorian-era miser taken on a journey of self-redemption, courtesy of several mysterious Christmas apparitions.

Starring/Voices Of:
Jim Carrey
Gary Oldman
Colin Firth

Critic's Grade:
C-
(Consensus: Robert Zemeckis' 3-D animated take on the Dickens classic tries hard, but its dazzling special effects distract from an array of fine performances from Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman.)

My Grade:
B-

Animation just keeps better and better, quality wise. There were numerous shots in this film I swore were real life actors on screen. I guess in a way they were, I think they used some kind of "gollum" like technique with these actors to animate them on screen. Well anyway, here we have another version of the timeless Christmas carol about nasty old Ebenezer Scrooge and his journey of redemption on the eve of Christmas. We have all seen many versions of this story, but I don't know if any have been quite so dark as this one.

Personally I like the older versions better, because I grew up on them and they were simple and pretty much kid friendly. Here we have a version of the film that is a little heavy with the dramatic side of the story, and pretty much strips away most of the charm and fun of the other versions. Yes there is some entertaining, fun moments that everyone can enjoy. There is a good dose of mediocre humor that kids might like. I softly chuckled a few times. But I find that this movie is more appealing to adults than it might be for the young ones. It's almost to scary for kids. It's definitely to slow for most children these days to stay focused on. We really get a glimpse into the deeper and more frightening core of these timeless characters. The ghosts are somewhat threatening looking, especially that last one. The first one felt like some kind of "drug trip". All of them were played by Jim Carrey (Liar Liar, The Truman Show).

For me, the best parts of the movie were the performances. Carrey plays a handful of characters, including all three ghosts and every version, young and old, of Mr. Scrooge. Don't laugh at me here, but I thought this was one of Carrey's better performances. Now I've always been a fan of Carrey's dramatic performances, more so than his comedic ones (but I like them all the same too). Here we have a nice taste of both sides. They captured his face so realistically on Mr. Scrooge, that you are pretty much watching Jim Carrey act out this whole performance on screen. He did a fantastic job, he didn't do any of his usual antics to capture cheap laughs. He WAS Ebenezer Scrooge, and he was very good at doing so. I also like Gary Oldman's performance as Mr. Cratchett. It was sad and emotional portrayal of a man who has almost nothing but still maintains his love and happiness.

The animation was damn brilliant as well. Like I said it was freaking realistic as all hell! I also saw this movie in 3D. Usually I would say not to waste an extra $2 on a movie ticket JUST for 3D, but here it really helps bring the magic to life. The effects get a little to much to handle sometimes, the director, Robert Zemeckis, get's a tad carried away. They do all these intentional things to stick outside the screen, but don't really have that awesome "in your face" 3D effect. It just got a little heavy handed with the effects is all, but for the most part the animation and the 3D were great!

This is not the best version of this tale by any means. This is not one most kids could probably sit through and enjoy whole heartedly. But I still would recommend people to see it. It's good enough that I enjoyed it. And heck, it's Christmas time...you gotta see it right??

2009 Review #59: The Messenger

The Messenger

Rated R

(language and some sexual content/nudity)
1 hour 45 minutes

Storyline:
An American soldier struggles with an ethical dilemma when he becomes involved with a widow of a fallen officer.

Starring:
Ben Foster
Woody Harrelson
Samantha Morton
Jena Malone

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
B-

I don't really have a whole lot to say about this movie. No I did not think it was bad, I actually thought it was overall a good movie. The problem this movie had for me is that it tried to be to much. It tried the whole "artsy" feel thing a little to hard, and it kind of falls flat in many points in the film. There are a few scenes that go on WAY to long and literally stay focused on one shot for what feels like an eternity. It drags a lot, and in the end, carries a lot of the story down with it.

I liked the scenes where they had to deliver the news to the families of their deceased loved ones. For the most part they were quite devastating to watch. They felt very authentic and they were pretty emotional. I wish they would have touched more on how it was affecting these two soldiers though. These were the best scenes in the film however. Very well done.

There was the side story of Ben Foster (3:10 to Yuma, Alpha Dog) trying to hook up with one of the women who recently lost her husband played by Oscar nominee Samantha Morton (In America, Sweet & Lowdown). These scenes played out a little to dry for me. I didn't really understand the direction they were taking. They could have been in better taste I guess. Oscar nominee Woody Harrelson's (The People Vs. Larry Flynt, Zombieland) story arc was some of my favorite parts of the movie. He plays this soldier who hasn't actually seen much war time and he is deeply disturbed for some reasons we never fully know. But he's a hard ass. A hard ass with a heart. He's a pretty complicated character, and Harrelson plays him brilliantly. I feel if this movie got more attention, we could see Harrelson garnering himself an Oscar nomination for supporting actor here. He was very, very good. I love that he's surfacing back in the movie world. Ben Foster was also excellent here, but not powerful enough to provoke to much emotion from the audience. At least not from me. Honestly I think he turned an Oscar worthy role in 3:10 to Yuma a few years back, but he was ignored. He will probably be ignored again this year for lead actor, but I think this guy is well on his way to award glory.

You know this is a good movie, but it's centered around kind of a messy movie. I feel like it goes in a few different directions and I never really knew where it was going. It had to many "down" moments and scenes that just took forever to get going. But it has some brilliant performances with some deep and emotional moments that it's enough for me to say, yeah, The Messenger is a solid movie. However, it's just not a movie I would urge you to go see in theaters. It falls into that black hole of "forgettable good movies" such as Alpha Dog and American Gangster to name a few. That's just my two cents.

2009 Review #58: The Proposal

The Proposal

Rated PG-13
(sexual content, minor nudity and language)
1 hour 48 minutes

Storyline:
A pushy boss forces her young assistant to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada.

Starring:
Sandra Bullock
Ryan Reynolds

Critics Grade:
D-
(Consensus: Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds exhibit plenty of chemistry, but they're let down by The Proposal’s devotion to formula.)

My Grade:
B

I didn't have the highest of hopes for this movie. It is a romantic comedy after all, and we all know by now that this isn't my favorite genre of film. But I heard enough good things about it through my friends (even though the critics virtually smashed this film to pieces) that gave me enough push to watch it via Netflix. I have to admit, I kind of liked this movie.

Sure it wasn't anything all that special or new, but it was charming and sweet. It wasn't over the top, and didn't try to hard to make the audience laugh. I didn't laugh a ton while watching the movie, but I still found it to be humorous, but I also liked the story. The story of course, was full of cliches and it ended the way we all knew it would end. At the same time, none of that really mattered. It was written well enough for us to lose focus of the usual romantic comedy formula, and pay more attention to the fun characters that this movie was all about.

I've secretly always been a big fan of Sandra Bullock (Speed, Crash), and I know just as well as the next person that she has had some big swing and misses in her career. But when she picks the best movie for her, when she is in her element, she rocks it! I thought she was perfect here. She was funny, she was hate-able AND likable at the same time. I loved her in this movie! Ryan Reynolds (Waiting, Smokin' Aces) has developed himself quite a fanbase, and I can understand why. He has some near perfect comedic timing, and he's great at being the funny, sometimes awkward guy. Just as he was here. The two of them together worked super well, it was a great duo!

Overall, this isn't an amazing movie. But was anyone expecting it to be? Listen, yes it's completely cliched and you know how it's all going to go down. But at least it has some unique characters that you grow to love and move the usually boring storyline in a funny direction. I liked The Proposal, you should like it too! Hehe. Oh and the best part of the movie plays right as the credits role...classic scene!

2009 Review #57: Precious

Precious

Rated R
(child abuse including sexual assault, and pervasive language)
1 hour 50 minutes

Storyline:
In Harlem, an overweight, illiterate teen who is pregnant with her second child is invited to enroll in an alternative school in hopes that her life can head in a new direction.

Starring:
Gabourey 'Gabby' Sidibe
Mo'Nique
Paula Patton
Mariah Carey
Lenny Kravitz

Critics Grade:
A-

My Grade:
A+

Wow. Precious is one of the most heart breaking films I've seen a very long time. This film is devestating to watch. I saw it all by myself, which probably wasn't a good idea. This is a movie that should be embraced with other people. I will not lie to you, Precious is an extrememly difficult film to watch because the subject material is dark as dark can be. It reaches down to the trenches of how evil people can be and how tormented other people are. It captures the disgusting act of judgment that we all possess. Precious is a brilliant film. A must see film, if you can take it. This film is not only FULL of extremely vulgar language, but it goes into much more sinister territroy that is not something everyone could probably see. I'm talking incest (Precious was raped by her father twice and now has two children from him). That isn't ruining the storyline at all trust me. It shows phsical and emotional abuse to the max. It features a scene where a baby is tossed to the side. I'm telling you, this is a film that is hard to see but it is one I think all should see.

I'm not going to dive into the storyline in this review, it would take to long. Read my synopsis above and also most people by now know what this film is about. It's all over the place. My theater was jam packed last night! Anyway, the screenplay here was one of dismal beauty. I've never read the book, but I feel like the screenwriter captured it well enough. They did not hold back in this film, they threw it all right in our faces. They shoved a message right down our throats. No matter what a person may look like on the outside, no matter what you may THINK they are...never ever assume that about them. Never assume the worst of someone and tear them apart.

Who are we to judge? How do you think people feel when they are judged? You see the main character in this film and hear her story and you think nasty things about her. But then we get to know her. We begin to learn her story, and through that, we feel her pain. We've all been guilty of judging people like Precious. I've been judged in the same ways. What the film makers do here is capture the essence of this heart ache and amplify it to the max. This is something that happens in real life. This is a film that needs to be seen so that our eyes can be opened. We need a slap in the face to see the reality of this world. The sadness that is going on all around us. It may have been shown to us in a very harsh way in this film, but they did a phenomenal job at bringing this to us. Oscar worthy screenplay, and absolutely Oscar worthy directing by Lee Daniels.

This film has gotten a lot of word of mouth mainly because of the performances. We've been hearing a lot about the ladies in this film. This is Gabourey 'Gabby' Sidibe's very first film and I'm telling you, you would never have guessed that. She delivers one of the most emotionally devestating and heartbreaking performances I've seen in years. If there is front runner for Best Actress at the Oscars so far this year, it is Gabby. She was simply amazing as Precious. She delivered this authentic performance that could bring a grown man to tears (not this one though, sorry). She has a scene in the classroom towards the end that is hard to watch. She breaks down and releases all her pain and in the moment you see a real girl in real pain and then you think...wait, this is just a movie.

The supporting ladies weren't chop liver. First we have Mariah Carey (Glitter). She only has about three scenes in the whole film and maybe about ten minutes of screentime. Her character is really "toned down" from her real life image. This was not done to embarass her, but to have us relate to her. Her short performance was very monoton but I'll tell you what, it was incredibly believable. She plays a social worker who appears unhappy, of course she's monotone. She see's turmoil every day. With what she had, she was convincing and did a great job. Paula Patton (DeJa Vu, Mirrors) seems to have been ignored in all the award buzz, and I don't understand why. I thought she carried herself beautifully in this film. She connected with Precious in such a sweet and convincing way and really showcased her acting chops in this film. It's shame she will go un-noticed this year in the awards area, because she was very good.

So now we come to Mo'Nique (Phat Girlz, Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins). I was not believing the hype about her performance. I mean come on, how could this woman who does raunchy stand up, has an annoying voice and stars in movies title "Phat Girlz" deliver a serious dramatic performance that's worthy of an Oscar? Well you remember that judging thing I spoke of eariler? You see how easily I fell prey to that? Because I could not have been more wrong, and I'm glad I was. Mo'Nique has about 5 or 6 scenes in the film. Every time she is on screen and she opens her mouth you hate her character. She is the definition of pure evil. She is nasty, vile person who treats her daughter like filth. And that's me being nice. She is super crazy in this film. But damit...she was brilliant. Shock of the century for me. She...was...brilliant. She was frigtening real, she was scary as hell and you didn't see comedian Mo'nique in this character at all. I don't how she did it, but I'm glad she did. Her final scene was probably the most heart breaking moment of the film. She gives this haunting monolugue that made me teary eyed. How can you feel for a character as sinister as this? Well you can't, but you come close in that scene. You begin to understand her. You begin to believe she's incredibly mentally unstable. She's hurting too. But how can you feel for her? That's the beauty of that scene. If she does not win an Oscar for the moment alone....it will be an Academy Awards travesty. She HAS to be a shoe in?? RIGHT?

Bottom line...this is one of the very best films of 2009. It should be nominated for Best Picture, no doubt in my mind. It's captivating. It's haunting. It's tragic. It even has some very sweet, funny moments to brighten up the dread of the film. This is an all around amazing motion picture. A must see film. Just be warned. The movie gave me goosebumps at times. Woo, freaking phenomenal film!

2009 Review #56: Food, Inc. (Documentary Feature)

Food, Inc.

Rated PG
(some thematic material and disturbing images)
1 hour 34 minutes

Subject:
An unflattering look inside America's corporate controlled food industry.

Critics Grade:
A+

My Grade:
A

Well the tagline for this film is correct, I am NEVER going to look at my dinner the same way again! I must warn you right out of the gate, if you enjoy eating food...like really, really enjoy it...do not watch this movie even though I HIGHLY suggest that you do! This is a must see film for EVERYONE! You're stomaches may turn, you may want to gag, you may be repulsed, you may be pissed, you may be sad, heartbroken, etc after watching this film but you must see it. So you may never buy a bag og Tyson chicken again...but that is the point of this film...to inform us of the disgusting truth about the food we love to eat.

This film shockingly shows us the inside to some of the slaughter houses and "plants" where they grow and eventually kill these animals for our food. I'm not talking farms where cows are free to roam and eat grass. I'm talking cages and small enclosements where chickens, cows and other animals are jailed, tortured and pumped full of chemicals. They genetically enhance these animals to make them grow faster, and the same time make these poor animals suffer unimaginable pain and anguish during their lifespans. Chickens who aren't able to walk more than two steps without falling over. Some chickens just simply die. Cows that are bullied. They push them over with tractors and push them back into their cages as they scream.

They feed these cows corn instead of grass and the cows don't digest it right which can cause their meat to be infected with E Coli. Causing widespread epidemics of E Coli breakouts killing many people. There was a story of a young boy who died twelve days after eating a hamburger that was infected with E Coli. And what do these food industries do about it?? Absolutely nothing is what. They have made it illegal in some states to protest and critisize their idustry. Are you kidding me? Remember the Oprah scandal? These food companies control damn near 90% of the food industry. They are like their own government...hell they even have the government on their side!

Well I don't want to ramble to much. You sould really just see the movie. Go rent it...please! This is an EXCELLENT documentary. A brilliant look into a world we are shunnd from learning anything about until now. It is sickening what is going on in our food, and this movie has inspired me to take a much closer look into what I'm eating. Great movie! Better be nominated for an Oscar this year! I'm calling it RIGHT NOW! Hehe.

2009 Review #55: The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Rated R
(violence and pervasive language)
1 hour 46 minutes

Storyline:
Armed men hijack a New York City subway train, holding the passengers hostage in return for a ransom, and turning an ordinary day's work for dispatcher Walter Garber into a face-off with the mastermind behind the crime. This is a remake of a 1974 film of the same name starring Walter Matthau.

Starring:
Denzel Washington
John Travolta
John Turturro
James Gandolfini

Critics Grade:
D-

My Grade:
B-

So this film is apparently a loose remake of a 1974 thriller of the same name. I've never seen said film, so I cannot compare the two. Critics say the original is much better, and I'm sure they are probably right. By all standards, this should have been a movie I was destined to not like in the least. It's hard these days to take Oscar nominee John Travolta (Pulp Fiction, Face/Off) seriously. But on the other hand Oscar winner Denzel Washington (Training Day, Deja Vu) is usually a reliable performer. But then back on the flip side you have a film directed by Tony Scott, whose films such as Man on Fire, Deja Vu, The Fan, etc have been crapped on critically for being "to much" or "seriously bad over the top action"(even though I typically enjoy them). Then you have the tired storyline of a crazy hostage take who wants a tremendous sum of cold hard cash (10 million dollars in this case) and only wants to deal with a person who has no experience in hostage negotiation. This formula should add up to a pretty ridiculous, over the top and fairly stupid action thriller right?

Well not for me it didn't. I was actually surprised, because I enjoyed this film overall. It is not a perfect movie. It is not in the top ten or twenty action films ever made. It has it's flaws, of course. Yes some of the action does get a little "Tony Scott" on us. But it never escalated to being "to much to handle". There were also numerous moments where the movie would do this weird slow motion thing with the train or the shots of the city that became distracting after a while. There was this elongated action sequence of the money being transferred by the NYPD that became so cliched and annoying. You would have to think they would have had a better method of getting this money over with a deadline of only an HOUR! Instead the whiz through the streets getting in numerous fender benders without a care in the world. I don't know...that part was a little silly to me. Also the constant use of John Travolta's character saying "Mother F**ker" with this weird inflection...bothered me. Ha, whatever though.
Overall those are minor delays, and ones that were to be expected in a film like this. But I thought the movie played out pretty well. There was no ridiculous motive for the villain, no sinister and overly intelligent and well thought out evil plan. The bad guy was smart, but also didn't think things through. He screws up a few times. Almost "humanizes" the guy in a strange way. I have to say too, Travolta was actually pretty darn good in this movie. He had every opportunity to just go nuts with this performance and fall into the crazy hostage taker cliched role but I don't think he did. He was actually pretty cool. I mean he wasn't to far off from said cliche, but he was different enough for me to like. Also good was Denzel. Duh. The guy is almost always good in anything he does. He plays his character so calm and collected but also shows some bad ass tendencies. You really like his character even though he isn't the best person in the world. He was funny at times, and just really good. Great job from both leads.

Tony Scott's direction was pretty normal for him again here. Yes there were some insane over the top moments, but this film was more toned down for him I thought. I think he handled the film well. You don't have this awesome screenplay, so he did what he could for the film and relied on strong performances from the two leads to carry the movie along the way. I also liked how he tried to humanize a couple of the hostages. Most of the time, we see very little of the victims, only glances. For the most part, it's the same here, but they showcase a couple hostages enough for us to know they do exist in the movie and that we are supposed to care for their safety. So pretty good job there.

You are probably thrown off by the fact that I liked this movie, but whatever I'm in a good mood today! This is just a fun, entertaining flick that passes the time really well. I would totally suggest it to people who are into a movie like this. It's not as terrible as you may thing or as the critics are letting you on. It's not the coolest action movie of the year, duh! But it still holds it's own I think. Good flick! So sue me!

2009 Review #54: Adoration

Adoration

Rated R
(Language)
1 hour 41 minutes

Storyline:
For his French-class assignment, a high school student weaves his family history in a news story involving terrorism, and goes on to invite an Internet audience in on the resulting controversy.

Starring:
Scott Speedman
Rachel Blanchard
Kenneth Welsh
Devon Bostick

Critics Grade:
C+

My Grade:
B-

Oops, I just realized I watched this movie like three or four days ago and forgot to review it. Well I'm going to keep this review very short, so I'm sorry in advance.

This was definitely a good movie. It was certainly well made and had some fairly good performances all around. The first two acts of the film were the best aspects of the story. It was really interesting and I found it to be quite captivating. However, the last act of the film seemed to spiral downwards in a direction I was disappointed by quite honestly. I almost felt like the first two thirds did not tie in to the "climatic" last third. All the events in the beginning and middle seemed to just be forgotten about by the end. Maybe I missed something, which is certainly a possibility but...as of now I did not understand why the movie concluded the way it did without really wrapping the whole story up. They hinted at this teacher being fired, and the boy being caught for what he was doing but we never actually see this happen, it's as if it all just a minor after thought. Even though it was the prominent aspect of the story.

So I don't know. I'm not really knocking the overall film, because for the most part it was actually pretty good. This isn't a movie everyone is going to see, I just happened to find it on Netflix one day and thought I'd check it out. If you are into indy type dramas with fairly unknown casts...I'd say sure...check this movie out. Otherwise, most people I know wouldn't care a less for this movie.

2009 Review #53: Dance Flick

Dance Flick

Rated PG-13
(crude and sexual content throughout, and language)
1 hour 24 minutes

Storyline:
Spoof comedy about Street dancer Thomas Uncles is from the wrong side of the tracks, but his bond with the beautiful Megan White might help the duo realize their dreams as the enter in the mother of all dance battles.

Starring:
Shoshana Bush
Damon Wayans Jr.
Critics Grade:
F-

My Grade:
D-

OK so I admit...I was bored. Also Netflix is being totally stupid about sending me movies, everything is a "Long Wait". So I was partially desperate to have them send me ANYTHING. So...I got Dance Flick, the new spoof comedy from the Wayan's family that basically spoofs all those great dance movies out there. Now I typically don't like these movies after the great travesties called "Meet the Spartans" and "Disaster Movie" but what the hell...you have to watch a dumb movie every once in a while right? Right??? Anyone????

Dance Flick is just that...a really dumb movie. It's hard to review a spoof movie though, because they are intentionally bad. They have intentially corny storylines and intentionally bad acting. I'm cool with that. These movies bank on their styles of humor and hope that they can make audiences laugh. I'll admit...I laughed more in this movie that those other two garbage films I listed above. Not saying much though, because I only laughed about four or five times. The rest of the jokes were all so cliched and just so bad. I mean really really bad. Really outdated and so forced that it just stunk up the whole movie.

So I'm not going to ramble on to much about it. This movie has some good funny moments, but a rare few. That's why I didn't give it an F grade. I've actually seen worse movies than this, this year. Believe it or not! At least it was kind of entertaining...at least that's what I keep telling myself.

2009 Review #52: 2012

2012

Rated PG-13
(intense disaster sequences and some language)
2 hours 38 minutes

Storyline:
An epic adventure about a global cataclysm that brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.

Starring:
John Cusask
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Amanda Peet
Thandie Newton
Oliver Platt
Danny Glover

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
D

Ok so I'm a liar. I may have said or at least implied to some people, that I would never see this film. Based off the previews, the movie looked just stupid to me. It looked like just yet another giant special effects (and bad special effects at that) movie about the end of the world. A movie we've seen so many times before, but now we have one with the 12/21/12 end of the world storyline those pesky Mayan's predicted many a moon ago. But yes, I did see this film. Listen, I enjoy hanging out with my friends. A good buddy and I go and see movies a lot...we were going to see Pirate Radio...but I guess we both felt like a good laugh...so we decided to see John Cusask in "2012".

Well, this wasn't the worst movie of the year, it has that going for it at least. This wasn't a truly AWFUL film. Hell it even had some borderline redeeming qualities (mainly the great Woody Harrelson in a brief role). But overall, yes, this was a fairly bad film in most aspects. Clearly this film is not going to have a profound storyline, I get that, and I accept that. Clearly it's not going to have an Oscar worthy performance from anyone. This movie, and all movies like this, rely on the entertaining and "bad ass" factor. This movie wasn't all that entertaining and certainly not "bad ass" in anyway. I actually thought it was a bit boring and ran just a tad to long (It's 2 hour and 40 minutes for petes sakes!!).

I think we got MOST of the "cool" special effects shots in the previews for the film. There's a lot of gap between the action in the film. When the action happens, it's all so...blah. The same crap we have seen time and time again. A bunch of cities and famous landmarks get demolished by various weather disasters or what have you. Volcanoes destroying national parks, major earthquakes sucking in major cities into the vast abyss. Blah blah blah. Been there, done that. The other half of the movie is the main characters trying to escape such chaos...and in such over the top, insane ways. For God's sake, if you have a plane, fly UP...not down and towards the destruction. But again...those scenes are there for our "entertainment". The scenes of these people just barely escaping death from horrific events became almost irritating and had no tension. Then it had all the cliched moments such as: the lives of thousands of human's rest in the hands of a mere book author who has to go on a suicide mission to save everyone. But before that, as the clock is ticking down, he of course must say his "I love yous" and make out with his estranged ex-wife for a minute or two. These types of moments just become so frustrating after a while. Not because they are unrealistic...because they are tiring and cliched.

The visual effects, for the most part looked pretty bad. There were times where I thought I was watching some kind of XBOX 360 game or something. They looked realistic enough for a video game...but not a major film if you catch my drift. A lot of them had this "cartoony" look to them too, almost to a point where they were just silly! It had some cool shots, mainly the rushing waves of water pouring over mountain tops...that was pretty cool looking. But the fire effects, and things going "boom"...all looked so corny. I've seen much better special effects in many other movies. The camera work also drove me nuts. Hell if people can complain about the hand held camera work in movies like "Cloverfield" and "Blair Witch" you can't tell me this movie didn't make you feel slightly sick. The camera was just all over the place and it was driving me bonkers!

Here's my main issue with the film. The whole 2012 thing is a big deal right now...it's the new vampire thing (in the past year or two vampires have taken over TV and film). They are now making a TV show based on the after effects of the 2012 disaster. Please stop! But anyway, the 2012 thing is a big deal and this movie was advertised like it was ALL about our impending doom the Mayan's predicted would happen. Here's the thing...I think I counted 1 very minor scene and maybe one kinda sorta big scene where they even bothered to mention the whole Mayan prediction. It was basically an afterthought!! It was barely mentioned! Then they threw all this science mumbo jumbo in our faces and boom...we were completely distracted away from the Mayan storyline...that never really existed in this film. Talk about a deceiving marketing ploy! All this movie turned out to be was a big hoax...just like the 2012 thing in real life. All it was, was an excuse to make another big budget end of the world disaster flick...and how do you get people to see it...eh, say it's all about the 2012 business...that will fill seats right? Well...it did, and everyone was duped! Sad!

I'm not proud I suffered through this film...but like I said...I enjoy hanging out with my friends and seeing crap movies sometimes! Sue me! I can't stop you from wasting your money on this film, who knows, maybe you will find it entertaining. I certainly did not. My friend also did not and he's less of a movie snob than I am. We both found the whole movie to be laughable...and yes, we laughed a few times in the film at parts that weren't meant to be funny. Whatever though, I'm just stupid movie snob right? Ha! Whatever, I like a good, ridiculous action flick just as much as everyone else...this one just fails in so many categories. Boo "2012", Boo! Hell I think last year's "Disaster Movie" was a better disaster movie than this...ooooooooh!

2009 Review #51: The Box

The Box

Rated PG-13
(thematic elements, some violence and disturbing images)
1 hour 54 minutes

Storyline:
A small wooden box arrives on the doorstep of a married couple, who know that opening it will grant them a million dollars and kill someone they don't know.

Starring:
Cameron Diaz
James Marsden
Frank Langella

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
F-

You may be thinking, "Really Mike, you gave this movie an F-??" You may also be thinking, "How can this possibly be a film that deserves the lowest possible grade when you gave a movie like 'Meet Dave' a D??" Here's my answer: I have never, and I mean NEVER been so unbelievably pissed off from watching a movie like I did after watching this crap fest called "The Box". The trailer for this film should win some award titled 'Most Misleading Trailer Award." You see the trailer for this film and you might think, "Oh that looks like it could be somewhat of an original thriller about some psycho who makes a happy couple kill a random stranger for a million bucks." If you thought that, you were wrong. You were very, very, very wrong. Like me. Sure it has a creepy old man who offers a million dollars for a seemingly nice, but struggling couple to press a button that would kill a random person somewhere in the world. But there is SO much that trailer does not tell you. I had NO idea this movie would go the direction it went in...and I still have no idea what it is exactly I witnessed in this film.

***SPOILER ALERT*** This movie I think...I THINK...is about aliens. The creepy old man was a NASA employee who was struck by lightning and killed. Half of his face is burnt off and now he looks like Harvey Two Face from The Dark Knight. Now he's come back to life as....ummm....well they never truly say. He says the line "I am now controlled by who controls the lightning". So...God maybe? No that can't be right, he's making people kill each other. Well OK, he has "employees" that look like you and me, but act like robots and bleed from the nose. Then there's this apparent portal system that's basically vertical boxes of water free floating. You have three choices, one leads to the right path the other two lead to eternal damnation. Also these...."beings" lets call them, have the ability to make a person deaf and blind permanently but can change them back as long as someone kills another person. The film also tries to deliver a few messages such as: we as a human race are so greedy that we just may do anything not only for money, but for our own selfishness to make ourselves happy and could care a less about others. It also has a biblical reference to Adam and Eve (at least I picked up on it) about how Eve ate the forbidden apple. Except in this movie, the women are far to quick to press that damn button and now the human race and the world has to suffer from their selfish decision. ***END SPOILER ALERT***

So if you read my spoiler paragraph...did any of that make sense to you? Because it sure as hell did not to me when I watched this movie! This has got to be the single most frustrating and confusing movie I've ever seen. There was WAY to much going on and they were trying to feed us WAY to much information. It was mysterious for a good hour and twenty minutes before they really started explaining their twists...which also made no sense. It becomes annoying when they start throwing all of these explanations and reasons for things at you when they become to cluttered and all over the place. I couldn't put any of this film together. The storyline went just way to far way to fast and took the movie to a level that it did not need to venture to. Please if you see this movie (which I don't suggest doing) can you please make some attempt to explain it to me?? Man this movie pissed me off!! I was angry from watching it because of how nonsensical it was.

This really was the very worst movie I've seen for 2009 so far. I'm not typically going to movies this year that I absolutely do not want to see...so I actually wanted to check this movie out. Holy crap was I disappointed and livid after watching it! This may be one of the most upsetting and stupidest movies I've ever had the misfortune of watching. I hated virtually every aspect of it. I'm sorry for the waste of talent of the main cast, what a crappy ass movie to choose to be a part of. All three can do so much better than this filth! I'm sorry...but I HATED The Box. This was a dumb movie than I would not suggest to ANYONE to go see. If you have to see it...wait for it to be on DVD in like...a month and rent it for cheaper. Ugh, this movie was so, SO bad!

2009 Review #50: Inkheart

Inkheart

Rated PG
(fantasy adventure action, some scary moments and brief language)
1 hour 38 minutes

Storyline:
A young girl discovers her father has an amazing talent to bring characters out of their books and must try to stop a freed villain from destroying them all, with the help of her father, her aunt, and a storybook's hero.

Starring:
Brendan Fraser
Paul Bettany
Helen Mirren
Eliza Bennett
Andy Serkis

Critics Grade:
F

My Grade:
D+

I decided to a throw movies onto my Netflix list that people really dogged on, just to see if they really were that bad. Inkheart was critically smashed for the most part when it first arrived in theaters. Not to many people gave this movie any average praise. They all said kids would not care for this flick because it lacked charm and charisma and had no heart and was just plain boring. Well I was curious to see if this was all true.

Inkheart is not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination. Trust me I have seen some BAD movies in my life, and this is Oscar worthy compared to those said crap fest films. That being said, Inkheart isn't exactly "good" either. This is one of those kid movies that is way over the head of most children the film is targeting. I don't know if any child under 10 would really understand this movie as a whole or really be all that into the movie. Kids that age like "flashy" things, and comical sidekicks and funny gags. This movie doesn't have any of that. It's all to serious for a childrens flick. That's what kid movies are doing these days...they are becoming to sophisticated for the brain of a young child. They don't take into consideration what kids really like. Sure this movie has some cool effects that might make a kid go "ooooooooh" but not enough.

This movie played out more like the film "Stardust", which I was a fan of. That at least had the guts to say it was meant for adults and it was rated PG-13. I'm not saying that Inkheart should be PG-13, but it almost plays out like a movie like that. It's a much less fun version of the "Pirates" movies. This movie is just bland, not only for kids but for adults. It doesn't have any thrills or really any likable characters. No you don't hate the main heroes of the story, but you don't really care for them either. This movie isn't funny. I don't think I laughed once. Brendan Fraser has done this same old movie time and time again, and he really needs to stop now. He needs a new genre of film to work on. Let someone else take over the helm please.

I can't sit here and say this movie sucks or that it's bad it's just not fun in any way. It's not entertaining. It has a really cool idea about a man who can read a book and the story comes to life instantly...cool right? Well this movie poorly executes that idea. It could have been done so much better. If they just said, "alright, this isn't a kids movie, lets have fun with this" it might have been better. But it just ends up getting lost in the mix somewhere. Please, go rent the movie "Up" for your kids to enjoy, laugh at and be inspired by...Inkheart really isn't the movie to do that.

2009 Review #49: The Education of Charlie Banks

The Education of Charlie Banks

Rated R
(pervasive language, some violence, sexual content, and drug and alcohol use)
1 hour 40 minutes

Storyline:
College student Charlie Banks has to face old problems when the bully he had an unpleasant encounter with back in high school shows up on his campus.

Starring:
Jesse Eisenberg
Jason Ritter
Eva Amurri
Chris Marquette

Critics Grade:
D

My Grade:
C

This is a movie that clearly not a whole lot of people have even heard of. It's been out since around the beginning of 2009 and has less then 1000 voted on IMDB. It only has a total of 26 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes...which is really low. This movie was never really "out there" for people to see. But now it is available on DVD, and I saw it on Netflix and it caught my eye. The movie is basically about a quiet, kind of nerdy kid named Charlie who has come face to face once again with a childhood/high school bully that he has always been deeply afraid of. Charlie one ratted this bully out to the cops only to recant but the bully never knew that. Now Charlie is just trying to get through college and also trying to become more than friends with a fellow female student.

This movie has "independent" written all over it. Did you know this was the directorial debut of musician Fred Durst? I kid you not! Honestly I never would have guessed he could ever direct a film and if he did I would have imagined it would have been pretty bad. However my thoughts would have been wrong. I think he did quite a good job for his debut. I didn't think that was a great film and it is ultimately forgettable, but all things considered, Durst did a fairly good job capturing the realism of college and all the potential problems that could arise amongst college aged people.

That being said, this movie has a pretty big flaw in my eyes: it is very dull. The writing especially, falls very flat and for the most part is incredibly one dimensional. Yeah yeah yeah, I'm not a screenwriter and I have no idea how hard it is to write a screenplay. I know all that. But that doesn't mean a person who watches enough movies can tell when a screenplay doesn't pop. It didn't pop for me. Nothing stood out as being powerful or magnificent. It isn't poorly written by any means, there are some well written scenes, but in the end nothing really inspiring comes out of this tale. I don't know how else to critique it other than it just doesn't have any "oomph".

The film does have some good performances. Mainly from Jason Ritter (Freddy Vs. Jason) who plays the bully with some pretty good depth. His performance is so authentic I thought. He shows us the deeply mean and troubled side to a bully but also the side of him that wants to be good and to be redeemed. You feel bad for him. I also liked Chris Marquette (Alpha Dog, The Invisible) who plays the friend torn between the good (Charlie) and the bad (the bully) who is friends with both. He's been a bit actor for probably all of his career, but I thought he was solid this time out. Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland, Zombieland) actually annoyed me in this movie. I can't exactly put my finger on it...but his performance was just annoying as all hell. I couldn't stand him and he was the main character! He had this high pitched naisley voice when he was angry, and at other times he was to quiet and his voice "fidgeted" to much. It just bothered me, it was a distraction.

Overall this is a fairly good movie with some good direction by Fred Durst but it fails to have a captivating storyline that packs a very weak punch. Some good performances and some OK ones. Overall just a good but forgettable film. That's all I can really say.