Showing posts with label guest blogger. Show all posts
Showing posts with label guest blogger. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Guest Movie Review: La Parisienne Reviews "Maleficent"


Apparently all disturbingly good-looking villains must now wear horned headdresses

“Maleficent” is clearly rooted in Disney’s classic “Sleeping Beauty,” and it is sure to evoke childhood memories. This is a tactic that works for the movie and against it. The story begins with a young Maleficent, a fairy child who lives happily in the magical realm of the Moors. She develops a friendship with a young Stephan (yes that Stephan) from the neighboring human kingdom.

So, how does this kind fairy turn into a powerful villain? Without giving any spoilers, I’ll just say well-worn tropes are used, which is a little disappointing. Angelina Jolie’s portrayal of Maleficent, however, is remarkable and makes up for the rather cliché storytelling. I have to wonder how many times she watched the animated movie to prepare for the role. She is magnificent in her villainy, but she also manages to blend moments of humor and humanity into her character as she interacts with the sickeningly sweet Aurora, played by Elle Fanning, and her faithful raven, Diaval, whom Sam Riley gives human form. 

Sharto Copley plays the adult Stephan and demonstrates what a life of hatred and greed will do to a man. Much like Maleficent, he becomes trapped by his own acts of vengeance, costing him both his family and his sanity. He is nothing like the animated character, and he instills feelings of pity and disgust in the audience.

Like the animated film, three fairies agree to raise Aurora. I must admit to some personal bias here. The fairies in “Sleeping Beauty” were the characters I enjoyed most as a child. The fairies in “Maleficent” seem to be plot devices who appear for comic relief and additional CGI. Just think of women playing the Three Stooges and you get the idea. They have no character development, and I highly question if they ever develop feelings for their human charge. Imelda Staunton, Leslie Manville, and Juno Temple deserve better. 

Overall, I give “Maleficent” a B. The story was a little disappointing in parts, but the acting and special effects are worth watching. In the end, I’m not sure if “Maleficent” departed too far from the original animated film or not far enough.

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Movie Review: The Cine-Sib and MM Take On "Tron" and "Tron: Legacy"


I had initially reviewed "Tron: Legacy" here.  I had gone to see it opening weekend without the Cine-Sib, but over the holidays he really wanted to see it, so I went with him.  There was one big difference the second time around: he and I went to see it in 3D IMAX on a proper (i.e., 70-foot-high) IMAX movie screen (not a fake IMAX -- as the Cine-Sib and I call it, a "faux-MAX").  I liked the flick a lot better on the massive screen since then it really was the triumph of style over substance, but I'm thinking that I liked it better too for the company -- the Cine-Sib and our friends!  I'll give it a C+ the second time around while knowing full well this is a function of the IMAX.  Anyway, on to the Cinema-Mad Sibling's review!

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Movie Review: the Cine-Sib Reviews "Red Cliff"

The Cinema-Mad Sibling LOVED this flick. Here's his review:
Red Cliff is a return to form for Hong Kong director John Woo, exemplifying the art of war vividly in this historical epic centering on the decisive Battle of Red Cliffs in 208 AD Han-Dynasty China where outnumbered allied rebels with Spartan odds outsmart the near-unstoppable imperial army. The most expensive Asian film ever, it shows onscreen with grand-scale elaborate land/sea battles, unmatched in ANY film. Period.

Dude, that was awesome
Hollywood can't do this stuff
Dude, that was awesome
Well, that sounds like unqualified praise, all right!

He also suggests this trailer:

Monday, March 15, 2010

Movie Review: the Cine-Sib Reviews "Brooklyn's Finest"

Here it is:

Brooklyn's Finest is a nihilistic, clichéd, overwrought, overacted, forced exercise in gratuitousness whose portrayal of three washed-up cops on the brink of moral anarchy falls victim to its own bleak reality as the director's overzealous ambition to emphasize the outlandishly visceral and gritty backfires, resulting in a criminally frustrating, uneven, meandering mash-up that fails to advance or do the genre any justice.

And Wesley Snipes didn't even get to do kung fu.

Undercover sucks.
Never live in Brooklyn, no!
What was the point?

Some stupid moron
brought his toddler to this flick.
Stupid idiot.

(See also on Rotten Tomatoes.)

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Movie Review: La Parisienne Reviews Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland"



A very important movie date.


Of course “Alice in Wonderland" is good -- any time Johnny Depp and Tim Burton team up, good things happen. (Everyone would probably be surprised if the movie turned out to be awful.) A good movie, however, does not necessarily equal amusing, but Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” is the most amusing movie watching experience I have had in years. I can sum it up in one word: FUN.

Now, I am not against movies teaching lessons or having morals. I just hate it when movies present these lessons with all the subtlety of swinging a sledgehammer over my head (*cough* Avatar! *cough*). “Alice in Wonderland” managed to get its point across without healthy doses of guilt or constant nagging. This seems to be a dwindling skill in Hollywood and I was happy to see a film that made it possible to get lost in the story.

Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter presents a heroic and sensible character who just happens to be a little mad. Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen manages to be cruel and evil, yet she is almost pitiable (outside of the whole head thing.) They have both received glowing reviews for their performances; however, the rest of the cast should not be overlooked. Alan Rickman is unmistakable as the voice of Absolom the caterpillar, fans of “Little Britain” will be pleased to see Matt Lucas, and Anne Hathaway plays the all-too-kind White Queen. Now we come to the character essential to the story, the Cheshire Cat. What? I always loved that cat. This is where 3D technology makes all the difference, not to mention the talent of Stephen Fry. I suppose I should mention Alice, after all, the title is “ALICE in Wonderland.”

Mia Wasikowska is a wonderful Alice. In her own world she refuses to obey convention yet struggles with the desire to do the right thing. Like most young adults, she is at risk of having her identity and dreams swept away by the people around her, and Mia Wasikowska manages to convey this without CW-style monologues. Alice grows as a character in Wonderland where she is able to do the impossible with the help of her new friends.

I didn’t find any glaring flaws in the film, but I do admit that I don’t want to see any. The jabberwocky was not as terrifying as I expected, and this is the problem with turning literary creatures into movie characters. Everyone has a personal vision and mine is much scarier. I suppose terror has to be toned down or they run the risk of scaring children. Overall, I give the movie a solid A for sheer viewing pleasure.

PS: If you can’t get enough 3D action, stay for the first part of the credits.

Saturday, March 06, 2010

Movie Review: "The Wolfman" By La Parisienne

The delightful La Parisienne reports from the cinema:

=============================================

I watched “The Wolfman” on Valentine's Day because in my opinion that is the perfect day to see a horror movie. I had no idea what to expect, especially considering the Hollywood trend of taking classic horror films and remaking them into mindless, plotless gore-filled flicks with bad acting. (Gore is not necessarily a bad thing, but I do need some sense of a plot.) So, I went into the movie with low expectations and was pleasantly surprised.

The Good:
I’ll start by focusing on the good points of the movie. There was an actual plot with dialogue and everything. I almost fainted. The writers borrowed from the 1941 classic "Wolfman" but managed to successfully add some new elements, not to mention fun effects and extra gore. Anyone familiar with the film starring Lon Chaney Jr. will notice the similarities as well as the differences.

Every good movie needs a solid script, but in the hands of the talent-challenged even the best script doesn’t stand a chance. Thankfully, the cast had talent. Benicio Del Toro managed to create a believable Lawrence Talbot. Anyone can play the wolf -- it is mostly CGI, after all -- but the man must be someone the audience can understand. Lawrence is a flawed but sympathetic character with some serious daddy issues. And what a daddy he has. No one can play evil like Anthony Hopkins. Sir John Talbot is the perfect foil for his son, and he represents Lawrence’s future if Lawrence isn’t careful.

Hugo Weaving plays the unwavering Inspector Abberline determined to arrest Lawrence for the gruesome murders. (Isn’t he the inspector from the Jack the Ripper movies?) He gives a solid performance, but ignores the fact that Lawrence was not even in town for the first murder. The fact that Lawrence is an actor with a tragic past is all the proof Abberline needs. Now we come to the bad.

The Bad:
I can suspend reality. I do it for television shows and movies all the time. I do have limits, however. I find it difficult to believe that a group of presumably seasoned hunters armed with silver bullets are not able to even wound a werewolf. Also, the lunar cycle is a little confusing, which might be caused by the pacing. Pacing a horror film is not easy; one has to balance plot with gory action seamlessly. “The Wolfman” had serious pacing issues. The flashbacks and dream sequences were interesting and artistic, but they took up too much of the movie, in my opinion. Parts of the movie also seemed to drag on and on, particularly father/son scenes. Sir John is evil; we get it.

This is definitely a movie about a father and son. The female characters exist mainly to move the story along. But there is no reason why they cannot be three-dimensional. Emily Blunt delivers as the sad and unfortunate Gwen Conliffe, who loves and loses both of the Talbot sons, but I would have like to know more about what drives her to fall for such melancholy individuals.

Maleva is the wise old gypsy woman who understands lycanthropy. She falls under the magical mystical minority category. She is misunderstood but has all the answers. Granted, gypsies in this movie are given more sympathy than they were in the 1941 film, but is stereotyping acceptable if it is positive?

Despite its flaws, the movie is worth watching. It is at its core a classic wolfman film. There are no quirky one-liners or plastic pretty actors, which is honestly refreshing. I debated between giving this a C+ or B-. Had lesser actors been cast the answer would be clear. I believe it deserves a B- based on the strength of the actors, moments of fun, and possessing a plot.

Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a 32%.

"The Wolfman" runs 102 minutes and is rated for R for violence and gore.

Monday, January 18, 2010

Movie Review: the Cine-Sib On "The Book of Eli"

I'm back in Nerdworld (sigh). I haven't seen new post-apocalyptic flick "The Book of Eli" yet, but I want to (it stars the awesome Denzel Washington and the also awesome Gary Oldman).

The Cinema-Mad Sibling, back home, went to see the flick on opening night, January 15, and I got two pithy responses from him. Here they are, and they seem kind of contradictory:

The text message as he left the theater:
"Hmm, OK, uneven but unique. Go watch . . . People will either love or hate it. Don't wanna give anything away; don't read any spoilers."

The now-standard haiku-review:
Had high hopes for this
Martial arts were really hyped
Kind of a letdown
Hmmm. Well, AICN's Massawyrm apparently LOVED the flick. I'll go see it! Come on, it has DENZEL. I've been a fan of the great actor ever since "Glory."

UPDATE: More Cine-Sib haiku!
Mila Mila Mi
La Mila Mila Mila
Mila Mila Mi

Underdeveloped
11th hour plot twist
Anticlimactic

Fighting the good fight
The killing is symbolic here
Staying on the path

Monday, January 11, 2010

The Cinema-Mad Sibling Reviews "Daybreakers"

The Cine-Sib and I recently went to see the new vampire movie "Daybreakers" with some of our friends. Here is the latest Cine-Sib haiku review:
The world is undead.
Humans are farmed for their blood.
But is there a cure?
My own review will be online later. Caveat: there is a lot of gore in this flick! It's of a video-game, horror-flick schtick ludicrous sort of gore, though, so my buddies and I were laughing uproariously in our seats.

Short version of my review: I liked it. Come on, just think -- Sam Neill as a vampire villain! Besides, this flick is an anti-"Twilight." You can read this until I get my own review done.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Conversations with the Cine-Sib, Plus "Sherlock Holmes" Movie Review Haiku

It's great to be back with the Cinema-Mad Sibling and our friends! Yesterday the Cine-Sib and I went to watch "Sherlock Holmes" with La Parisienne and Foxtrot (yay!).

Now, the post is entitled "Conversations with the Cine-Sib," so here are a couple notable quotables ending with his haiku review of the Holmes flick.

On the current president:

"Obambi's just like Ma (Ying-jeou)! He gives great speeches and looks pretty, but then you elect him and find out that his policies are crap and that the guy's a d*****bag."


(Here's an example.)


On the Pantybomber/Undi-bomber/Boxers-or-Briefs Bomber:

You know, gentle reader, this may finally shut up all those multiculti apologists and security ostriches who just want to talk to terrorists and appease them in the hope of getting them to stop trying to murder people. Because ...

"How do you reason with a guy who's willing to set his own junk on fire?"


And finally . . . *drum roll please* . . .

The Cine-Sib Haiku Review of "Sherlock Holmes":

Finally it's here

What a Holmes movie should be
The game is afoot.

Surprisingly good
Completely reinvented
Bring on the sequel

Characters are real
Flawed but all have certain depth
Believable, yeah
Yes, he liked it so much that he wrote 3 haiku instead of just 1. My own review will be online shortly. UPDATE: My full review is now online.

OK, now I'm off to make eggs Benedict for the MM clan.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Haiku Movie Review: the Cine-Sib on "Gamer" and "Final Destination 3D"

The Cinema-Mad Sibling gave us his prose movie review earlier, and now he's back with the poetic versions.
For "Gamer":

Action junkies, yeah!
Leonidas versus Dexter.
Once you're fragged, you're dead.

For "Final Destination 3D":

In your face 3D
Shows gory deaths well
Gets old really quick.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Movie Review: the Cine-Sib on "Gamer" and "Final Destination 3D"

The intrepid sibling went to see two flicks that I wasn't going to waste my money on (sorry, Gerard Butler), and his mini-reviews are in:
Gamer, while high-concept in premise of visualizing the zeitgeist of the gaming era, fails more than it succeeds, relying more on gratuitous excesses than its sharp social commentary on how massive multiplayer online gaming (MMOG) has affected pop culture, its obvious trappings, where in a future dystopia convicts vying for freedom are mind-controlled as players in real-life death matches a la Running Man & Death Race. (MM notes: the Cine-Sib did like Death Race.)

Final Destination 3D succeeds in taking advantage of the growing 3D medium, placing the viewer right in the middle of the action of Death's Rube Goldberg machine as chain reactions of events lead the characters one by one in sequence to their in...evitable grimly depicted demise, despite attempts to alter their fate, though ultimately becoming anti-climatic due to the very premise of the movie and its unoriginality.
The Cinema-Mad Sibling, by the way, laughingly told me that he tried to make the mini-reviews sound like Nerdspeak.

The summer movie season is over, and now we're in the usual morass of mediocrity until the Christmas movie season of Oscar-bait. I kind of want to see Surrogates, though.

A footnote to the whole MMO/MMOG/MMORPG Internet gaming subculture thing. You're probably far better off enjoying the delightful web series The Guild (now in season 3).

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Movie Review: the Cinema-Mad Sibling Reviews "District 9"

Last night the Cine-Sib went to see the new sci-fi flick "District 9," which is set in Johannesburg, South Africa, involves insectoid space aliens, and has been receiving a lot of buzz for being an apartheid metaphor.

I saw it a couple of days ago, and maybe I'll get around to writing a review. The Cine-Sib liked the movie very much and wrote his review in haiku:

Shrimp from outer space
Are more human than we are.
Let 'em phone home, K?

Monday, August 10, 2009

The Cinema-Mad Sibling's Haiku Movie Review: "GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra"

I have no intention of going to see the new "GI Joe" flick, now currently being savagely torn to shreds by critics everywhere.

The Cine-Sib, though, saw it this weekend, and he liked it. He has reviewed it with 4 haiku (4!). Here they are:

Awesome action yeah
Toy-to-movie done right on
Baroness is hot

Worthy of sequel
Perfect for us shallow folk
Scarlet is hot too

Van Helsing this ain't
Stephen Sommers, you're redeemed
More movies like this

Baroness spin off
Definite moneymaker
Lis'ning, studio?

Oh, for goodness sake. Can you possibly drool any more over the Baroness/Sienna Miller? I don't think she's very pretty at all. She's got that Gwyneth Paltrow "pale, skinny, snooty, ice princess" air. (No, I'm NOT going to post a photo of Sienna Miller! You can do your own research.) So, anyway, there you go, dear reader, my sibling weighs in as a member of the coveted 18-to-35-year-old male demographic.

As for me, I'm off to see "Julie and Julia" just for Meryl Streep's portrayal of that inimitable, awesome kitchen goddess, Julia Child. (We love you, Julia! We miss you terribly! How could you go and leave us to the tender mercies of Rachael Ray and Sandra Lee on Food Network? But I digress.)

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Movie Review Preview: the Cine-Sib on "Star Trek" Context

Consider this the prelude to his full movie review of the new Trek film. He'll have a lot to say; he and I were on the phone last night having a great time comparing notes.

* * *

Let me preface this preface with the fact that I'm a fanboy and undoubtedly this will be obviously biased. I grew up with Star Trek, my first real introduction to science fiction. Watching The Original Series on reruns every evening as a boy, Next Generation from the beginning and then the subsequent other 3 series and 10 movies.

Unfortunately, while I continued to be a fan, the Trek machine grew too big; the studio, Paramount, keen to its business side of things was now cranking out two Trek series concurrently (Deep Space Nine and Voyager) the movies were coming out every 2 years, which eventually oversaturated the market. There was just too much: DS9 competed with Voyager, which competed with Original Series and Next Generation reruns. By the time the tenth movie came out in December of 2002, Star Trek: Nemesis, no one cared anymore. Not even fans. I was at a Philadelphia theater on opening night of Nemesis, and the only noise I heard was crickets. There was only a handful of people in the theater and I wondered, am I even in the right room? This was Trek. And no one cared. With $65 million budget, its domestic gross was only $43 million. Ouch.

Flash forward several years, and no Trek movie had been made since the failure that was Nemesis. It seemed like Trek was dying if not already dead in the water. Enterprise, the latest, and last Trek series that was on the air, was losing viewers left and right, and its prequel premise ultimately spelling its own doom with the writers writing themselves into a corner. What was supposed to be fresh came out stale, and it was unceremoniously cancelled in 2005, and that seemed like it was it.

Something needed to change. Then came along J.J. Abrams, TV veteran who masterminded Felicity, Alias, and Lost, had just been given the reins of another dying movie franchise, Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible series, and was tasked to rejuvenate the franchise. Budgeted at $150 million, MI:3 was the most expensive movie ever given to a rookie director for his debut. Abrams, with writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman (also former producers of Alias) were up to the task and delivered an action packed third volume of the series that opened up the summer movie season of 2006 with a bang, exceeding studio expectations. They managed to take the premise and make it fresh, allowing new viewers who hadn't seen the previous movies to latch on to this new story. And they did it with aplomb.

Paramount found their savior and immediately offered the Trek franchise to him and his crew. But would they be able to breath life into this 40 year old enterprise?

More to come.

* * *
OK, it's MM now. Let me add this to the Sibling's analysis. I think part of the problem of the Trek franchise by the time of "Nemesis" and "Enterprise" was that it had grown so self-involved that it wasn't gaining any new fans. Heck, it wasn't even keeping some of its old fans. I absolutely hated "Enterprise" and stopped watching in disgust after a few episodes. (I did watch the series finale in a fit of morbid curiosity and ended up yelling insults at the TV.)

By "self-involved," I mean Trek became "so consumed with itself and its own fictive universe that it lost all sense of fun and adventure." The whole reason I liked Trek in the first place was the idea of young, energetic folks heading out into the wild unknown of space -- the FRONTIER, hello? -- to explore. It's a premise as full of danger as delight. Just think of the sorts of folks who had the daring and guts to head out into the untamed American Old West. Think of Lewis and Clark, for goodness sake.

But as time went on, the pioneering, robust, can-do, make-your-own-destiny ideas turned into endless technobabble and, even worse, bellyaching about galactic politics that would bore even the most seasoned desk jockeys of the EU and UN. The whole franchise descended into navel-gazing and self-castrating obsessions about social issues AT THE EXPENSE OF CHARACTER AND FUN. Instead of Lewis and Clark, we got space alien versions of bureaucrats. The huge open spaces of the galaxy turned into claustrophobic offices. Then, even more damning, the franchise began to obsess about moral lessons. I know, I know, this was a habit going all the way back to the original series, but a habit isn't good simply because it's old. I think science fiction and fantasy can be a great way to discuss complex moral and ethical ideas, but I resent having anybody beat me over the head with them. It's -- let's say the heresy, here -- NOT FUN.

The idea of Trek went from "Let's head into the great unknown and see what's out there!" to "Please review the protocol for the state dinner for the Andorian ambassador and his security detail." Then add: "By the way, the ambassador's daughter wants to claim asylum with the Federation because she's in love with a non-Andorian and it's against her culture to marry aliens. Her father insists it's an internal issue and forbids us to interfere. So! What do we do? Prime Directive or give a heavy-handed, thinly-veiled, preachy Trekkified moral lesson about feminism and women's rights?" The click you're hearing is the sounds of millions of fans changing channels to watch ANYTHING ELSE BUT THIS. If I wanted a sermon, I'd go to church.

The Trek universe got too small in its outlook. It became an ever-shrinking echo chamber. I think it became more interested in preserving its own little universe than in being daring, bold, colorful. It seemed so concerned with never stepping over the line of "acceptability" that it became unacceptable in its own creative passivity.

The Paramount bigshots who oversaw Trek forgot what made it great in the first place. And people noticed. And then JJ Abrams went back to basics. The result was movie magic. Oh, it had plenty of flaws, but overall, it did in 2 hours what previous efforts had not been able to do in nearly 2 decades. It made Trek fun and exciting and -- yes! -- unpredictable.

Friday, May 08, 2009

Movie Review: the Cine-Sib on "Star Trek"



In terms of looks alone, set phasers on "STUN."


Here's some background. The Cinema-Mad Sibling went to a late-night premiere last night, and this morning he called me with groggy enthusiasm. He sounded completely exhausted but also completely delighted. He proceeded to proclaim that he wore a red shirt to the cinema last night in honor of all the nameless red shirt ensigns (otherwise known as "cannon fodder on Kirk-Spock-McCoy away missions"). Funny guy, that Cine-Sib.

So! Since he was so tired, I didn't demand a full review, but I did want some immediate feedback.

"Review it in one word!" I said.

"Kick butt!"

"That's two words."

"Not if you HYPHENATE it. Kick-butt. One word."

"Whatever."

He'll return later with a full review, but he just sent me a review in haiku. Here it is!

Star Trek new again
About time they got it right

Uhura... uh-hot

As for the Cine-Sib fuss about Uhura (Zoe Saldana), here's a little visual aid:



"Hailing frequencies open"
= Star Trekspeak for "What's your number, baby?"


Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Movie Review: "Twilight" by La Parisienne



Zoning out.

The lovely La Parisienne is my guest blogger and movie reviewer for this post! She and I (along with the intrepid Cine Sib, but not Il Barista, who fled in horror from the very idea) went to see "Twilight" earlier tonight. The result? The most entertaining night at the cinema in a very long time -- because we were treating the whole thing like a big episode of "Mystery Science Theater." This film is unintentionally hilarious! She and I had been waiting since Thanksgiving for me to come home for the holidays -- so we can hang out.

Without further ado, I give you . . . La Parisienne's review! The friend mentioned in it isn't me, by the way. LP had seen the flick once before tonight, but she insisted that it was so funny it warranted a second screening.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I had high expectations for "Twilight." I expected it to be bad -- very, very bad. Anyone who read the book couldn’t honestly expect a great film or even a good film. Seriously, the majority of the book was Bella droning on about the beautiful vampire who wants to eat her, all in between fainting spells and make-out sessions. So, when I finally conned my friend into watching "Twilight" with me, I warned her that it would be bad. I was, however, pleasantly surprised to discover that it was wonderfully bad. Allow me to point out particular scenes of hilarity. Sorry, it is more of a recap than a review, but I love it when directors inadvertently make comedies.

Bella’s first day of school in Forks is interesting. She meets Eric and Mike, who are infatuated with her in the book, but I’m pretty sure that movie Eric doesn’t like girls. Maybe they can all go shopping together. The vapid Jessica and bookish Angela complete her social circle, and then she sees the pale and pretty Cullen clan. Jessica explains that all of the foster siblings are “together,” but Edward just happens to be single. Bella has Biology class with Edward where he first catches her scent; apparently vampires are immortal but not immune to seizures. This scene is hilarious. Pattinson promised to play Edward as a “manic depressive who hates himself,” and he delivers. Edward is everything I ever imagined and more.

We see the tortured soul in Biology another day where he attempts to strike up a conversation with our heroine. You'd think a century-old vampire would have improved his social skills by now. Every time Edward was in a scene, my unbiased friend simply said, “AWKWARD.” Anyway, their relationship finally progresses when Edward saves Bella from an out of control vehicle by jumping between her and it. He leaves without warning or explanation. Now we come to a departure from the book that I greatly appreciated. Bella doesn’t pass out or go out of her way to keep a secret, at first. She wants answers, which leads to more odd scenes with our self-loathing hero who warns her to stay away from him while simultaneously poking his nose into her personal life. AWKWARD. Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

When Bella runs into her family friend, Jacob, during a group outing, he tells her an old Native American legend about the Cullens. I also think that his story about wolves and enemy tribes is vague, so I understand why she decides to do some more research on the subject. I like movie Bella better than book Bella. I just have to mention that this is also the part where Bella talks Angela into asking out Eric. I can only guess that people in a town where vampires can lead normal lives aren’t all that observant. Angela is now a beard.

Bella’s research leads her to a bookstore out of town, but as she is leaving it, to meet up with her friends, a group of men surrounds her. All is well though, because Edward drives up and gives the monsters a scary stare. HILARIOUS! The comedy continues when they find Jessica and Angela, who ate while their friend was in mortal danger. Edward tells them that he will drive Bella home because he wants to make sure she eats. They have the typical teenage response and gush about how “thoughtful” he is. I now laugh like a mad woman every time I hear the word. The restaurant is a time of revelation. He admits to stalking her and being able to read minds, every mind but Bella’s. Of course, the stalking is all in the name of protecting her, so it is all right. He also watches her sleep, but that must be because he's thoughtful. Sure, it isn’t creepy at all. Bella finally figures out the truth that night when she reads her newly acquired book and surfs the internet.

The next day, Bella leads Edward into a secluded part of the forest for the confrontation. Nothing like making sure you are completely alone with a vampire before telling him you know his secret. In my opinion, this is the best scene of the movie because most of the dialogue is straight out of the book. We establish that he is a vampire, finally. When that doesn’t scare her off, he throws her on his back and quickly carries her to the sunny side of the mountain. They really had no budget for effects. He shows her what he is by opening his shirt in a ray of sunlight. It looks like Tinkerbell has been showering vampires with fairy dust again. Think happy thoughts, Edward. Never mind, I forgot that you can’t; good thing that you can run like the wind. Anyway, after warning her that she is his “brand of heroin,” he admits that “the lion fell in love with the lamb.” I told you it was straight out of the book.

Meanwhile, a small vampire gang has been snacking in the area. Bella’s father, Sheriff Charlie Swann, has been investigating the deaths along with Edward’s father, Dr. Cullen. One of the vamps must be a dance choreographer because that is the only thing to explain their moves. It is also nice to see that the female vampire was able to borrow some fur off the White Witch from Narnia. I guess Hollywood really is going green. The interloping vampires concern the “vegetarian” Cullen family who need to keep suspicion away from themselves. I mean, vampire attack is always the first theory in a suspicious death investigation.

Edward takes Bella to a family baseball game where the players all have Matrix-like skills. There is fun for all until the other vampires show up. What? Is this a hint at a plot? The Cullens, in their baseball uniforms, contrast with the wild vampires nicely. That’s right; they wear uniforms like civilized people… vampires… whatever. The new vampires want to play, and things look friendly at first. Edward and Bella are about to leave when one of the vamps catches her scent and decides it’s snack time. The two groups dramatically snarl at each other and game over.

The movie moves far too fast at this point. We finally have an actual plot line with action and it is smashed into the last half hour. Anyway, Bella leaves with Edward’s brother and sister, Jasper and Alice, while the others try to lead the James, the obsessive and hungry vampire, on a wild goose chase. I like Alice and I wish we saw more of her here, but -- alas -- Edward was given most of her lines. It does make him more honest and likeable, but it still sort of stinks. Jasper always looks pained because he is new to the vegetarian lifestyle and not used to eating only animals when people are around. I’m not allowed to kill people at will either, so I have little sympathy.

Moving on, Alice has a vision of the future and where their adversary will end up in a ballet studio. This happens, of course, when Bella, thinking that he has her mother, meets him there. She pepper sprays him at first and tries to run away, but he is too fast. Surprise. Personally, I would bring sharp objects and fire. His torture of her ends when Edward enters. There is a hilarious fight scene right with lots of broken glass and then some group vampire killing and burning. Edward is forced to drink Bell’s blood to remove vampire venom and almost kills her. I told you it all moved too fast. She wakes up in the hospital with her mother and Edward. There is the typical “I should leave you for your own good” scenario. The movie ends with a romantic moment at their prom and promises of sequels. As we left, my friend said, “I’m glad it was entertaining, but I don’t get it. Why did she fall in love with him?” I’ve got nothing.

"Twilight" runs for 122 minutes and is rated PG-13 for some violence and one (hilariously terrible) kissing scene.

RottenTomatoes gives this film a rotten rating of 49%.

Monday, June 02, 2008

Movie Review: the Cinema-Mad Sibling's Guest Review

It's been added here at the end. Great blurb/movie quote from it: "Iron Man throws a bit of hot rod red into this summer movie season."

The Sibling's been trying to dust off his review-writing skills. It's been a while since he's done a movie review; he's been too busy in his technophiliac pursuits!

Friday, May 30, 2008

Movie Review Review: Friends, Feedback, and Further Thoughts on “Iron Man”



Thinking about identity and keeping up appearances. Aren't we all?

Recently both the Sibling and I (in separate cities) took friends to see “Iron Man. Both sets of buddies enjoyed the movie immensely, and I thought this might be a good time to step back and look at it again. After all, a reviewer can change her mind after a repeat viewing, or perhaps see things she missed the first time around. The Sibling also says that one mark of a really good movie is its replay value, and it’s true. Really good movies you can watch over and over; just look at our DVD collections. We can’t wait to get “Iron Man” on DVD.

Anyway, for reviews it’s always nice to have the input of other movie fans too. I went back to the theater with some dear friends from college as a “girls’ night out.” (And yes, this gaggle of young women decided to go see a blockbuster ‘boys’ club’ action flick – so put that in your pipe and smoke it, Manohla Dargis. In fact, the theater was about evenly populated with both guys and girls, so there.)

On a repeat showing, I have to say that my original review stands. Here are a few more thoughts from my friends, the Sibling (to whom I just gave the soundtrack), and me too. So here we go.


A Girl Appreciates a Man – or Movie – That Can Make Her Laugh

Everyone caught onto the essential but hard-to-define fun factor. There’s a lot of laughter in the movie, and by laughter, I mean the good kind. The scriptwriters and director Jon Favreau have created a film with a vibrant sense of fun and a deft, light touch. Plus it’s nice to hear friends chortling in the darkness as we pass popcorn around.

A huge part of this is the script. It’s smart, sharp, and witty, filled with snappy dialogue and memorably playful lines, and – thank goodness – it doesn’t waste our time with too much dull, plodding exposition, overwrought origin stories a la Spider-Man, or pseudo-philosophical-existential whining. The script is often a fencing match between characters, only with words instead of foils. There’s a priceless exchange between Stark and Rhodey on an airplane, for instance, and between Pepper and Stark about shoelaces.

The writers have created Stark as someone who seems to be congenitally, incorrigibly incapable of not making smart-aleck comments or hilarious, lightning-fast, deadpan quips. (I caught one this time that I had missed before, and it was so naughty it made me giggle. Look for it in the scene when Stark’s robots are attempting to disassemble his exoskeleton while he’s still in it. Oh, my!) Downey, whose comic timing is spot-on, is like the class clown whom the instructor can’t scold because she’s too busy laughing helplessly – believe me, I know.

Oh, and the Sibling would like you to know that he absolutely loves the bit about the cheeseburger. “Cheeseburger first.” Priorities, man!


The Devil Is In the Details

I hadn’t realized how rich the details were – and they’re so easy to miss in all the action. But here are a few.

~The Sibling points out that on Stark’s workshop table, you can see the Captain America insignia. It’s in the form of a paperweight or something like that. But the point is that right there is a comic book reference. The Sibling “geeked out” and got all excited. Fanboy.

~In the Afghan caves, you can see piles of food aid in large bags. The best chance to see this is in the parting scene between Stark and Yinsen (Shaun Toub). The labeling on the bags actually reads that the food is the gift of the American people and that it’s not be sold – what you see on US food aid sent overseas to troubled areas of the world. So think about it: humanitarian supplies have ended up in the hands of terrorists and evildoers instead of people who really need it. Is this a not-so-subtle shot at corruption and inefficiency in international agencies? Was I the only person who thought about stuff like the UN’s Oil for Food scandal?

~If it looks like the BBC, sounds like the BBC, whines like the BBC, and peddles doom and gloom like the BBC . . . Well, chances are, it’s the BBC – specifically, BBC News. Check out the news report Stark’s watching on TV when he finds out about Gulmira’s weapons cache. The film’s news has no logo on it, but the reporting’s tone and content basically shriek out “I’m BBC!” Come on, there is such a thing as “BBC-speak,” and no news outfit on the planet is as good as the BBC for trafficking in human misery and tear-jerking prognostications of total disaster.

~From the Sibling and his technophile friends: “What the heck is Tony Stark doing using Dell servers? Should he be using, like, a supercomputer?” It’s called product placement, bud. And I hadn’t even noticed the Dell computers in the movie. To the Sibling: YOU COMPUTER GEEK YOU.


Pepper Potts’ Fancy Footwear

Remember my comment in the first review about Pepper’s shoes? As the ladies and I were talking after the film, my friend Alessandra spontaneously declared: “There’s no way Pepper Potts could run in those ridiculous shoes.”

I burst out laughing. The issue of shoes maybe is some kind of female instinct. We KNEW, because at various times we’ve all had to wear beautiful but totally impractical shoes. Pepper’s teetering heels look like they’re four inches high or more, and I guarantee you that if I wore them, I might look fantastic, but I’d be utterly immobilized. And then I’d need big-time orthopedic surgery.


“What’s the Air Force doing driving Humvees in the desert?!”

This was the comment from a friend with a military background. Implied in that too was the idea that hey, somebody else should be doing that desert driving – and that’s the Army. I hadn’t a clue, but my buddy pointed out a number of things; she should get hired as a consultant on the next film with a military presence!

~The female soldier driving Stark’s Humvee identified herself as an “airman.”

~The uniforms weren’t those currently being worn by the US Army.

~Despite all that, the name “1st Cav” was printed on the Humvees. (Need a refresher on who the First Cavalry Division is? Yes, they’re ARMY.)

~“Those are Humvees we have in the States, not the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

~“If someone’s shooting at you, why would you get out of your armored vehicle?” (Because otherwise Stark wouldn’t end up in his sticky situation? It’s a movie, after all.)


Pet Robots

The ladies were intrigued by Stark’s little pet robots – especially the overly enthusiastic fire-extinguisher-bot. There’s also a rather oddly touching moment with another little ’bot that wins the praise “Good boy.” Not quite R2-D2, but all this makes me want to rush off and see the new Disney-Pixar film “Wall-E” as soon as it opens – its robot star is going to be adorably cute. But I digress.


We’ve Found the Solution for Our Dependence on Foreign Oil! Or Not.

Now I hadn’t thought about this per se, but gentle reader Don did. I give you his comment:

. . . that miniature reactor was pretty cool tech and apt to lead to a lot of great technologies both civilian AND military, possibly even medical.

Think of that baby powering a car, Maddie! No more stupid corn ethanol, no more gas pumps, just seal off the Middle East and watch the mullahs starve as nobody wants their frigging oil anymore.

By George, he’s right! That would be pretty awesome. *grin* Well, I’ve long been an advocate for increasing research and development, for firing up the tech sector, showering down
incentives, and turning the geeks loose to find alternative solutions . . . ! We’ve a lot more potential there than in a million Kyoto Treaties or Al Gore sermons or ethanol subsidy boondoggles. I’ll tell you this now: I have more faith in tech geeks in R&D than in politicians and activists.


Glorious Geek Joy and Tech Lust

OK, this is especially for the Sibling and me, so if you’re not mad about technology, computer wizardry, and the delights of being a brainiac geek or nerd, you don’t have to read this! I’ve tried explaining this, but maybe it just doesn’t make much sense unless you are also a technophile. Anyway, part of why we love this film is its sheer mind-blowing, breathtaking technical wizardry and enthusiastic delight in techno-toys, engineering, and computers. When the Sib and I first saw Stark’s awesome basement workshop, I thought we were going to pass out right then and there. Come on, 3-D virtual rendering, pet robots, Jarvis the AI, and a million shiny cool doo-dads, doohickeys and gadgets! We’re suffering from tech lust. And what’s the Iron Man suit if not the ultimate tech-toy? Heck, you can even use your cellphone hands-free in the darn thing!

That’s another thing too. For us, just watching Stark make the suit through trial and error was one of the best parts of the entire movie. You have to realize that the Sibling and I were always on the science, computing, and tech teams in high school; we used to participate in all kinds of science competitions from Odyssey of the Mind to Science Olympiad to software programming contests and more. I didn’t go to my senior prom because I was at a national science competition with my friends. That was the sort of nerdy, geeky, but delightful and brainy life the Sibling and I shared with our school friends; nowadays I’m just a fan and amateur enthusiast of science and technology (I decided to be a PhD doctor instead of a medical one – do you really want someone like me operating on you?), but the Sib is a professional computer expert. Tech lust is in our blood; our relatives include engineers aplenty. We just LOVE tech stuff. The movie resonated with us on a very personal level—hence the ridiculously rapturous response. Stark takes what the Sib and I love – and makes it so much cooler. The whole thing is some kind of glorious geek fantasy. Oh, and when Stark first went flying outside in his exoskeleton, that was too cool for words – the moviemakers did very well in creating a sequence that captured the thrill of figuring out that wow, you can FLY at super speed. Stark whooping and laughing with delight in his helmet was a great image. What a rush, man. We’re green with envy!

And, yes, I guess you can say that the Sib and I are fans of Tony Stark for the sake of his brains. As the Sib said admiringly, “He’s an inventor. A genius inventor.” I’m taken with the whole idea of using your brains; the entire business in the Afghan caves, with Stark MacGyvering his way out, was a great sequence. Add up all the elements: brains, brawn, humor, and butt-kicking tech—what a potent cocktail. I quote another critic noting that Stark doesn’t have any superpowers in himself, really: “his heroism is all handicraft, elbow grease and applied intelligence.” The result is absolute, unashamed brainy geek joy over the power of creativity, inventiveness, intelligence, and technical brilliance. Besides, (girl-talk here), smart is attractive. And as Alessandra added, “That suit is HOT.” Mmm, you can say that again.

Here’s some Geek Joy and Tech Lust for everybody. Heck, yeah.


Political Rorschach Test

This flick seems to be different things to different people – or at least, people seem to see their own political persuasions reflected in it. I’m only going to say this: I’ve read reviews identifying the movie as both pro-war and anti-war, pro-conservative and pro-liberal, and I think this is all great. Why? Because it means that the moviemakers haven’t overwhelmed the film with any one particular, obvious, beat-you-over-the-head bias. It’s probably too much to hope that the overwhelmingly leftist Hollywood would make movies actually sympathetic to conservative or traditional values and viewpoints, so it’s nice to get a film that doesn’t go around actively stomping on them, blatantly bashing America and the military, and/or inserting heavy-handed political commentary. I might be (to some people, anyway) an evil campus subversive reactionary, but I still want entertainment, not sanctimonious lectures, when I go to the cinema. Really, if you take this film overall, it’s kind of a centrist film. It’s there to have a good time, and it wants you to have a good time too.

I have to say this, though. I don’t think the post-Afghanistan Stark is really as much a liberal peacenik as some people think he becomes. Sure, in a knee-jerk, impulsive decision, he wants to shut down weapons manufacturing at Stark Industries when he comes home. But is anybody an actual pacifist peacenik if he personally dons a weaponized robotic exoskeleton to go unleash deadly force on terrorists? Stark’s self-imposed (and totally unilateral) mission to Gulmira is, if anything, reminiscent of an entirely opposite perspective: he identifies hostiles and civilians in clear terms (no moral ambiguity or moral equivalence there), doesn’t even try to talk to (much less negotiate with) the hostiles, and dispatches them without hesitation. Then he just as decisively disarms the remaining terrorists by blowing up their weapons supplies (and he later tells Rhodey, proxy for the US military, “Looks like somebody did your job for you”). Hm.

I don’t want to get into a big digressionary discussion about the use of force or the role of arms, but here’s a thought: both in the Gulmira incident and Stark’s captivity sequence, it’s clear that there is a time and place for the use of force. Stark and Yinsen, no dummies, both know that their captors aren’t to be trusted.

A related thought is about Stark and his weapons manufacturing. I’ve heard some critics call him a scion of the leftist-bogeyman “military-industrial complex” and/or an unscrupulous arms dealer and profiteer who doesn’t care where his products end up. Is he really just churning out weapons willy-nilly to the highest bidder? I just don’t think so. If he didn’t care, he wouldn’t be so upset to see his weapons end up in the wrong hands. The whole point to his “epiphany” is that he discovers that, without his knowledge or approval, Stark weapons are in the possession of the bad guys – and that those weapons are being used against the wrong people. There is one short but important segment where the usually-flippant Stark agonizes that his weapons are now being used against American troops, the very people he meant those arms to protect and defend. He actually uses the words “protect and defend” – that’s pretty significant. Interestingly, Stark doesn’t moan about being shredded by his own weapons as much as he talks about how other people are affected.

As for his entire guilt trip, I think it’s a littlest bit overblown (since it was really Obadiah Stane who was responsible for the arms shipments), but hey, it’s for the plot, right? Thank goodness guilt soon turns into action, not moping and self-flagellation.

In the end, the whole angle about armaments and foreign involvement isn’t the most important thing going on in the flick. This subplot disappears as soon as we figure out that Stane is the one whose machinations are wreaking havoc. Cue the Iron Monger-versus-Iron Man throwdown! Yeah, baby! (Who cares if it’s an echo of every clanking, screeching mech warrior/guyver/Tranzor Z/Voltron/Transformers robo-rumble fight? It’s just darn cool.)


Well, that’s all, folks. I’m going home to see my family in a few days (finally!!!), and I’m sure that, once reunited, my Sibling and I will be going back to the cinemas with all our buddies too.

In general: Look for more reviews and non-academic summer silliness here in the near future!

UPDATE: The Cinema-Mad Sibling has a guest review. Enjoy:

Review: Ironman (2008)

At the behest of a sibling of mine, I was encouraged to hasten my efforts in producing a review for Ironman, as it's been quite a while since I've put forth the effort to collect my ever-scattered stream-of-consciousness thoughts into legible text., if it were ever so simple...So here we go, it's me Mario...

You know, before the trailers and stuff, I never really knew much about Tony Stark or Ironman, or the history there with Avengers, etc. So sue me, with the comic world (i.e. Stan Lee's head) being so crammed with endless characters and stories, hey you're bound to let a superhero or two slip thru the cracks. I was much more a Batman/Superman fan, with Batman Begins to me was being what a superhero origin movie done right. Would IronMan be up to the challenge?

Fortunately, yes, and it indeed exceeded my expectations greatly, and lived up to the all the reviews and the hype, 93% fresh on Rottentomatoes. Renaissance man/actor/writer/comedian/producer/director Jon Favreau put together a production that hones in on audiences want to see: a smart, funny action-filled, character-driven story that balances that all those ingredients carefully, resulting in an enjoyable 2 hours of summer movie.

A quick summary: man inherits family business that makes weapons. Discovers weapons are in the wrong hands the hard way. Uses wit to MacGyver himself from terrorist captivity by protecting himself with an iron suit made from missile scraps and busting out. Perfecting his designs and using technology to fight the enemy, destroying any of the weapons that wrongfully fell into their hands. Finds his purpose, to protect the people. Fun ensues.

Characters were all developed nicely with fun interchanges among them. Robert Downey Jr plays Tony Stark as the cool hero, genius child prodigy with a penchant for machinery, sarcasm, and women. His character grows from the man we see in the beginning and there is a learning curve in a matter of speaking. This hero is not endowed superpowers by the sun nor midichlorians in the bloodstream. No, he is a normal everyman who has to figure out with his wit and brain how to solve problems. He finds his destiny and embraces it.

The special effects people have outdone themselves. That suit is just bdazz. I'll take two. Cool robot action reminiscent of Transformers and Robocop pepper the movie. Though most of the fun parts were the getting there - seeing Stark's various trial and error outings with the mechanics of his would be superhero garb, seeing that it's not perfect at first, it's not all there at once. Step by step and slowly taking shape, adding realism to the whole enterprise.

I for one would see this again. I saw it twice, and took some friends that would probably have not gone to proselytize 'em. When I first told this girl, she asked is it about Triathlon? Great, this'll be fun, hehe. Well turns out she really liked it and told me so, and that she never would have gone had I not taken her. That's what a good comic book movie should be - accessible to all ages and crowds. Ironman dazzles, shines, and throws in a bit of hot rod red in this summer movie season.