chi-cerca-trova Reviews

Zootopia (2016)

Strong story and excellent performances come together to make a touching movie

[8/10 · 24 September 2016]

Overall: Zootopia has a very clear and prescient message about prejudice and racism from the outset. But, its story carries a positive tone, refusing to insult the intelligence of its viewers nor does it strive to underline its point. We experience the journey of these characters as they realize their actions can have an unintended impact on those around them, which gently calls upon the viewers to reflect on how they treat others. This is a powerful movie with a timely message that is supported by a smart script, engaging performances and good natured humor that combine to create one of the finest animated movies in recent years. 8/10 Detailed Breakdown: Story: Zootopia is anchored by clear, natural and logical motivations for Judy and Nick, where their journey to discovery is both beautiful and believable. What makes the story powerful is that the discussion about racism is not about overt displays of hatred or prejudice, rather the small actions that we might not even notice to be harmful. This makes the story much more relatable, as it gently calls our attention to these actions. When supported by genuinely good humor, creative sight gags, and heart wrenching backstories, you are left with a strong script that gives plenty of room for these characters to breathe. +4 Characters: This strong story really acts as a backdrop to these compelling characters. Ginnifer Goodwin and Jason Bateman breathe life into these characters, giving emotional and well rounded voical performances that avoid overwrought histrionics that can creep into animated movies. This is aided by nuanced and beautifully realized animated performances, that deftly balance anthropomorphization with allowing different animal characteristics to inform the performances. The result is fully fleshed out world that heightens the complex social structure in Zootopia without underlining the point. +3 Production Design: Every set, background and prop work together to weave a believable world that supports the action admirably. True, there are the obvious pun jokes that are the mainstay of movies such as this. But, the way the different biomes bring a different visual style to film, that play with climate or size in interesting ways, help to accentuate the humor. This gives rise to creative sight gags that have a purpose in the movie, helping to push the plot along in ways that are not obvious at the moment. The result is an artistic direction that is some of the subtly strongest animated design in the Disney tradition. +4 Sound: The score is typical Michael Giacchino, relying on a strong main theme and an understated use of leit motifs. Not a bombastic or massively memorable score, but it supported the action well.

Furthermore, the Foley track here was adequate as well. It accentuates the different biomes and characters, fleshing out the world. Overall, solid efforts from the music and sound departments. 0 Misc: This film represents the full return of Disney Animation to the forefront of animation innovation. While "Tangled" and "Frozen" were great animated films in their own right, they still fell in the princess category that has been the bread and butter Disney for the last 50 years. Here, we see the not inconsiderable animation talents that have been growing at the House of Mouse through the mid-00's finally married with some creative and challenging storytelling that falls outside of Disney's standard stable of stories. This has to be one of the strongest "message movies" released over the past 10 years or so, as it is easily accessible to a wide audience and has a strong message of inclusivity that doesn't result to condescension or blame pointing. A strong movie that deserves to stand with the Disney classics.

Maggie (I) (2015)

An interesting premise weighed down by poor style choices

[5/10 · 24 September 2016]

Overall: Technically, there is nothing outrageously wrong with this movie. The story beats, while obvious, are effective and the acting is adequate; Arnold and Abigail have an easy enough chemistry that the emotionally manipulative story still packs somewhat of a punch towards the end. The main issue here is that the movie has no tension. We know how this going to end and the beginning exposition gives you how the disease will progress. An interesting premise let down by a poor script. 5/10

Detailed Breakdown:

Story: There are a few effective scenes in "Maggie" that show how this unique premise could have been handled. But the opening exposition effectively undermines this interesting idea, essentially giving the audience a road map for the movie. The checklist of symptoms, the timeline, what is going to happen, and how people should deal with the eventual "turn" of their loved ones all tell us how this movie will eventually end. This effectively robs the movie of all tension, making the first third a bit of a slog to get through as neither Arnold nor Abigail have the acting chops to carry such a low key movie on their own. When combined with a few dumb decisions by some of the supporting characters, makes the movie a bit of a boring watch until the last 15 minutes. Not a terrible story, but a waste of a good idea. -2

Characters: The movie also stumbles when it selectively provides exposition, making the motivation for these characters a bit of a mess. There is no reason why Wade is given such preferential treatment by people that are in charge of restoring order to a world that has barely survived a zombie pandemic, so when he struggles against the authorities, we don't have boundaries for him to break. Ultimately, his character comes off as an idiot that doesn't deserve the special treatment he's receiving. Abigail Breslin does succeed in the some of the quieter moments of the movie and when acting solely opposite Arnold, but her scenes elsewhere skew more towards awkward than heartwarming. Unfortunately for the movie, it's about halfway through the film when they finally seem to click with these characters. -1

Aesthetics: This was the single biggest issue with the movie. Every shot, especially in the first 20 minutes, was some film school, art house shot with unnecessary camera shaking and focus pulls. Furthermore, the action of the movie, especially towards the end, was so poorly lit and edited that it was near impossible to make out what was going on. Granted, this was a bleak movie with a bit of a nihilistic ending, but you can still light it in a way that helps invoke that feeling while still helping to show the action of the scene. -4

Sound: The music here was simple and sparingly used, which helped accentuate the feelings of isolation. However, the foley track really helped to flesh this movie out. Whether it was the pained cries of a trapped animal or the sounds Maggie's body steadily breaking down, the sound effects help to give this world weight. +1

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014)

Fun but forgettable movie

[6/10 · 3 September 2016]

Overall: A weak story and poor supporting performances drag down an otherwise enjoyable TMNT movie anchored by surprisingly effective performances by the Turtles themselves. Here, the story of April O'Neil is given much more prominence than in the past, which is unnecessarily convoluted and ultimately robs the Turtles of any genuine motivation beyond "we want to do good". Coupled with very weak performances from Megan Fox as April and Tony Shalhoub as Splinter, the movie is at risk of buckling under its own weight. But the Turtle performances were a surprise, injecting the movie with humor and heart. With the Turtles as an emotional core to the movie, the movie moves at a breezy pace that bows out just as its wearing out its welcome. The result is a fun movie that will be quickly forgotten. 6/10

Detailed Breakdown:

Story: Ninja Turtles is not supposed to be known for its highbrow story lines, but even here, it suffers from an unfocused script. The main evil plan is satisfyingly stupid for a Turtles movie, but suffers when it forces everything to be connected in some fashion. The idea of Splinter training the Turtles to be ninjas literally comes from the trash heap while an unnecessarily convoluted connection between April and the Turtles gets shoved into the center of the movie. Fortunately, the script doesn't get too bogged down in this, so the movie still moves along at a brisk pace. 0

Characters: The true charm in the Ninja Turtles comes from the titular characters and their relationship. This is where the movie surprisingly shines. The four brothers feel like actual brothers, and while the personalities remain generally unchanged from earlier iterations, they feel organic to the story. There is a comfortable chemistry and comes through the performances, with genuine humor and care between them. Unfortunately, this becomes weighed down by a weak Splinter, who lacks the gravitas and authority that one would need to be a father to the four brothers. Combine this with an underwhelming performance from Megan Fox, means the Turtles are barely able to carry the weight of the movie. Will Arnett is funny as Vern, but he's given literally nothing to do and is not in the movie enough to really help the film. +1

Production Design: The movie does a good job with building a new environment for the Turtles to inhabit, but is really held back by spotty CGI. The equipment and costuming for the Turtles stands apart from its predecessors in a satisfying way, but the design of the Turtles themselves draws a bit more of an ambivalent response. On one hand, their design feels like it serves the story at times, with them feeling like they would be able to actually do the things they are doing on the screen. But, it also follows the recent trend of superheroes being unfathomably ripped, which feels unnecessary. Overall, the world feels well fleshed out. 0

Music: The music here is your typical summer movie score. Doesn't really add or detract. 0

Misc: This is the first remake that really hits home for me. TMNT was a key part of my childhood, with the original 1990 film one that I can still go back and watch to this day. But, we as a nerd/geek subculture really need to get over this idea that a remake or belated sequel can destroy the original. Watching this, it became quickly apparent that this movie wasn't going to hold a candle to the original movie for me. But, there was no way it was going to. Whether or not this movie was good or bad doesn't detract from the original. The original will always be there for me to enjoy. And that goes for any property that gets rebooted or remade. The presence of something new doesn't erase the old.

Suicide Squad (2016)

Studio meddling and weak script undermine potentially great movie

[4/10 · 15 August 2016]

Overall: Suicide Squad opens in a ham fisted and slow manner, which immediately puts the pacing on its back foot. By the time action starts to pick up about half way through, the poorly written and clichéd characters have not given me any reason to be invested in the story and thus not really have any care for the action. It's a shame, because this was a great opportunity for DC to step out from behind Marvel with something unique that had a great pedigree of comic history and talent involved. Instead, this is a mess of uninteresting story lines coupled with a collection of half-baked characters that result in a boring film. 4/10

Detailed Breakdown:

Story: The biggest issue with this story is that it lacks a cohesive perspective; Deadshot and Harley Quinn are given minimal backstory, with Deadshot being the only one that is given an emotional grounding. That leaves the audience without an anchor point for their involvement in the story, which when coupled with blaise visuals and hackneyed writing, gives the story no characters for us to really care about. Without characters to care about, the story is scattershot and weak, underlining this lack of perspective and robbing the film of any momentum. -3

Characters: Overall, the characters do a seemingly alright job at building chemistry and gelling as a team. The real big problem is that this one movie has too much to do, so it tries to force us to feel something for them rather than letting it occur naturally. Will Smith plays Deadshot well, effectively portraying a preternatural assassin and is easily the strongest performance in the movie. However, Jared Leto and Margot Robie's Joker and Harley Quinn are both poorly thought out and weakly portrayed. Jared Leto is not in the film nearly as much as you are led to think, but the time he is in the movie is both annoying and distracting; you never felt any real menace from his performance, no maniacal energy that is a perfect and complete foil for Batman. He feels like every "crazed gangster" character that we've seen in crime movies the last 15 years. But, the real tragedy here is Harley Quinn, which was either written or edited terribly. When she is working with the team, she is constantly reaching for one-liners that are obvious and poorly written and her history doesn't make sense or have any impact on the story. Overall, the characters in this movie are generally one-dimensional and the performances pretty much reflect that. -3

Production Design: Pretty bland overall. Costumes are well put together, with Deadshot's costume really standing out as each part of his costume having actual functions. Harley Quinn's gun was also well designed, bringing a certain anarchic grace to the pistol. Other than that, the design was not anything special. 0

Music: This soundtrack was distracting and forced. The problem here is not so much the pop score rather the soundtrack is used in lieu of character development, which ultimately comes off as heavy handed. Furthermore, when using a pop soundtrack, there should be a connecting theme beyond the fact its "movie music". There is no connecting theme than trying to hit over the head repeatedly with how cool it's trying to be, which only glaringly points out how it's trying to cover over weak editing and storytelling. -4

Misc: With the prevalence of films being adapted from deep mythologies with years of backstory and lore to draw from, it's easy to fall into the trap of "well, it explains it in the book/comic/etc.". A movie needs to tell it's story, completely, within its running time. If the viewer isn't given an emotional anchor because of how the story is told, then the movie failed. Harley Quinn and The Joker have an incredibly rich and deep relationship that spans years of comics and movies. None of that complexity made it to the final film.

Movies like this will continue to fail if they rely on external media to do the heavy story telling lifting. While films can, and should, draw inspiration from a myriad of sources, these sources should not be used as shortcuts from what the job of writers and directors: to tell a story.

The BFG (2016)

Bright and fluffy, not much substance

[7/10 · 25 July 2016]

Overall: (Note: I have not read the book. Thus I am reviewing this as a film, rather than as a comparison to the book) The BFG is a meandering film that does not seem to really want to tell a structured story. Sophie is an underwritten character, who is whisked away to Giant Country before we even get to really know her, while the BFG doesn't really have a motivation and is given half of an arc. The pacing of the story drags in the middle, while it introduces an undeveloped and non-threatening conflict towards the climax. However, Mark Rylance and Ruby Barnhill give two stellar performances that ground the movie with a satisfying emotional core. While it is held back by some wonky special effects that don't jibe as neatly as they could and questionable storytelling choices, the BFG is a sweet and genuine movie that accomplishes what it sets out to do. Ultimately, it's a film that reminds what made me fall in love with movies as a child, even if through adult eyes I can find it somewhat lacking.7/10

Detailed Review:

Story/Script: The biggest fault here is the lack of a structured approach to the plot of the film. The characters don't have clear motivations or histories and the ultimate conflict does not feel threatening. While the action does get going quickly, the second act just meanders while the third act doesn't feel like there is much that needs to be resolved. At times, it feels like it is forcing itself upon you, trying to get you to feel the wonderment and whimsy that you would as a child without letting it happen organically. Yet, when the story relaxes and lets the characters tell the story, you do feel what it is trying at times to force upon you. There are genuine moments of wonder and whimsy, but that is quickly lost when it tries to force you to feel it. It feels like a child is telling this story, breathlessly going from point to point. But, the film is ultimately saved by the central performances and some deft design choices. -1

Characterization: It's hard to separate the lack of characterization with the well delivered performances. Mark Rylance and Ruby Barnhall really place the film on a solid footing; the ability of these two actors to evoke the sense of friendship and camaraderie helps the film find its emotional center, which gives the audience a buy in point. When you get to the end of the movie, you have a genuine feeling of contentment for these two characters that doesn't come from the story or ordeal they've been through. Rather, it feels like these are two real characters that have formed a real friendship. And that is beautiful on in itself. +2

Design: Bluntly put, the design of this movie really breathes life into the proceedings and gives the two leads an amazing backdrop to work off of. Little touches, such as a ship that is a bed in water or a tea tray made from a highway road sign, help make this fantastical world feel grounded. However, it does suffer from jarring "uncanny valley" moments, especially in the beginning. The green screen effects don't always seamlessly work together, which does throw the movie a bit and at times the sense of scale doesn't always quite evoke the emotion it's hoping for. Technically, there isn't anything here we haven't seen before, but the thought and artistry behind it is stunning. -1

Sound/Music: The Foley track helps support the visuals, where they are not over the top but help accentuate the action. Competently done. The music felt distracting, a John William's score without John William's ability to subtly use leit motifs. Once again, the score seemed to try and force a sense of wonder and whimsy but just couldn't just quite get there. Unfortunately, probably some the weakest parts in the movie. -2

Miscellaneous: A movie like this is hard to review. I look for various things in films, such as character motivation, solid three act structure, consistent pacing, etc. This film lacked a lot of that. Yet, this isn't the point of this movie. It's a film made for families, and for that, it works exceedingly well. My critiques are nitpicky, because I still felt something at the end of the story and that's what matters. It's a film that reminds what made me fall in love with movies in the beginning, even if through adult eyes I can find it somewhat lacking.

Brick (2005)

Spade review for "Brick"

[8/10 · 1 October 2013]

Overall: This is a movie that relishes the slow burn; each piece slowly fits into place, inching the viewer closer to its climax. The characters are excellent creations, with their actions believably influencing the plot. While it's influences are a little forward, this is a solid and stylish film noir that draws you in and keeps you there. Hammond and Chandler should be proud. 8/10

Detailed Review:

A) Story/Script: This is a story that Rian Johnson spent obvious time paring it down its core essentials; the story is smart and moves well. There is a really feeling of history with these characters, giving weight to the plot without adding unnecessary weight to the film. The stereotypical noir dialogue witty and stylistic, if slightly too much so at times, but fits with the overall vibe of this world and not just there for the sake of style, so it is effective. The echoing of classic noir films is clever, however it does detract a bit when some scenes were nearly lifted straight from their source. However, this is not something takes away from it necessarily and will hopefully push other film goers to explore this film's inspirations. 8/10

B) Characters: Each character feels deeply rooted in the roles they play, with the respective actor bringing a certain earnestness to their performance, which lends credibility to a concept that could have easily been played for farce. What is refreshing, though, is that none of these characters rely on John Hughes-esque clichés; they are believable enough as people that you can see that this story is just a snapshot, a small moment in lives that have many before and many after. 7/10

C) Design: The simple design helped cover what was obviously a low budget film. The middle class, Americana set design in the homes or Tug or the Pin gave a stark, but welcome, contrast to the cold and angular school or municipal buildings. What is interesting to note, that the further from established authority (i.e. school administration) the characters got, the more natural and wild the settings became; the location of the murder is a rundown drainage tunnel, covered in graffiti and overgrown with weeds or brush. Simple but effective. 6/10

D) Sound/Music: The sound design was subtle and sparing, which really accentuated its effectiveness at key points. Rian Johnson wisely relied on sound effects over music in certain portions, as the foot chase was a perfect example of: the pounding foot falls gave a real sense of danger and energy to what was likely a simple sequence to shoot, but would have been cheapened by an overbearing score or background music. Also, Nathan John's score is brutally sparse, focusing on simple leit motifs that weave subtly in and out of the film, never drawing attention to itself but enriching the film none the less. 8/10

E) Purpose/Misc: This film obviously wears its noir influences on its sleeve, but does not seem particularly bogged down by them. Its biggest asset is its setting; the use of high school as merely a flimsy conceit to put these characters together adds an interesting twist, yet feels completely natural. Telling a solid, serious noir while creating something original is difficult; in this, the film succeeded well. 9/10

Riddick (2013)

Spade Review for Riddick

[2/10 · 1 October 2013]

Overall: This is a textbook example of poor editing, poor writing and poor directing. The first 20 minutes of this movie are slow and unnecessary, and by the time something interesting starts to happen, all interest is lost. Poorly acted and shot, with few saving graces, Riddick is a missed opportunity to make a passable, late summer sci-fi thriller. 2/10

Detailed Review:

A) Story/Script: Riddick ultimately suffers from extremely poor pacing and lackluster screen writing. The script takes easy, cheap routes with no thought to telling a coherent story. Hitting every sci fi/action cliché, this was an overall weak effort that barely warrants the time spent watching it. Case in point: before the actual business of the monsters comes into play, Santana and Dahl are wrestling on the ground, implying a possible rape (this comes after much posturing by the both of them). The scene fades away, with a shot on Riddick observing the situation; when we return to the scene, there are the results of a bloody fight on the ground, with a body imprint, bloody handprints, blood streaks, indicating a body being dragged away, etc. However, both Dahl and Santana are fine, breathing and standing, with only a casual explanation "I had to smack him around a few more times", and it is dropped. Just one of the many dropped threads in the story that detract from an already weak script. 2/10

B) Characters: The ultimate problem this movie runs into with characterization is there is really nothing interesting for them to do. This is Riddick's show, so everyone else is essentially monster fodder. You have your sci fi thriller clichés: quiet leader, arrogant antagonist, tough as nails chick, etc. Ultimately, there is nothing there that really sets them apart from each other, each of the dying in surprisingly bland ways. Riddick is slightly fleshed out, but only by the virtue of this being a franchise movie. Other than that, these characters are mostly preoccupied with useless posturing and grimacing at each other. 2/10

C) Design: There were some interesting creature designs, specifically the main monsters, but everything else was passable. Basic sci-fi architecture and design, but nothing that particularly stands out. 4/10 D) Sound/Music: Music is pretty forgettable, with a stereotypical techno/rock score. The foley mix is not terrible, but nothing particularly creative either. Bland all around. 4/10

E) Purpose/Misc: "Riddick" really is a missed opportunity; a simple thriller like the original Pitch Black is not particularly difficult to make. The biggest issue with this film is the fact it seems to forget that "Chronicles of Riddick" is nearly 10 years old; the character is not one that has a significant recent memory outside of a relatively small fandom. You cannot make a movie about a character that the movie going public is not familiar with and expect to make a direct sequel. Overall, a lazy effort that is a disservice to loyal fans and waste of time for others.

PS: Putting a "tough" chick in a movie that only growls about tough she and smacks a guy around once or twice, to only fall for the hero at the end does not make her a tough chick. This is not the 80's; there are plenty of female roles out there that do not need to bray about how tough they are; they just are. 3/10

2 Guns (2013)

Spade review for 2 Guns

[7/10 · 1 October 2013]

Overall: This is a by the numbers summer thriller, which is not a bad thing at all; this is a fun, relaxed action movie that really lets Mark Wahlberg and Denzel Washington just have at the characters. The action is well thought out, the comedy is pretty witty and overall, it is a fun comfort movie. 7/10

Detailed Review:

A) Story/Script: This film really follows the established post-9/11 thriller tropes: evil CIA conspiracy, rouge agents, Mexican standoff climax set in an anonymously set, washed out color palette. But it does work, but this is mainly due to the casting more than the actual writing. However, it is handled deftly by director Baltasar Kormákur, who shows a decent grasp of making an unpretentious, fun action movie. Ultimately, the story serves its basic purpose and moves the action from set piece to set piece. 6/10

B) Characters: The characters are nothing new; we have seen these types many times before during past summer seasons. However, what really sets this a part is the chemistry and charisma of both Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg. They play extremely well off of each other, elevating a straight forward, by the numbers story into something a bit more entertaining and memorable. Bill Paxton delivers a solid performance as the lead villain, taking something that obviously had little meat on it and making it an enjoyable performance. 8/10

C) Design: The design of the movie serves its purposes, but nothing particularly spectacular. A mostly brown and tan color palette does not push new ground, but continues to serve the genre well. 5/10

D)Sound/Music: The music is an appropriate spy/techno-thriller soundtrack; soft but driving drums, a bit of rock guitar and some picked, Spanish style guitar. Same with the sound. Nothing special, with gunshots and explosions given proper weight and prominence in the foley track. 5/10

E) Purpose/Misc: This is an excellent summer, action spy piece. While there are some creative western genre touches, it manages to stick to basic action tropes, delivering a fun experience as expected. Will likely fall into the same line as films such as "The A-Team" and "The Losers" from a few years ago: not entirely forgettable, but not particularly memorable. A great time at the movies anchored by two, effortlessly charismatic lead performances. 7/10

Elysium (I) (2013)

Spade review for "Elysium"

[7/10 · 1 October 2013]

Overall: Elysium is a visually stunning science fiction melodrama set in a very well built and designed world that is ultimately held back by its weak characterization. Neil Blokamp has firmly established himself as the genre's most visually gifted directors and will hopefully continue challenging the vapid nature of modern, big budget sci-fi. 7/10

Detailed Review:

A) Story/Script: The story is relatively straight forward; characters are archetypes that say the lines demanded by their stereotypes. Yet, the story is effective. The plot is spun out well and is decently paced from set piece to set piece. A stronger, more nuanced script would have really elevated this film, especially with it backed by such strong production values. However, Neil Blokamp really excels at making this an international affair, with different dialects and accents naturally worked into the story. 6/10

B) Characters: Each character is an archetype: the ex-con with a heart of gold, the cold Defense Secretary, the psychopathic Mercenary, the childhood friend with a kid in peril. While they do serve their purposes amiably, it is disappointing after the nuanced and multifaceted characters seen in "District 9". However, they are played well by their respective actors, with a special mention going to Matt Damon and Sharlto Copley: both play against type very well, inhabiting roles that could have been pure stock characters is played by someone else. 6/10

C) Design: This is an absolutely visually stunning movie: the stark contrasts between Elysium and Earth are more than just shifts in color palettes. Both use gorgeous architectural designs that really tell a story of their own. While the idea of the "used future" is not original, here it is used with such effectiveness that others will be hard pressed to beat it. The vehicle and weapons design are absolutely brilliant, and they tie into the respective aesthetics excellently, which really emphasizes the history of this world. All together, the visual design of this film really lends credibility to a story that would have been sorely lacking otherwise. 9/10

D) Sound/Music: The sound design is as stunning as the visuals they compliment. Engines, saws, gun shots, everything has a punch to them, really pushing the drama on screen further and wringing every last ounce of weight out of these set pieces. The score is a typical, sci fi score, with requisite bombastic portions complimented by slower and quieter sections. It serves its purpose without overstepping its boundaries; a simple but effective score is always better than a loud one that detracts from the film. 9/10

E) Purpose/Misc: Elysium is pure sci-fi melodrama, yet it's hard to hold that against it too much; it's ultimately overshadowed by "District 9". We have seen Neil Blokamp do effective sci-fi drama while still giving us a challenging story and characters in "District 9", so to see this Avatar-esque story supported by such stunning visuals and creative direction is a bit disheartening. Having said that, Neil Blokamp is a director very distinctly in command of the style and nature of the films he creates and does an excellent job building them. When he inevitably matches the style of "Elysium" with the brains and heart of "District 9", it could potentially be genre defining. 8/10

Silver Linings Playbook (2012)

Amazing Romantic Comedy

[9/10 · 18 January 2013]

This is a movie that hits all the romantic comedy tropes: the meet cute, time spent circling each other, montage where they grow closer, epiphany, overcome some obstacle and kiss at the end.

It's a traditional formula. So, why is it so good? Because it subverts what makes these tropes unbearable. The meet cute is an agonizing, awkward scene. The time where they circle each other is heart wrenching. The montage is fraught with truly touching moments of growth. And when they beat the odds and finally allow themselves to fall for each other, it is a beautiful, touching scene that you, in spite of seeing from the beginning of the movie, want to actually cheer for these two characters.

It is all rooted in the performances. David O. Russell tells a story that draws you in because of the relatability of these characters as the try to come to grips with some very serious situations. But, what is most beautiful about this movie, is that this movie never shies away from the ugliness that these characters are capable of. You know they are good people, but they are dealing with significant mental issues. Which makes the climax and epilogue that much more beautiful. You feel like these characters have earned their happiness, not just stumble upon it like so many movies.

This is a wonderful movie that has a tremendous heart to it.

Rampage (2009)

Better than an average Uwe Boll film

[6/10 · 22 March 2012]

I'll admit it up front: I initially skipped past this movie while searching Netflix one evening. Everything I had seen from Mr. Boll has been an utter travesty, a shameless exploitation of video games; sometimes, this was used as a weak attempt to shock viewers (ie Postal). Yet, I was drawn to the premise and gave it a shot.

Overall, it was better than an average Uwe Boll film. The characters had some sort of development; there was a coherent story with a beginning, middle and end; generally more well put together than what you typically see from this director.

Having said that, this was an incredibly weak film that missed the mark. I have no issue with violence in a movie; more specifically, I have no issue with a main character committing atrocities in a movie. However, you need to develop a coherent reason for the acts committed on screen. The protagonist/antagonist has no real reason for his actions. The poster speaks of revenge; yet for what wrongs is he killing these people? The two characters in this movie are whining, self centered losers who talk of grandiose ideas and solutions while taking no action to fix the problems they see. And, no, massacring a bunch of people is not a solution. And more infuriating, at the end, the shooter punks out and does not accept responsibility for his actions.

Now, I have seen different interpretations of this film, and some hold water while others do not in my opinion. To me, there was no clear message to this movie. It could be a commentary on violence in society, yet there was nothing that really set off the main character. The situation was hyperbolic. It is an interesting movie, albeit a poorly made one, that has the potential to spark discussion amongst viewers if you so choose.

However, the biggest compliment that I can pay to this movie is that it sparked my interest in non-adaptation Uwe Boll movies. This was an intriguing project that got away from his weaknesses as a film maker. I think him having smaller, original films would do him a great service. We'll see what the future brings for Mr. Boll.

The Lorax (2012)

Over-politicization ruins movie

[5/10 · 21 March 2012]

Full disclosure: I consider myself right of center, fiscally conservative while socially liberal. While I know there are those who will gnash there teeth and automatically discard my review, I just want to provide this as a basis for my critique of the film.

I went into this movie with the understanding it was going to be about the environment and how we must work to save it. This is a sentiment I completely agree with; you don't have to believe in global warming (which I do) to understand that our current way of living is unsustainable. What I wasn't prepared for, however, was the complete lack of subtly. This movie was a juvenile attempt at being crafty. This isn't a "Fox news" style sniping, picking a single scene of the movie out of context or reading too deeply looking for a hidden subtext. It's blatantly out there, before the end of the first song. After that, the movie was filled with shallow characters that were Ayn Rand styled mouthpieces for the films agenda. What makes it frustrating is the Dr. Seuss has never been this mean spirited. Dr. Seuss' political leanings have never been hidden, but they never detracted from my enjoyment of it.

What bothered me most was the lack of true heart in the movie. "Wall-E" had a very similar message a few years ago, yet that movie was a beautiful piece of art. It's message was plainly visible, and I'm sure it was hounded by hardcore conservatives when it was released. But it came from a place of understanding and cooperation in working together to save the environment and where everyone had the potential to make a difference in the end. The Lorax was just pretentious and condescending in its execution; you are demonized if you do not buy into the film maker's world view wholesale.

On a technical level, the animation was on par with the very Seuss-ian style that was presented in "Horton Hears A Who"; its detail was just right while it kept that Dr. Seuss charm. The voice actors filled their roles well; Ed Helms charmed as the Once-ler, imbuing pathos to an otherwise stale character, while Danny DeVito gave the Lorax a charming, world weary sarcasm that fit very well. The music was very well done. I found myself tapping along to the music, while the lyrics were very obvious and pandering.

Ultimately, this movie was held back by its execution; there was nothing wrong with its message or with the source material. But, its arrogant style was polarizing and distracting. If you believe that the world is simply black and white, where everyone is either a mindless sheeple or evil industrialist, you will genuinely enjoy this movie. Otherwise, it will likely frustrate you and insult your intelligence.

The Losers (I) (2010)

A Good Summer Movie

[8/10 · 27 June 2010]

This movie was loud, dumb, clichéd and oh-so-much fun.

Now, I consider myself a seasoned movie goer, and passionate lover of film. I realize that there are different opinions on classics and favorites, which the boards would last for eternity sniping each other over obscure French New Wave films. Would I enter the movie into a debate over best films of all time? Not particularly. Would I, even for best action movie? Not there either.

But, this movie falls into the rarefied category of films that do not take themselves seriously. It is a summer movie, one of those films that knows exactly where it belongs and what its meant to do. How can you take this film seriously when one of the main characters is trying to escape a building to "Don't Stop Believing" by Journey? I enjoyed this film exactly for what it was meant to be: Two hours of fun and action, one that was enjoyable on both accounts.

Green Zone (2010)

A Tired Genre

[5/10 · 26 March 2010]

Going into this movie, I was expecting a decent film. And, that is about what I can say I saw. The action was well choreographed, and the script was taut, in true Paul Greengrass style. Matt Damon had a good turn as the main protagonist. While he didn't tread new ground, he played the role passionately and enthusiastically.

But, I had a number of nagging problems with the film. At the end of the day, these problems prevented me from truly enjoying the film. While I enjoyed the use of HD, similar to Michael Mann's use in "Public Enemies", the shaky cam style completely took you away from the action. While this does add a gritty feel when used sparingly, feeling like someone was running with the camera while filming this was distracting and tiring.

Yet, my biggest gripes come from the actual story. If you're not aware yet, Green Zone is inspired by the book "Life in the Emerald City", which was written by a foreign correspondent covering the Green Zone during the early months of the Iraq War. While one cannot argue with inspiration, the fact that this is not told up front is quite misleading. Without stating this in the opening credits, I felt like I was being intentionally mislead by the director.

My other large complaint comes from the ending. Without going into too much detail with the climax, the fact that this is a fictional movie that is telling a story about recent events, its climax does not have the impact it could have. Unfortunately, a movie like this paints itself into a corner almost. The ending wrapped up the major plot threads, but it still feels misleading.

Ultimately, this movie wasn't particularly terrible. From a technical standpoint, this is an extremely well made movie, aside from the excessive shaky cam. But, the muddled sources and unsatisfying ending unfortunately detracted heavily from this movie. I do look forward for more from Greengrass and Damon on other projects, as they seem to work well together. Hopefully, this was a valuable learning process and will plant the seeds for greater things than Bourne Four.

Alice in Wonderland (I) (2010)

Ultimately, unfocused

[4/10 · 7 March 2010]

This is one of those seemingly match made in heaven. Tim Burton, with his incredible ability to make Gothic imagery not dark and forbidding, takes on the classically twisted tale of Alice in Wonderland. Throw behind him his regular standbys and a blank check from Disney, and we should see something awe inspiring and as timeless as his earlier work...

Or so the theory goes. Ultimately, what we end up with is the imagery of Tim Burton, but not the soul. The movie looks fantastic. The effects blend very well together, and allows it to look cartoony without being over the top.

But, at the end of this movie, you feel incomplete. True, the story line resolves itself. But, there's not gratifying feeling that you usually get from his movies. When Edward Scissorhands finished, you felt content. Not the storybook ending you would have wanted, but felt like you were told a complete story. Here, the end feels forced, like a grandiose commentary on individuality and blazing your own path that never set the conflict up for it in the first place.

Johnny Depp and Helen Bonham-Carter both give well enough turns here, but they only fill out the roles that they have become type-casted for. Johnny Depp obviously relishes the eccentric roles, as well as Helen Bonham-Carter. But eccentric doesn't mean bombastic, and unfortunately the two of them just chew scenery for the sake of it.

I hope they all find what they are missing. The four of them, that's including Danny Elfman, are wonderfully talented. But, this movie was too big, too unfocused. Tim Burton and gang need to return to the smaller, character driven movies that built their respective careers. Because, Tim Burton's imagination is fantastic, and he is a great film maker when he is focused.

Avatar (2009)

Genuinely Our Generation's "Star Wars"

[9/10 · 19 December 2009]

Every so often, a film comes around and jolts a stagnant industry from its lethargic state. Whether it's through spectacular screen writing, effective acting or revolutionary special effects. In this current age of nostalgic tie ins and reboots, "Avatar" comes and restored my love of cinema and hope for the future of movies.

Up front, the story is cliché' ridden backed up by shoddy screen writing. While the actors and actresses do impressive turns at their respective characters, no one is really given the material to add depth or nuance. It's a by-the-numbers plot, never straying from its established structure. If you've seen "Dances with Wolves or "The Last Samurai", you'll be given a good approximation of what the story holds.

However, what this simple plot and structure allows for is us to be engrossed by the world of Pandora. The subtlety, detail and passion that is clearly evident in each frame of this movie is truly a sight to behold. After years of wondering what it would have felt to be one of those first audiences to watch "Star Wars", I finally understand. This movie shows what can be done with film. Granted, these techniques have been used time and again. But, the craftsmanship with which this film was built is a testament to the true genius and artistry that cinema is capable of.

So, whether or not this is a rallying cry for the auteur or it just passes in the night still remains to be seen. This is an effective shot across the bow for a lazy movie industry, however. James Cameron has thrown down the gauntlet Hollywood. How do you choose to respond?

Ninja Assassin (2009)

No style or substance

[3/10 · 7 December 2009]

I really wasn't expecting anything walking into Ninja Assassin. From the trailers, it looked like an excuse to throw together fight scenes for two hours. That's all I expected and wanted.

Ninja Assassin was completely inept in theory and execution. The plot tried to make you care about the characters, and failed miserably. In a movie like this, we really don't need a weak exposition on lost love or the morality of killing. You need more than that. If you want a story to be there, then you have to build your characters beyond cookie cutter genre stereotypes and actually add meat to them. But, this back story/girl friend/emotional trauma angle felt weak and under developed.

However, since this movie wasn't meant to be art or meaningful, how can it fail as a fight movie? Easy. Crappy CGI and an over reliance on extreme gore made each fight scene over burdened and a bore. Why watch ninjas be CGI stealthy when I can pull up a dozen movies and watch it done more coherently. Why watch a crappy CGI scythe or sword look like its being wielded by a 12 year old when I can get better from "3 Ninjas"? Ultimately, this movie fails as a whole. All the bad movie trappings are there (cheaply set up twist, failing to obey its own rules, etc.) This movie was over-burdened by muddled intent and weak story telling. If you want to tell a story about revenge, then tell a damn story about revenge. If you want to make a movie as an excuse for fight scenes, then put some actual effort into the fight scenes. Half assing both leads to a worthless movie going experience.

District 9 (2009)

A refreshing movie

[9/10 · 13 September 2009]

There are few genres in film that have become as stale as sci-fi. It usually a go to when the producers want to make a cheap action movie, a snide social commentary or make a nonsensical make sense. It has become riddled with clichés and over all bad story telling.

While District 9 seemed unique, I was quite confident that it was to be a usual alien invasion movie: peaceful aliens pushed to the breaking point, cowardly protagonist becomes macho hero, and all is well as the aliens sail off into the sunset.

This could not be further from the truth. When discussing the movie with my friend afterward, I could not think of one major sci-fi cliché that was used in this movie. This is a truly original work, possibly the first brilliant entry in what I hope is a long and prosperous career for Mr. Blomkamp.

This was not the perfect movie, by any stretch of the imagination. But, while one could nitpick things here and there, this is overall a modern sci-fi classic.

District 9 is a compelling, original and gracefully made film that will stand the test of time.

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009)

Fun, tightly executed summer movie

[8/10 · 6 August 2009]

GI JOE was a film I was wary going into. I loved the toys and animated show growing up, and this seemed like a cynical cash in. And to an extent, it was. There is no use denying that.

However, I realized that, as a summer blockbuster, it works wonderfully on that level. Devious bad guys, squared jaw good guys and thrilling action pieces make this a fun adventure.

Stephen Sommers has steadily gone down hill the past few years. I really enjoyed The Mummy and The Mummy Returns. Then The Scorpian King and Van Helsing were complete duds to me. But, GI JOE is a return to form. Tightly directed action sequences, characters that don't try to hard to fit their niche and actors who filled the roles they were meant to fill.

So, I enjoyed it. I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys a summer movie for what it is.

Star Trek (2009)

A Brilliant Film

[9/10 · 11 May 2009]

I must preface any statement I make about this film with the following disclaimer: I never followed Star Trek. To be honest, I've only seen Nemesis. So, my approach to this movie is from the standpoint of a film rather than an addition to the Star Trek cannon.

Having said that, I thought this was an amazing film. It grabs you in the first 10 minutes and does not let go. The special effects, the story, the acting all came together to create a wonderful film. JJ Abrams was able to do what few directors can: Balance the epic nature of the film with a gripping character study. Too many times the basic human story involved is lost in an orgy of CGI. While CGI made up a substantial chunk of this film, JJ Abrams never lost sight of what makes a story great.

I highly recommend it, from a cinephile's point of view. A great way to start of the summer movie season, Star Trek will not disappoint.

Role Models (2008)

Surprising

[8/10 · 9 November 2008]

When one saw the preview for this movie, it was easy to think that it was completely given away by then end of an extremely short two minutes. You could pretty much map out the movie: 1. Crime committed 2. Complete social foils for each kid and adult 3. Smattering of social, racial and potty humor 4. "Touching" end as the credits roll.

And that would really sum the brunt of the movie. But, what makes this movie stand out is the heart it displays. While there is a solid amount of drug and sexual humor, it's foiled by genuine talent and solid screen writing.

I was very happy with the movie. I had a great time, laughed a lot and enjoyed myself immensely. I solidly recommend it to anyone with a solid sense of humor.

War, Inc. (2008)

A satire that could have been more

[5/10 · 19 October 2008]

As a spiritual successor to Grosse Point Blank, I must say that I hope we keep that sentiment just that: spiritual. While GPB was a sardonically dark film, this film attempts to proverbially "perform surgery with a machete." The good points are there. John and Joan Cusack are brilliant foils for each other, whether because they are brother and sister or the just work that well together. Hillary Duff definitely took a risk, and to some extent it paid off. And to be completely forthright, there is a solid point to be made about the privatization of war, and satire has always been a great way to address social ills. Look at "Dr. Strangelove" for the epitome of this art form.

Yet, this movie left something to be desired. I would argue that the art of satire lies in subtlety. Granted, one must make pointed jabs in order to allow the full meaning of the statement get through. However, this movie had the subtlety of a baseball bat. It's direct references to current events, corporations and political figures are in no way cleverly disguised. The dialog was heavy handed and self serving, while the plot was contrived and trying way too hard. The dark ending, the "twist" and heavy handed second act made this story way too smart for it's own good.

In the end, the experienced part of the cast delivered an acceptable performance, the choreography was spot on for the fights, and the irony and comedy landed a few rare blows. But over all, this movie had much more potential than was delivered.

5/10

Max Payne (2008)

Good, but not great

[7/10 · 18 October 2008]

*HAVE NOT PLAYED THE GAME, RATED AS A MOVIE* I am a big fan of film noir. It sort of acts as a counter to either extremely melodramatic heroes or the too-polished ones. So, I must say I had an affinity for this movie before going in.

Since I am not acquainted with the source material, I cannot give a fair comparison to the game. As a movie, I must say the aesthetics and style were top notch. The dramatic shadows, the deliberate camera, the stylistic character development all hearkens to noir classics like "The Big Sleep" and "The Maltese Falcon" to name a few. While the dialog was cheesy and predictable, it had it's own style to it that became endearing. The gunfights, while few, were kinetic and engaging.

However, it had some style choices that were quite erroneous on the part of the director. While the Valkyrie imagery was an interesting metaphor and well done, it was done way over the top that distracted from the scene in the movie. Rather then enhancing the scene, it distracted from some very powerful cinematography. Another was a deliberate ripoff from Gladiator. The whole pseudo-Elysium dream sequence was a direct tear from Gladiator, and his wife even says "Not-Yet".

All in all, not too bad of a movie. It was a tight movie that clipped along and didn't take itself too seriously. My gripes were more of style over substance that detracted from what could have been a great movie.

Oh side note: I don't know if this has been done before, but the end title sequence get's a 3/10. It had nothing to do with the movie. lol

The Dark Knight (2008)

The Dark Knight

[10/10 · 21 July 2008]

As people standing on the outside, it is very easy for us to praise or denounce another artists work. We have the luxury of imaginations, with which budget and limitations hold no sway. So, I stand here with the predicament of trying to stand out from a braying crowd, and going with what I feel.

This film is not perfect, nor is it the end all be all film. A few minor transgressions, which have been beat to death by those who have rated it before me, do lay fault to the film. However, this is a brilliant film that will stand the test of time.

As a follow up to a phenomenal Batman Begins, the crew found themselves in a unique position. They had been granted silent permission to rewrite the Batman mythos. Instead of trying to maintain the feel from the first movie, which is the fault of most sequels, the Nolan brothers and co. bravely took the film to new depths. The dark, menacing overtone through out the film allows for the actions of the main characters to really effect the audience. The wanton violence, while it may be distasteful for some, is brutal and unrelenting. But, this brings a certain emotional high to the film. The Joker's maniacal and malicious plot leaves the audience uncomfortable, as it should.

The individual roles bring together an amazing cast that mirrors the intent of the movie so well. Bale has always been excellent at playing tortured roles, as evidenced in Equilibrium, American Psycho and the Machinist. Here, he is given a playground to explore this tension as only a Hollywood blockbuster can provide. Aaron Eckhart plays his role to a T. You are torn in both directions when his character falls. You feel for his rage and realizes he wanted to sacrifice himself, yet you cannot condone his actions. His descent into madness is both heart wrenching and horrifying at the same time. The supporting cast does not play their roles as such. Each person puts an honest soul into what could have been cardboard, cut out roles. Bravo to the cast.

But, to the late Heath Ledger, my hat is off to you. This role exemplifies what he had to offer to the cinema industry. His roles up till this one were no more edgy than the rebel from a teen movie. Most of the time, he relied on his looks and charm to carry his character. But here, here is a masterpiece in method acting. The lack of back story adds to the menace, as he even gives multiple stories himself. His complete lack of goal, which is a goal in itself, is so unnerving. We're used to a tortured villain out for revenge for the lost of a loved one. But, here is a wanton psychopath that is destined to go down in the annals of cinema history as one of the definitive villains.

If you have read until this point, I thank you. This movie is a modern masterpiece, that explores the duality of society from multiple facets, and has left me speechless. This is not for everyone. The violence in this movie is brutal and unsettling. For the Joker, there is little context to his actions, as it forces the hero to stand firm in his beliefs. THIS IS NOT A KIDS MOVIE. Yet, in a world where movies are becoming souless, this movie took a brave step in a risky direction. Bravo, ladies and gentlemen of the Dark night. You are now part of the gilded guardians of cinema.

Wanted (2008)

Enjoyable. Exactly what the summer ordered

[8/10 · 30 June 2008]

The classic Hollywood action movie. Such a tough genre to work in, especially now a days. In the 70's it was about gritty realism. The 80's was about over the top shenanigans. The 90's was the birth of CGI, when talent still mattered...

Now we have the likes of the Matrix and the Star Wars prequels. Orgies of CGI that trying to force themselves upon the public as classics. The action heroes of old were able to mow down swaths of enemies before riding off into the sunset, kicking that snide smile to the audience. Where have the action heroes gone? I don't know, but this is a great action movie. If you were looking for a treatise on the superhero mythos, read the Watchmen comic book or wait for the movie. The action is ridiculous, over the top, gratuitous and completely enthralling. I spent the entire movie with my jaw dropped to the floor. And the best part? It was completely un-apologetic. No weepy second acts about the mayhem being wreaked. That definitely has its place in good cinema, but not here. It's balls to the walls from start to finish.

The action is a lot like the Matrix, but it does not make you feel like you have to read a dissertation on Western Philosophy to appreciate it. Go, turn off your brain off(way off) and enjoy it for what it is.