Change Your Image
laurana75
Reviews
Lucky 7 (2003)
The Case for Patrick Dempsey
Spoilers follow.
While channel-flipping I came across this on Cinemax--Lucky 7, starring that girl who could have been Mrs. Sampras, Kimberly Williams of Father of the Bride; Patrick Dempsey; and Brad Pitt look-alike (and namesake) Brad Rowe.
The story is sweet: the mother of Kimberly Williams' Amy dies when she is seven. Before she dies, she lays down a time line for Amy's life which includes summer camp, running for student council, law school, and seven boyfriends--the last of which is 'The One'. After she breaks up with #5, she meets Daniel (Rowe) who is utterly perfect for her--corporate upstart, ultimate flower-guy (she gets three bouquets in two weeks), not to mention quite cute. However, he isn't #7, so she sets out to find a temporary #6 and finds it in Peter (Dempsey), the manager of the bagel shop she frequents.
Peter asks her to accompany him for the weekend to a wedding where she will pretend to be his girlfriend because his ex is also going to be at the wedding. As with almost all the pretend-relationships in popular cinema, sparks fly and they end up getting to know each other a little better. In a decision that not-so-subtly parallels Amy's choosing her unfulfilling legal job, she chooses safe and well-liked Daniel over the spontaneous Peter--but does she? Everything wraps up as it's supposed to wrap up, and although some tears are shed, we know everyone's happy in the end.
Patrick Dempsey seems to be realizing the potential that winked at us in his earlier movies (and was evident in Sweet Home Alabama), and turning out to be quite the hottie while at it, a far cry from the decidedly weird characters he portrayed in some of his earlier films. The goofballs can become leading men after all. I'm now looking forward to seeing the "About A Boy" TV series in which he is starring (based on the book and the Hugh Grant movie of the same name). Kimberly Williams shows us why she charmed us in the Father of the Bride movies, and the story fills you with a warm tingly feeling; but this is by no means a great movie.
There is nothing life-shattering or awe-inspiring about this movie. It's just... nice. It's quite so-so, filler TV movie fare even--and the warm tingly feeling lasts just until the rolling of the end credits. Maybe I just had to be reminded of the nicer things in life, like falling in love with someone you didn't really expect and finding out that your hands 'fit'. Meanwhile this movie is perfect for lazy nights curled in bed, or a pseudo-date movie at home. Sometimes we need a little simplicity, after all.
Hellboy (2004)
Seeing Red
Some spoilers.
As in a big red man with chopped off horns, with a fire starter, a psychic fish-man, Nazis and Rasputin. It makes for (what my friends tell me is) a great comic, and an entertaining movie. We are introduced to Hellboy at the tail-end of World War II when the Allied forces stop the Nazis and Rasputin (yes, the supposed "sorcerer" last seen in Russia's royal court--and in the cartoon Anastasia) from opening a portal to another dimension and bringing about the 7 Gods of Chaos to bring forth Ragnarok. Now I know the Axis powers wanted to take over the world, but I didn't realize that they wanted to destroy the world while at it. Anyway, it's probably just Rasputin with an apocalypse-wish. The Allies are able to nip the plan in the bud and the only thing that comes of the portal is a red-skinned baby with a huge hand, which John Hurt's Professor Broom befriends with a Baby Ruth bar. Broom will later head the secret FBI Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense, which watches over prized government assets Hellboy, Abe Sapien (a psychic merman who reminds me of Frasier's brother Niles) and Liz Sherman, a pyro-kinetic (or fire starter if you will).
Rasputin has been resurrected, stronger than ever, and is planning to start up world destruction again. Apparently, the key to all this is Hellboy (which is why he was the first one to come through the portal). Hellboy, Liz, rookie FBI agent Meyers and FBI head Manning have to stop him before it's too late. It's a comic-book movie, with comic-book inspired fights that are fun to watch, and it's colored like a comic book, too: the stark red of Hellboy, the vivid interiors, and the darkness of Rasputin's palace-cum-hell mouth. In fact, the only colorless thing seems to be Selma Blair's (Liz Sherman) face, which is also quite revealing because she is cutting herself off from her emotions to control her pyrokinetic tendencies (just like Drew Barrymore's fire starter and not the X-Men's Pyro).
Although the movie is about supernatural entities and ruthless villains, the story is not devoid of humanity, and the most remarkable thing is that Hellboy is trying hard to be human--and succeeding magnificently. Hiding behind a mack truck body and a voice not unlike Darth Vader's, he is sixty but ages slowly so basically he's in his early twenties, and showing the gamut of emotions associated with that age. He gets aggressive, petulant, mischievous, and most importantly, he falls in love. That a minion of hell, destined to bring about Ragnarok, can do so--and save the world--then there's probably hope after all.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
'Prisoner' Captivates
The third installment in the Harry Potter film series is upon us. Finally, Chris Columbus has relinquished the directorial chair to Alfonso Cuaron, director of such diverse fare as the racy Y Tu Mama Tambien and the enthralling A Little Princess. That has been the best move in three movies so far. Sorry Chris C., Cuaron has basically kicked your a$s on this one. Because the third installment is decidedly darker in theme than the first two (and gets even darker as the series progresses--JK Rowling where is your sixth book!), Cuaron has reflected this in the more pensive and muted tones and colors of this movie. It seems more real (and more depressing) than the all-too-magical feel of its predecessors. Hence, additional quaint charm. This does not detract one bit from the story and the action, still suspenseful and awe-inspiring even if you have read and re-read the books countless times. Of course, fangirls like your truly everywhere will not hesitate to point out that much of the story has been cut and simplified to better fit the genre of feature film--something that Chris Columbus seems to have been loathe to do, but which Alfonso Cuaron uses to full advantage here. (Would that he would direct the rest of the series.)
The most important elements of the book though, Sirius Black and the Dementors, are artfully brought to life by Gary "no-current-jobs" Oldman and the special effects team, respectively. Oldman is the right degree of madman and the Dementors, although reminiscent of ringwraiths in a certain other magnificent series, are notably eerie. It's good to note that the design team does not have them floating around like B-movie ghosts; instead they are ethereal, creatures of frost and void. The Shrieking Shack is as I envisioned it, although I could have had more of Hogsmeade. The Marauders' Map is beautifully brought to life. The main action sequences are also done with enthusiasm and lots of class. Noticeably absent though is Ginny Weasley, catalyst of Harry's troubles in the second movie, as well as the four former Hogwarts residents who made the Marauders' Map. The story of Padfoot, Mooney, Wormtail and Prongs was in my opinion one of the best points of the novel, but the exclusion from the movie isn't a sore point. The introduction of characters who actually knew more about Harry's parents, though, was a welcome (and essential) addition.
Michael Gambon does not disappoint as the replacement Dumbledore, Alan Rickman is still wonderfully menacing as Severus Snape, while Oldman and David Thewlis are effective as Black and Remus Lupin. Emma Thompson's role is nothing more than an extended cameo (albeit a funny, wonderful extended cameo), but later in the series we find out that Sybil Trelawney does play an important part in Harry Potter's life. Also appearing in (underused) cameo roles are formidable actresses Maggie Smith and Julie Christie (fresh from her cameo in Troy).
But the movie belongs to the three stalwarts, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint, reprising their well-loved roles as Harry Potter, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley. Growing into adolescence along with their characters, these three are now more comfortable in their skins and it really shows on the screen. Harry is now more assertive; Hermione is smart as ever--and less know-it-all; and dear Ron is still steady best-friend-slash-comic-relief. There are some little details between a couple of characters which fans watch with a knowing smile because we are eagerly anticipating that story. The rapport between the three is also quite remarkable, although it must be noted that it seems that the Harry-Ron friendship seems to be less evident in this film than in previous films. No matter--the film does not suffer much for it.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, not much a sequel but an installment, surpasses the first two films in that it is more tightly-knit, more engrossing and generally better-made. You barely notice that two hours have passed. It is a fast-paced, visually rich and entertaining film that, although edited mercilessly, evokes the spirit of its source novel--adolescence, confusion, fear, searching for truth, twists and turns, and the comfort of good friends. As I maintain that Prisoner of Azkaban was the best story among the first five novels, so I agree that so far, this is the best film in the series. Here's hoping that Mike Newell (he who directed Four Weddings and a Funeral) will continue the tradition of good storytelling.
Troy (2004)
The Epic Tale of Bronzed-God Pitt (minor SPOILERS)
Where do I start? Do I start with all the short skirts and the burnished bodies (and that's just the men)? Do I start with a bland Helen that doesn't really look like she would launch a thousand ships? Do I start with the fact that the film, loosely based on the Iliad, proves to be very loosely based on the Iliad? Let's start out with the fact that Iliad-lovers could start to picket this film with all the liberties that it had taken with Homer's great epic. For one, people who shouldn't die end up dying, while some people who were killed off in Homer's opus live on. The story unfolded quite well, although parts of it were a bit dragging. The best thing for me, however, was taking out all the gods and goddesses. Granted that the immortal bickering was the majority of the fun of things but a war movie-cum-heroic epic seems better off this time without immortals playing the soldiers like chess pieces (anyone remember the wonderfully cheesy Clash of the Titans? I loved that movie, though). Troy now takes on the flavor of a historical--albeit overly dramatic--account that was later added mythological spice by Homer.
Orlando Bloom fan that I am, I was quite apprehensive that he was playing the spineless Paris; however, he has been able to create more depth for the character in that there was a realization, and a transformation. Depth was also created for Brad Pitt's Achilles' character, for which I have conflicting emotions. He doesn't really come out as particularly heroic, just vaguely troubled. And quite promiscuous, too. Pitt plays Achilles with what seems to be a gnawing sense of insecurity that he is trying to hide behind the fame and glory of war. It doesn't really hide the fact, though, that Brad Pitt seems to be bigger than Achilles, at least in this movie--we cannot get over that this is Brad-bronzed-god-Pitt and his character seems to suffer for it. This begs the question though--who else could have played the greatest Greek warrior if not Brad Pitt, and held his own in this movie? A lesser actor (icon) would probably have been eaten alive by the others in the cast.
The great O'Toole portrays Priam quite well and one of the best scenes in the entire movie is when he implores Achilles to return the beaten body of his son. ("Ah Brad, that there's what we call acting.") Sean Bean also turns in a solid performance as the level-headed and smooth-talking Odysseus--they should shoot the Odyssey with him, it would be quite interesting. Brian Cox is rightly menacing and calculating as Agamemnon. My favorite character in the Iliad, though, remains my favorite character here--Hector, Prince of Troy. Eric Bana is subtly effective as the doomed prince, conveying a stalwart nobility and honor that seems to be lacking from most other characters yet also being fearful of his impending battle with Achilles.
It is quite entertaining--there are sword- and spear-fights, there are great balls of fire, there are love scenes, and the wondrous Horse. The mano-a-mano fight scene between Hector and Achilles is worth re-watching. There is requisite action and drama, there are pretty girls and prettier guys. There is a clash of cultures--the conquering Greeks with their brash king and their shining, temperamental hero Achilles; and the more laid-back Trojans, with their god-fearing king and their pensive hero Hector. And, yes, there is a lot of man-kissing and hugging going around. I am especially touched by the portrayal of the brothers Hector and Paris--which is nonexistent in the Iliad because there they were not brought up together. Paris plays the perfect bumbling little brother foil to Hector's noble older brother; and although his little brother has helped launch the war that will bring their doom Hector, after an initial fit, stands resolutely by his side, until the death. His unfaltering love for country and family are part of what brings about Paris' own transformation; and ultimately seals his fate as the most admirable character in the movie (as he was, IMHO, in the Iliad).
There is an inherent problem in the production, though. I cannot place my finger on it--It may be the script, vacillating between being stirring and dragging. It may be that there was no sense of pathos, really, and no stirring emotion brought about by war and killing--but then that could just be desensitized me talking. It may be a lack of imagination in the filmmakers that is visible at times.
In any case, it's regulation Hollywood summer fare. There is something to be said about the views on war, though: the movie suggests a permeating melancholia about war--how war is sometimes waged on the pretext of something other than the actual reason (note that Helen's abduction merely gives the power-hungry Agamemnon his chance to sack Troy), how families are affected by war (cut to the haunting face of Saffron Burrows' Andromache), and how the greatest soldiers are sometimes the most troubled. There are also some points on religion, and Achilles' hubris. It may be a trying-hard epic mooching off an actual epic, a mean feat of over-acting by Brad Pitt, and quite dull in some parts; but it is quite a bit more than just a great movie for the summer. I suggest (for the girls especially) watching it twice--the first to ogle at Brad, Orli, Eric, Sean, etc., and the second to actually watch the film. Both instances would be quite popcorn-worthy.
Shrek 2 (2004)
It's Fun Being Green (minor SPOILERS)
I didn't really like Shrek. Not that I didn't think it was funny, because it was. It was also quite the breakthrough film, setting Dreamworks up as Pixar's staunchest rival for CGI supremacy. I think I was such a Disney/Pixar loyalist and felt nothing could come close. I was also not very enamored with Cameron Diaz. And, let's face it, that dude was ugly. Rightly funny, though. I enjoyed the pop-culture references immensely. Not to mention it featured the voice of one of my favorite actors, not-just-Monica-Belucci's-husband Vincent Cassel as Monsieur Hood.
This time around, the pop culture references whiz by so fast I'm sure I missed a couple of them, beginning from the honeymoon montage featuring flatulence jokes to LoTR to a various jabs at Disney. The story takes a backseat to the various sight gags, one-liners and altogether abundant mirth of the movie. The Kingdom of Far Far Away, Princess Fiona's hometown, is a stylized Beverly Hills, complete with Starbucks, Tower (of London) Records and homes of the stars. The story has its requisite twists and turns, with shades of Guess of Coming to Dinner interspersed with the characterization of an almost-megalomaniac Fairy Godmother (shades of The Godfather) who will do everything to install her son Prince Charming as the next king. There are car chases (a COPS parody comes on) and an old friend does a Mission: Impossible. Meanwhile, Shrek must choose between his love for Fiona and the chance of providing her her happily-ever-after--of course, who doesn't know that those two come hand in hand?
Mike Myers with his brogue is not a wonderful thing to hear so I basically blotted him out of the movie (I know, he plays the title character, but still--). Now, taking Mike Myers out of our focus leads us to enjoy the movie even more. Cameron Diaz and Eddie Murphy reprise their roles as Fiona and Donkey, respectively, and the magic is still there. And Fiona's parents sound familiar--who wouldn't recognize the voice of the great Julie Andrews! And John Cleese to a lesser extent (although the drawing looked like Mel Brooks). Jennifer Saunders rounded out the cast as the scheming fairy godmother and Ruper Everett lent his wonderful droll voice to Prince Charming. Someone little and orange steals the movie, though--that deliciously funny Puss in Boots voiced by Antonio Banderas. Apparently his voice has wonderful comic timing; add to that wonderful animation and various fun things that the writers have Puss do... there's your entrance's worth (and more) right there. (I could have done without the Livin' La Vida Loca number though. A better song with the same visuals would have been twice as nice.)
Shrek was a hard act to follow, but Shrek 2 has succeeded quite well. I must give Shrek 2 props for providing me with much-needed mirth and sustained laugh-intensity all throughout the hundred or so well-spent minutes of my time. The CGI seems to have improved greatly over the first movie, too, with those great hair strands and the movement of the fabrics. The best drawn character is also Puss in Boots (ah, am not Banderas-biased mind you, this is a *cat*!)--the fine hairs are drawn perfectly and although Puss strides around on two feet, he looks positively feral. Almost everything, though, is predictable, from the backstory of Fiona's dad the king, to the eventual resolution, but then sometimes we need a nice safe hilarious romp of a movie to just give us a rollicking good time.
Best watched with good friends.
Starsky & Hutch (2004)
The Zoolander Boys Fall Short of Expectation (minor SPOILERS)
Maybe it's because of the limitations set by translating a well-known TV show to screen. Maybe they're really better off as male models than as cops. Or maybe Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson should give their duo a rest. For the meantime at least. I was quite disappointed by Starsky & Hutch, seeing as I was practically laughing my head off at Zoolander (yes, even when I see the screenings on Cinemax), while Meet the Parents and The Royal Tenenbaums were also entertaining. Maybe I really can't see the homages to the TV show as I wasn't really aware of television when I was an infant/toddler.
The plot, involving cocaine that can't be detected, and the transformation of Starsky and Hutch's partnership from being at each others' throats to being friends (haven't we seen this before? Zoolander, maybe?), seems quite thin. Okay, so there are a lot of capers along the way but somehow it could have been done better. The funniest scenes for me involved Starsky in an undetectable-cocaine induced high, seeing cartoon birds while Hutch sings "Don't Give Up On Us, Baby," and then entering a dance-off.
Vince Vaughn is a creepy jerk as the druglord, while Juliette Lewis is underused as his bubbly mistress. Will Ferell's cameo as the perverted inmate/informant was also a funny turn; and Snoop Dogg as the streetwise informant Huggy Bear is a delicious turn, threatening to steal the movie from Stiller and Wilson. Granted, these two are obviously enjoying themselves while the acting is going on and their chemistry is what carries the movie. However, it seems to be nowhere near the sheer mirth of Zoolander, which remains the quintessential Stiller-Wilson film to date.