O Masterpiece
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
X Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 31, 2008
The first movie release of the year is always sketchy. If you try the first Friday’s flick, you take your chances. “One Missed Call” is one such example; it was released on January 4 and is somehow still in theaters.
“One Missed Call” is supposed to be “a scary movie,” but here is a list of things that are scarier: flowers, butterflies, cotton candy, puppies, Garfield and the first day of kindergarten.
Sure, I realize that it’s fashionable to update the cinema to correspond with our technological age. That’s why we’ve had flicks like “You’ve Got Mail” (1998), “Firewall” (2006) and this year’s “Untraceable.” But why, oh why do we need a movie where people are terrorized by their cell phones? I mean, that’s already a fact of everyday life, isn’t it? Perhaps that was the filmmakers’ underlying, sad-but-true joke. If so, it’s a costly, needless joke, much like this movie.
Actually, “One Missed Call” is yet another remake of yet another Japanese horror film called “Chakushin ari” (2003), which, roughly translated, means “Even though this movie is unmistakably similar to “The Ring” and “The Grudge,” it’s different, honest.”
No it’s not.
“One Missed Call” gives us a group of friends in their twenties who begin to be terrorized by their cell phones’ inexplicable, incoming calls that allow them to hear their own voices responding to their awful, near-future deaths … talk about bad news. Hence the movie’s tagline, “What will it sound like when you die?”
The movie’s primary strength is its lead actress, Shannyn Sossamon, who looks like she could be Jessica Alba’s sister, though she’s not. Hers is the only credible performance in the film, considering what she has to work with. You might recognize her from “The Holiday” (2006), “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” (2005) or “A Knight’s Tale” (2001). Edward Burns, who’s usually decent, is disappointing as Jack Andrews, the cop who tries to help Beth (Shannyn Sossamon).
Because its characters are facing supernatural phenomena, “One Missed Call” can cheat and sidestep the rules of plausibility. And it’s not the movie’s incredulousness that bothers me; it’s just that once we find out why (not how, mind you) these killings are happening, we aren’t convinced or satisfied. This last statement, unfortunately, is one that I cannot elaborate on without revealing too much, so I won’t.
But I can write this: When we find out why the maniac in “Untraceable” is killing people, it sort of makes sense. We can buy the reasoning, as crazy as that sounds. On the other hand, when we find out why the killings are occurring in “One Missed Call,” we wish our cell phones would have called us about 87 minutes earlier with bad news.
Directed by Eric Valette
Shannyn Sossamon / Edward Burns / Azura Skye
Thriller 87 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for intense sequences of violence and terror, frightening images, some sexual material and thematic elements)
U.S. Release Date: January 4, 2008
Copyright 2008: 230
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Mad Money (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 31, 2008
Why is it so alluring to think about instantly becoming filthy rich and all the things we’d buy and do with that money? If you’ve never pondered such a thing (first of all, that’s weird), and second, try it right now. I don’t know about you, but there’s something about this universal mental exercise that magically excites me.
Whatever that phenomenon is, it’s the very same one that makes “Mad Money” so much fun. There’s nothing Oscar-worthy about this movie, but I’ve ranked it as a rental because it is so enjoyable. If you ever want an easy, happy, feel-good film, “Mad Money” is the one for you. I can’t go so far as to call it excellent, primarily because it’s not quite worth theater prices. (But hey, if you do instantly become filthy rich, knock yourself out and see it in the theater. Heck, buy the whole theater.)
The story of “Mad Money” is told through a flashback. It follows that classic narrative technique like the one in “All About Eve” (1950), where it begins near the end, catches us up on everything that’s already transpired through flashbacks, then shows us what follows after the point where the movie began.
As a result, we know from the beginning that our criminal masterminds get busted, because several characters are being interviewed in an interrogation room, which supplies the storyline for said flashbacks. Part of the intrigue of the movie is seeing exactly what crime was committed, by whom, and how these thieves finally get caught. So, yes, “Mad Money” is basically a heist flick, another criminal caper peopled with colorful characters.
The ring leader of these is Bridget (Diane Keaton), a 60-something, upper-middle-class woman who’s used to having an employed husband (Ted Danson) and all the comforts of life, including a cleaning lady. But when financial ruin falls upon them due to her husband’s perpetual unemployment, Bridget enters the work force. And because of her “maturity” and lack of previous work experience, Bridget settles on being a janitor at the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank.
While making her rounds as a janitor, Bridget discovers that the Federal Reserve destroys a million dollars each day, simply because the bills are tattered and worn out. She devises a plan for robbing the bank, and seeks strategically employed accomplices to assist her, which is where Nina (Queen Latifah) and Jackie “Katie Holmes” come in. And that’s the plot: The three ladies continue robbing the bank, over and over again, because the money they steal is untraceable and let’s face it, irresistible.
Keaton, Latifah and Holmes have a good onscreen chemistry together. It appears that they enjoyed making this movie, and that energy transfers into the audience. There’s a nice dead-horse theme that’s repeatedly beaten about how we should not want too much. And unfortunately, the movie also has a useless subplot about Latifah’s character not having sex for many years, like we care. Oh, and the legal details become conveniently rubbery at points, but songwriters are allowed strained rhymes, so screenwriters should be granted similar leniency from time to time.
Directed by Callie Khouri
Diane Keaton / Queen Latifah / Katie Holmes
Comedy 104 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for sexual material and language, and brief drug references)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 229
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 31, 2008
Why is it so alluring to think about instantly becoming filthy rich and all the things we’d buy and do with that money? If you’ve never pondered such a thing (first of all, that’s weird), and second, try it right now. I don’t know about you, but there’s something about this universal mental exercise that magically excites me.
Whatever that phenomenon is, it’s the very same one that makes “Mad Money” so much fun. There’s nothing Oscar-worthy about this movie, but I’ve ranked it as a rental because it is so enjoyable. If you ever want an easy, happy, feel-good film, “Mad Money” is the one for you. I can’t go so far as to call it excellent, primarily because it’s not quite worth theater prices. (But hey, if you do instantly become filthy rich, knock yourself out and see it in the theater. Heck, buy the whole theater.)
The story of “Mad Money” is told through a flashback. It follows that classic narrative technique like the one in “All About Eve” (1950), where it begins near the end, catches us up on everything that’s already transpired through flashbacks, then shows us what follows after the point where the movie began.
As a result, we know from the beginning that our criminal masterminds get busted, because several characters are being interviewed in an interrogation room, which supplies the storyline for said flashbacks. Part of the intrigue of the movie is seeing exactly what crime was committed, by whom, and how these thieves finally get caught. So, yes, “Mad Money” is basically a heist flick, another criminal caper peopled with colorful characters.
The ring leader of these is Bridget (Diane Keaton), a 60-something, upper-middle-class woman who’s used to having an employed husband (Ted Danson) and all the comforts of life, including a cleaning lady. But when financial ruin falls upon them due to her husband’s perpetual unemployment, Bridget enters the work force. And because of her “maturity” and lack of previous work experience, Bridget settles on being a janitor at the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank.
While making her rounds as a janitor, Bridget discovers that the Federal Reserve destroys a million dollars each day, simply because the bills are tattered and worn out. She devises a plan for robbing the bank, and seeks strategically employed accomplices to assist her, which is where Nina (Queen Latifah) and Jackie “Katie Holmes” come in. And that’s the plot: The three ladies continue robbing the bank, over and over again, because the money they steal is untraceable and let’s face it, irresistible.
Keaton, Latifah and Holmes have a good onscreen chemistry together. It appears that they enjoyed making this movie, and that energy transfers into the audience. There’s a nice dead-horse theme that’s repeatedly beaten about how we should not want too much. And unfortunately, the movie also has a useless subplot about Latifah’s character not having sex for many years, like we care. Oh, and the legal details become conveniently rubbery at points, but songwriters are allowed strained rhymes, so screenwriters should be granted similar leniency from time to time.
Directed by Callie Khouri
Diane Keaton / Queen Latifah / Katie Holmes
Comedy 104 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for sexual material and language, and brief drug references)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 229
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
The Orphanage (2008)
O Masterpiece
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 30, 2008
“The Orphanage” is almost a masterpiece but not quite. Why not? Because it astounds then lulls, astounds then lulls. Had it been able to maintain its astonishing qualities throughout, or at least a pace that doesn’t drag, then “The Orphanage” would surely have been a masterpiece.
Even so, it’s still excellent. Notice its MPAA rating is “R.” Now notice why it’s rated R: “for some disturbing content.” This means that “The Orphanage,” which has no nudity, sex, excessive profanity or graphic violence, is rated R basically for its “creepiness” … and rightly so.
I don’t get scared at movies; at least, I thought I didn’t. But I was notably anxious during “The Orphanage.” It’s not that it’s scary, as much as it’s creepy. In fact, “The Orphanage” is the creepiest movie I’ve seen since “The Exorcist” (1973) or “Pet Semetary” (1989). Remember Zelda, the twisted, sick sister that was hidden away “like a dirty secret”?
And yet, “The Orphanage” is not a slasher film, nor would I even call it a horror film. It is a potent, effective thriller, as well as a mystery. But here’s the part you’re not going to believe: In all actuality, “The Orphanage” is essentially a haunted house, ghost movie!
Last June, in my review of “1408,” I wrote that I couldn’t think of a haunted house movie that is truly good. Then, an insightful, anonymous commentator replied that Alejandro Amenabar’s “The Others” (2001) is a haunted house movie that is truly good. And I had to agree. Now, we can confidently add “The Orphanage” to that short list.
Laura (Belen Rueda) lived at the Good Shepherd Orphanage as a child until she was adopted. Later, as an adult, she and her husband buy the dilapidated, uninhabited orphanage and plan to remodel it. They have a 7-year-old son named Simon (Roger Princep) who is HIV positive and also adopted. The couple plan to take care of their son, as well as other special-needs children.
But there’s a problem. Awful things have happened at this orphanage, and awful things are yet to happen. Simon, who’s known to have imaginary friends, claims to have new companions, much to his skeptical parents’ displeasure. They play games with Simon, who draws pictures of the unseen children for his parents to see. One of them called Thomas (Oscar Casas) wears a strange sack on his head.
Inexplicable events begin to unfold. An elderly lady who claims to be a social worker starts coming to the orphanage. Also, one day Simon vanishes. “The Orphanage” follows Laura’s desperate search for her ill son and her discovery of the orphanage’s past, including Simon’s mysterious little friends.
Set in Spain, “The Orphanage” is filmed in Spanish with English subtitles. If you have an aversion to subtitles, which many do, overcome it and see this film. Sensitive viewers might be distressed by its “disturbing content,” some of which is freak-accident-related, but you can always close your eyes for a second.
“The Orphanage” doesn’t settle for those cheap, overdone Gotcha! moments designed to keep the audience on edge. I’m not claiming there aren’t jumpy surprises, but these are done well and relevant to the plot. The suspense and dread that mount in “The Orphanage” come from its superior screenplay, set design, costumes, cinematography and overall directing. For example, watch carefully how the camera pans back and forth, left and right, when the adult Laura is playing the knocking-on-the-wall game of tag. Also, notice how the creepy film footage within the film itself puts to shame anything we saw from “The Ring” (2002).
No spoilers follow: The end of “The Orphanage” seems to be an attempt to please every audience member. Its ambiguity allows us to understand it however we wish; but I believe there is still a “right answer,” and I believe I’ve arrived at it after pondering the film.
“The Orphanage” gave me some of the biggest jumps I’ve had in the theater. It was a memorable viewing experience. Not only did the projectionist accidentally begin with “27 Dresses,” he or she played the first 10 minutes of “The Orphanage” twice. And when I left the theater, a blizzard had befallen our town and buried my car. But I was glad; the inclement weather gave me something less eerie to think about on my drive home at 12:30 a.m.
Directed by Juan Antonio Bayona
Belen Rueda / Roger Princep / Oscar Casas
Thriller / Mystery 100 min.
MPAA: R (for some disturbing content)
U.S. Release Date: January 11, 2008
Copyright 2008: 228
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 30, 2008
“The Orphanage” is almost a masterpiece but not quite. Why not? Because it astounds then lulls, astounds then lulls. Had it been able to maintain its astonishing qualities throughout, or at least a pace that doesn’t drag, then “The Orphanage” would surely have been a masterpiece.
Even so, it’s still excellent. Notice its MPAA rating is “R.” Now notice why it’s rated R: “for some disturbing content.” This means that “The Orphanage,” which has no nudity, sex, excessive profanity or graphic violence, is rated R basically for its “creepiness” … and rightly so.
I don’t get scared at movies; at least, I thought I didn’t. But I was notably anxious during “The Orphanage.” It’s not that it’s scary, as much as it’s creepy. In fact, “The Orphanage” is the creepiest movie I’ve seen since “The Exorcist” (1973) or “Pet Semetary” (1989). Remember Zelda, the twisted, sick sister that was hidden away “like a dirty secret”?
And yet, “The Orphanage” is not a slasher film, nor would I even call it a horror film. It is a potent, effective thriller, as well as a mystery. But here’s the part you’re not going to believe: In all actuality, “The Orphanage” is essentially a haunted house, ghost movie!
Last June, in my review of “1408,” I wrote that I couldn’t think of a haunted house movie that is truly good. Then, an insightful, anonymous commentator replied that Alejandro Amenabar’s “The Others” (2001) is a haunted house movie that is truly good. And I had to agree. Now, we can confidently add “The Orphanage” to that short list.
Laura (Belen Rueda) lived at the Good Shepherd Orphanage as a child until she was adopted. Later, as an adult, she and her husband buy the dilapidated, uninhabited orphanage and plan to remodel it. They have a 7-year-old son named Simon (Roger Princep) who is HIV positive and also adopted. The couple plan to take care of their son, as well as other special-needs children.
But there’s a problem. Awful things have happened at this orphanage, and awful things are yet to happen. Simon, who’s known to have imaginary friends, claims to have new companions, much to his skeptical parents’ displeasure. They play games with Simon, who draws pictures of the unseen children for his parents to see. One of them called Thomas (Oscar Casas) wears a strange sack on his head.
Inexplicable events begin to unfold. An elderly lady who claims to be a social worker starts coming to the orphanage. Also, one day Simon vanishes. “The Orphanage” follows Laura’s desperate search for her ill son and her discovery of the orphanage’s past, including Simon’s mysterious little friends.
Set in Spain, “The Orphanage” is filmed in Spanish with English subtitles. If you have an aversion to subtitles, which many do, overcome it and see this film. Sensitive viewers might be distressed by its “disturbing content,” some of which is freak-accident-related, but you can always close your eyes for a second.
“The Orphanage” doesn’t settle for those cheap, overdone Gotcha! moments designed to keep the audience on edge. I’m not claiming there aren’t jumpy surprises, but these are done well and relevant to the plot. The suspense and dread that mount in “The Orphanage” come from its superior screenplay, set design, costumes, cinematography and overall directing. For example, watch carefully how the camera pans back and forth, left and right, when the adult Laura is playing the knocking-on-the-wall game of tag. Also, notice how the creepy film footage within the film itself puts to shame anything we saw from “The Ring” (2002).
No spoilers follow: The end of “The Orphanage” seems to be an attempt to please every audience member. Its ambiguity allows us to understand it however we wish; but I believe there is still a “right answer,” and I believe I’ve arrived at it after pondering the film.
“The Orphanage” gave me some of the biggest jumps I’ve had in the theater. It was a memorable viewing experience. Not only did the projectionist accidentally begin with “27 Dresses,” he or she played the first 10 minutes of “The Orphanage” twice. And when I left the theater, a blizzard had befallen our town and buried my car. But I was glad; the inclement weather gave me something less eerie to think about on my drive home at 12:30 a.m.
Directed by Juan Antonio Bayona
Belen Rueda / Roger Princep / Oscar Casas
Thriller / Mystery 100 min.
MPAA: R (for some disturbing content)
U.S. Release Date: January 11, 2008
Copyright 2008: 228
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
How She Move (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
X Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 29, 2008
“How She Move” is the latest movie to feature “step dancing” (but not verb conjugation), and I have a feeling it won’t be the last.
For those who aren’t familiar with step dancing, it appears to be an energetic blend of hip hop, break dancing, cheerleading, gymnastics and stomping around rhythmically. In fact, “stomp dancing” would be a more accurate name; but in any case, step dancing is fast, intense and usually entertaining to watch.
But “How She Move” is merely a poor retread of last year’s better step-dance movie, “Stomp the Yard,” except our new protagonist is female. All in all, they’re both the same movie, even down to the death-of-a-sibling inciting incident.
Raya Green (Rutina Wesley) lives in the inner city (somewhere within close driving distance to Detroit). Determined to rise up out of the hopelessness of her rough neighborhood, Raya excels academically at a private school with high hopes of attending medical school in the future.
When Raya’s sister dies from drug addiction, she’s compelled to leave her studies and return home, forced to face the problems she was trying to elude. One such issue is her family’s poverty, which poses a problem when it comes to paying for med school.
But Raya is a dancer, as was her sister, and it appears they always have been. Step dancing seems to be the competitive entertainment of choice among the primarily Jamaican inhabitants of her community. And if a dancing crew can step well enough, there’s money to be won at local step competitions.
So, you can see where this is going. In fact, “How She Move” is more predictable than the sunrise. Yes, Raya has to struggle with getting involved again in stepping (and its unsavory associates) in order to compete at the big dance contest in Detroit called the Step Monster Competition.
“How She Move” has some impressive dancing (which I, admittedly, could never physically imitate), but even so, I’ve seen better.
I’ve read complaints online about the music that the dancers step to. Step dancing in and of itself produces percussive sounds (or “music,” I suppose), so some would argue that no accompanying soundtrack is necessary. “Stomp the Yard” and its sparse soundtrack seems more like cheerleading than dancing to me, so I actually prefer the musical backdrop of “How She Move.” Besides, the percussive stomping is plenty audible amid the music.
Overall, “How She Move” is rather unremarkable, unmemorable, unoriginal and probably not worth your time simply because you’ve already seen this movie before, several times. Here we have rental-worthy dancers stuck in a mediocre screenplay.
Directed by Ian Iqbal Rashid
Rutina Wesley / Dwain Murphy / Brennan Gademans
Drama 94 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for some drug content, suggestive material and language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 227
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
X Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 29, 2008
“How She Move” is the latest movie to feature “step dancing” (but not verb conjugation), and I have a feeling it won’t be the last.
For those who aren’t familiar with step dancing, it appears to be an energetic blend of hip hop, break dancing, cheerleading, gymnastics and stomping around rhythmically. In fact, “stomp dancing” would be a more accurate name; but in any case, step dancing is fast, intense and usually entertaining to watch.
But “How She Move” is merely a poor retread of last year’s better step-dance movie, “Stomp the Yard,” except our new protagonist is female. All in all, they’re both the same movie, even down to the death-of-a-sibling inciting incident.
Raya Green (Rutina Wesley) lives in the inner city (somewhere within close driving distance to Detroit). Determined to rise up out of the hopelessness of her rough neighborhood, Raya excels academically at a private school with high hopes of attending medical school in the future.
When Raya’s sister dies from drug addiction, she’s compelled to leave her studies and return home, forced to face the problems she was trying to elude. One such issue is her family’s poverty, which poses a problem when it comes to paying for med school.
But Raya is a dancer, as was her sister, and it appears they always have been. Step dancing seems to be the competitive entertainment of choice among the primarily Jamaican inhabitants of her community. And if a dancing crew can step well enough, there’s money to be won at local step competitions.
So, you can see where this is going. In fact, “How She Move” is more predictable than the sunrise. Yes, Raya has to struggle with getting involved again in stepping (and its unsavory associates) in order to compete at the big dance contest in Detroit called the Step Monster Competition.
“How She Move” has some impressive dancing (which I, admittedly, could never physically imitate), but even so, I’ve seen better.
I’ve read complaints online about the music that the dancers step to. Step dancing in and of itself produces percussive sounds (or “music,” I suppose), so some would argue that no accompanying soundtrack is necessary. “Stomp the Yard” and its sparse soundtrack seems more like cheerleading than dancing to me, so I actually prefer the musical backdrop of “How She Move.” Besides, the percussive stomping is plenty audible amid the music.
Overall, “How She Move” is rather unremarkable, unmemorable, unoriginal and probably not worth your time simply because you’ve already seen this movie before, several times. Here we have rental-worthy dancers stuck in a mediocre screenplay.
Directed by Ian Iqbal Rashid
Rutina Wesley / Dwain Murphy / Brennan Gademans
Drama 94 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for some drug content, suggestive material and language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 227
Meet the Spartans (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
X Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 29, 2008
Today’s news headlines indicate that a disabled, U.S. spy satellite that weighs around 20,000 pounds and is about the size of a small bus has fallen out of orbit and will likely plummet back to Earth … somewhere. Having heard this news, all I could think about while sitting in the theater watching “Meet the Spartans” is I hope that satellite lands on me, right now.
No such luck.
If it’s not obvious from the trailer, “Meet the Spartans” is in the same silly vein as “Scary Movie” (2000), “Date Movie” (2006), and “Epic Movie” (2007), and, in fact, is basically “Epic Movie 2.” And if you’ve seen any of these winners, you’ll know that these movies strain (and I mean strain) to get laughs by threading several recent movie plots together with a merciless barrage of pop culture references and shameless advertising (and I mean shameless).
Typically, these movies select a primary target, and “Meet the Spartans” aims its spoof at “300,” which was a well-received hit of 2007. But of all the movies that could have been ridiculed from the past year, “Meet the Spartans” attempts to parody a film whose thin plot leaves little to work with: Basically, all that happens in “300” is a two-hour, repetitive blood bath by the sea.
And yes, you might be wondering, what movie could be more deserving of such scrutiny? But if “300” is as fun as playing with a stick, “Meet the Spartans” is just a stick, no playing and certainly no fun.
If you’ve ever watched the TV cartoon “Family Guy,” then you’ve seen effective parodies. “Family Guy” sticks closely with the source material, only deviating slightly (albeit deviously) from the original it is imitating. And better still, “Family Guy” points out small oddities about the show it’s spoofing. Even “Weird Al” Yankovic recreates comedy songs that are so close to the original version, we might not realize they are parodies unless we’re paying attention to his new lyrics.
Though “Meet the Spartans” follows “300’s” plotline events very faithfully, it wanders way, way off the path from the nature of the original material. For instance, during the scene where King Leonidas and Xerxes’ messenger discuss unpopular topics by a gaping hole, somehow, Britney Spears and the American Idol judges show up. And I’m tellin’ ya, if one person gets kicked into that hole, 100 do. Now, this might have been humorous if “300” had countless hosts of people getting kicked into a hole, because it would have been peculiar enough to mock. But that wasn’t the case; instead, “Spartans” chooses to evoke Sanjaya. See what I mean?
I can compliment “Meet the Spartans” on one thing: Sean Maguire, who plays Leonidas, closely resembles and impressively impersonates Gerard Butler, “300’s” Leonidas. Speaking of casting, there is something I can’t figure out: Why in the world does Carmen Electra always agree to play in these movies? She’s been in “Meet the Spartans,” “Epic Movie,” “Scary Movie 4,” “Date Movie,” “Scary Movie,” etc. Obviously, she either likes this type of humor or the money’s good.
If you are careful about which PG-13 movies you choose to see, “Meet the Spartans” is probably one you’d opt to skip. It mimics its seedy inspiration, “300,” and is filled with crass, vulgar, gross-out humor. If you still choose to see this movie, halfway through the end credits there’s additional footage, including more attempts at a comical portrayal of child abuse, in case the first round wasn’t funny enough for you. (I will admit that this is an example of “Spartans” trying to mock a peculiarity of “300,” but child abuse is like cancer: It’s never funny.)
My filmmaker friend, Barrett Hilton, has told me in the past that I’m too hard on the movies I hate. After all, this is somebody’s art I’m writing about. I’ve considered his critique of the critic carefully. Then, last year gave us a great character that added to Barrett’s sentiments named Anton Ego, a ferocious food critic who writes the following thought in “Ratatouille”:
“In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read, but the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”
Well, I was touched by this until I saw “Meet the Spartans.” I’m convinced that even if I typed a whole review of binary code (which, in fact, I have), it would still be more meaningful, funnier and more entertaining than “Meet the Spartans.”
(Oh, and legendary film critic Stanley Kauffmann’s movie reviews are more meaningful than most movies.)
Directed by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer
Sean Maguire / Carmen Electra / Ken Davitian
Comedy 84 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for crude and sexual content throughout, language and some comic violence)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 226
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
X Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 29, 2008
Today’s news headlines indicate that a disabled, U.S. spy satellite that weighs around 20,000 pounds and is about the size of a small bus has fallen out of orbit and will likely plummet back to Earth … somewhere. Having heard this news, all I could think about while sitting in the theater watching “Meet the Spartans” is I hope that satellite lands on me, right now.
No such luck.
If it’s not obvious from the trailer, “Meet the Spartans” is in the same silly vein as “Scary Movie” (2000), “Date Movie” (2006), and “Epic Movie” (2007), and, in fact, is basically “Epic Movie 2.” And if you’ve seen any of these winners, you’ll know that these movies strain (and I mean strain) to get laughs by threading several recent movie plots together with a merciless barrage of pop culture references and shameless advertising (and I mean shameless).
Typically, these movies select a primary target, and “Meet the Spartans” aims its spoof at “300,” which was a well-received hit of 2007. But of all the movies that could have been ridiculed from the past year, “Meet the Spartans” attempts to parody a film whose thin plot leaves little to work with: Basically, all that happens in “300” is a two-hour, repetitive blood bath by the sea.
And yes, you might be wondering, what movie could be more deserving of such scrutiny? But if “300” is as fun as playing with a stick, “Meet the Spartans” is just a stick, no playing and certainly no fun.
If you’ve ever watched the TV cartoon “Family Guy,” then you’ve seen effective parodies. “Family Guy” sticks closely with the source material, only deviating slightly (albeit deviously) from the original it is imitating. And better still, “Family Guy” points out small oddities about the show it’s spoofing. Even “Weird Al” Yankovic recreates comedy songs that are so close to the original version, we might not realize they are parodies unless we’re paying attention to his new lyrics.
Though “Meet the Spartans” follows “300’s” plotline events very faithfully, it wanders way, way off the path from the nature of the original material. For instance, during the scene where King Leonidas and Xerxes’ messenger discuss unpopular topics by a gaping hole, somehow, Britney Spears and the American Idol judges show up. And I’m tellin’ ya, if one person gets kicked into that hole, 100 do. Now, this might have been humorous if “300” had countless hosts of people getting kicked into a hole, because it would have been peculiar enough to mock. But that wasn’t the case; instead, “Spartans” chooses to evoke Sanjaya. See what I mean?
I can compliment “Meet the Spartans” on one thing: Sean Maguire, who plays Leonidas, closely resembles and impressively impersonates Gerard Butler, “300’s” Leonidas. Speaking of casting, there is something I can’t figure out: Why in the world does Carmen Electra always agree to play in these movies? She’s been in “Meet the Spartans,” “Epic Movie,” “Scary Movie 4,” “Date Movie,” “Scary Movie,” etc. Obviously, she either likes this type of humor or the money’s good.
If you are careful about which PG-13 movies you choose to see, “Meet the Spartans” is probably one you’d opt to skip. It mimics its seedy inspiration, “300,” and is filled with crass, vulgar, gross-out humor. If you still choose to see this movie, halfway through the end credits there’s additional footage, including more attempts at a comical portrayal of child abuse, in case the first round wasn’t funny enough for you. (I will admit that this is an example of “Spartans” trying to mock a peculiarity of “300,” but child abuse is like cancer: It’s never funny.)
My filmmaker friend, Barrett Hilton, has told me in the past that I’m too hard on the movies I hate. After all, this is somebody’s art I’m writing about. I’ve considered his critique of the critic carefully. Then, last year gave us a great character that added to Barrett’s sentiments named Anton Ego, a ferocious food critic who writes the following thought in “Ratatouille”:
“In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read, but the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.”
Well, I was touched by this until I saw “Meet the Spartans.” I’m convinced that even if I typed a whole review of binary code (which, in fact, I have), it would still be more meaningful, funnier and more entertaining than “Meet the Spartans.”
(Oh, and legendary film critic Stanley Kauffmann’s movie reviews are more meaningful than most movies.)
Directed by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer
Sean Maguire / Carmen Electra / Ken Davitian
Comedy 84 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for crude and sexual content throughout, language and some comic violence)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 226
Monday, January 28, 2008
Untraceable (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 28, 2008
In 1978, the first of a series of shocking horror films called “Faces of Death” was released. This documentary (and its successors) claims to be a compilation of various footage that captures actual deaths, which is sometimes gruesome. It turns out that much of the “Faces of Death” footage is artificial.
But what “Faces of Death” threatened to deliver then is nearly commonplace now and easily found on the Internet. Saddam Hussein’s hanging was captured on a cell phone video and available for the world to see online. In fact, viewing live executions has become disturbingly popular.
Sensitive readers (like my wife) should skip over this lengthy, juicy paragraph and continue reading at the next: Let’s not forget the darkest form of filmmaking, snuff films, which are underground and obviously illegal movies that supposedly record actual violence, rapes and murders. (The movies “8MM” (1999) and “Vacancy” (2007) are about snuff filmmaking.) During my sophomore year of college, I happened into a dorm room full of guys watching something that I believe was an authentic snuff film: On this video I saw some dude hanging upside down by a chain while a group of deranged maniacs peeled his skin off in strips. It could have been some twisted Nine Inch Nails promotion, as their music was supplied for the soundtrack, but only Jeff “Time-deat” C. could tell me for sure (and I wish he would inform us on the comments page). My untrained eye was pretty sure it was real, so I left the room appalled and sickened. (Oh, and Jeff, by the way, it was my mom who ratted on you for having that pet snake in the dorms, unbeknownst to me at the time. Sorry.)
Anyway, all of this lengthy prelude is to introduce the potential validity for the premise of “Untraceable.” Sure, this movie has aspects that require a little suspension of disbelief; but overall, “Untraceable” is a fairly intelligent, modern thriller that would not disappoint as a rental choice for your spooky movie night.
Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane) works for the Cybercrime Division of the FBI. Hers is the duty to scour for scumbags on the Internet who are breaking the law, typically through fraud, thievery and sexual crimes. But when Marsh gets a tip to check out “Kill With Me.com,” she discovers that the URL offers a literal invitation. (By the way, to preempt your curiosity, I checked www.killwithme.com and found an amusing surprise. Check it out after you’ve seen the movie.)
Yes, in “Untraceable,” some nutcase is capturing and restraining victims in his or her basement, setting up live, streaming video of the sufferer’s fatal afflictions. And the more people who visit the site, the faster the killer’s lethal contraptions kill the victims. The means by which death is administered varies but is always diabolical and creative.
I know, I know … couldn’t the FBI easily zero in on the location of the killer or simply shut down the site? Yes, but not in this movie. This killer is exceptionally intelligent, not to mention tech-savvy, and lots of “techy-speak” is thrown around to try to quell the concerns of astute critics, such as yourself, who pose legitimate gripes such as these. But just go with it.
“Untraceable” was made in the capable hands of Gregory Hoblit, the man who gave us “Frequency” (2000), one of the best films that year. In Hoblit’s new film we get nice touches like an overcast, gray world, which is ominous and unpleasant. And at the same time, our protagonist passes a traffic accident (totally unrelated to the story) where a body lies motionless. These details stir uneasiness within us, evidence of a good thriller.
Part of the fun of a Whodunit or a “Who’s doin’ it” is trying to figure out the identity of the killer. “Se7en” (1995), a must-see crime thriller, waits for most of the film to reveal the recognizable actor who plays the killer. Whereas, “Insomnia” (2002), another great crime flick, necessarily reveals its killer’s famous face about halfway into the movie. Both of these approaches are effective. But “Untraceable” doesn’t tease our curiosity enough with the Whodunit question. Even so, the reasons why the killer is committing such heinous acts are pretty good, which is a rarity for this genre.
Oh, here’s a little challenge for those who see this movie: Unless I totally missed something obvious (which is possible), there are two characters who aren’t where they’re supposed to be and seem to essentially vanish. This question, though small, is never answered, at least, not that I noticed. If you caught what happened to these two characters (the two who were in the empty room where the lamp is tipped over), then please submit a comment on this blog.
I like “Untraceable” because it is somewhat original: Web site visitors aren’t fans but accomplices assisting in murder. Interesting. The killer may have unrealistic, elaborate plans, unbelievable luck, remarkable financial means and too much extra time, but it’s still intriguing, all the same. And I also appreciate how “Untraceable” is deranged without going overboard into the depths of unwatchable grotesqueries.
“Untraceable” seems to point its mouse finger at origins such as reality TV, a craze that is possibly mutating into our watching live executions online. We might wonder why anybody would want to watch that. But then again, why would anybody want to watch horror films?
Regardless of whether the killing is real or unreal, we are still entertaining ourselves with the portrayal of violence and murder. Perhaps we just like the thrill of viewing as a mere proxy, safe and secure, while asking ourselves the “what if?” question: What if that were me? What would I do in that predicament? Or, perhaps we’re just glad it’s not us hanging upside down from a chain at a Nine Inch Nails party.
Directed by Gregory Hoblit
Diane Lane / Billy Burke / Colin Hanks
Thriller / Crime 100 min.
MPAA: R (for grisly violence and torture, and some language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 225
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 28, 2008
In 1978, the first of a series of shocking horror films called “Faces of Death” was released. This documentary (and its successors) claims to be a compilation of various footage that captures actual deaths, which is sometimes gruesome. It turns out that much of the “Faces of Death” footage is artificial.
But what “Faces of Death” threatened to deliver then is nearly commonplace now and easily found on the Internet. Saddam Hussein’s hanging was captured on a cell phone video and available for the world to see online. In fact, viewing live executions has become disturbingly popular.
Sensitive readers (like my wife) should skip over this lengthy, juicy paragraph and continue reading at the next: Let’s not forget the darkest form of filmmaking, snuff films, which are underground and obviously illegal movies that supposedly record actual violence, rapes and murders. (The movies “8MM” (1999) and “Vacancy” (2007) are about snuff filmmaking.) During my sophomore year of college, I happened into a dorm room full of guys watching something that I believe was an authentic snuff film: On this video I saw some dude hanging upside down by a chain while a group of deranged maniacs peeled his skin off in strips. It could have been some twisted Nine Inch Nails promotion, as their music was supplied for the soundtrack, but only Jeff “Time-deat” C. could tell me for sure (and I wish he would inform us on the comments page). My untrained eye was pretty sure it was real, so I left the room appalled and sickened. (Oh, and Jeff, by the way, it was my mom who ratted on you for having that pet snake in the dorms, unbeknownst to me at the time. Sorry.)
Anyway, all of this lengthy prelude is to introduce the potential validity for the premise of “Untraceable.” Sure, this movie has aspects that require a little suspension of disbelief; but overall, “Untraceable” is a fairly intelligent, modern thriller that would not disappoint as a rental choice for your spooky movie night.
Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane) works for the Cybercrime Division of the FBI. Hers is the duty to scour for scumbags on the Internet who are breaking the law, typically through fraud, thievery and sexual crimes. But when Marsh gets a tip to check out “Kill With Me.com,” she discovers that the URL offers a literal invitation. (By the way, to preempt your curiosity, I checked www.killwithme.com and found an amusing surprise. Check it out after you’ve seen the movie.)
Yes, in “Untraceable,” some nutcase is capturing and restraining victims in his or her basement, setting up live, streaming video of the sufferer’s fatal afflictions. And the more people who visit the site, the faster the killer’s lethal contraptions kill the victims. The means by which death is administered varies but is always diabolical and creative.
I know, I know … couldn’t the FBI easily zero in on the location of the killer or simply shut down the site? Yes, but not in this movie. This killer is exceptionally intelligent, not to mention tech-savvy, and lots of “techy-speak” is thrown around to try to quell the concerns of astute critics, such as yourself, who pose legitimate gripes such as these. But just go with it.
“Untraceable” was made in the capable hands of Gregory Hoblit, the man who gave us “Frequency” (2000), one of the best films that year. In Hoblit’s new film we get nice touches like an overcast, gray world, which is ominous and unpleasant. And at the same time, our protagonist passes a traffic accident (totally unrelated to the story) where a body lies motionless. These details stir uneasiness within us, evidence of a good thriller.
Part of the fun of a Whodunit or a “Who’s doin’ it” is trying to figure out the identity of the killer. “Se7en” (1995), a must-see crime thriller, waits for most of the film to reveal the recognizable actor who plays the killer. Whereas, “Insomnia” (2002), another great crime flick, necessarily reveals its killer’s famous face about halfway into the movie. Both of these approaches are effective. But “Untraceable” doesn’t tease our curiosity enough with the Whodunit question. Even so, the reasons why the killer is committing such heinous acts are pretty good, which is a rarity for this genre.
Oh, here’s a little challenge for those who see this movie: Unless I totally missed something obvious (which is possible), there are two characters who aren’t where they’re supposed to be and seem to essentially vanish. This question, though small, is never answered, at least, not that I noticed. If you caught what happened to these two characters (the two who were in the empty room where the lamp is tipped over), then please submit a comment on this blog.
I like “Untraceable” because it is somewhat original: Web site visitors aren’t fans but accomplices assisting in murder. Interesting. The killer may have unrealistic, elaborate plans, unbelievable luck, remarkable financial means and too much extra time, but it’s still intriguing, all the same. And I also appreciate how “Untraceable” is deranged without going overboard into the depths of unwatchable grotesqueries.
“Untraceable” seems to point its mouse finger at origins such as reality TV, a craze that is possibly mutating into our watching live executions online. We might wonder why anybody would want to watch that. But then again, why would anybody want to watch horror films?
Regardless of whether the killing is real or unreal, we are still entertaining ourselves with the portrayal of violence and murder. Perhaps we just like the thrill of viewing as a mere proxy, safe and secure, while asking ourselves the “what if?” question: What if that were me? What would I do in that predicament? Or, perhaps we’re just glad it’s not us hanging upside down from a chain at a Nine Inch Nails party.
Directed by Gregory Hoblit
Diane Lane / Billy Burke / Colin Hanks
Thriller / Crime 100 min.
MPAA: R (for grisly violence and torture, and some language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 225
Friday, January 25, 2008
Rambo (2008)
O Masterpiece
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 25, 2008
Hollywood loves trends. It simply can’t help itself. The newest trend of marketability, which really isn’t new but is both weird and amusing, is revisiting old ‘80s action stars in a reprisal of their roles from 20 years earlier: A 52-year-old Bruce Willis returned as that resilient cop, John McClane, in last year’s “Live Free or Die Hard.” On May 22 of this year we’ll get to see a 65-year-old Harrison Ford pick up his whip and return as Indiana Jones. 2006 gave us Sylvester Stallone in yet another installment of “Rocky” at the ripe, old age of 61.
And now he’s back as Rambo. The children of the ‘80s have been smiled upon again. And really, 50s and 60s aren’t all that old, but these age ranges seem to be pushing it for the action genre. SAG comes to mean more than just Screen Actors Guild.
Unlike “Rocky Balboa,” “Rambo” is excellent if we judge it according to its dual purpose: Naturally, people want to go see “Rambo” because they want to see John Rambo shoot-up and blow-up everything and everybody that disgruntles him. Check. And in David Letterman’s interview with the film’s writer and director, Sylvester Stallone, he said he intentionally wanted it to be this violent and graphic to raise awareness of the atrocities occurring in Burma. Check. “Rambo” achieves what it set out to do, ergo, it’s excellent because it does these two things effectively.
But the film will have its critics. Because it rivals the explicit, graphic depictions of war found in “Saving Private Ryan” (1998), there will be those who call it “over-the-top” (which is funny when describing Sly Stallone movies), gratuitous and excessive in its body count. Perhaps, but the same things could also be said of war, in general.
John Rambo lives in present-day Thailand where he captures cobras and other dangerous snakes for the Maesa Snake Village, a touristy place that has daily shows where villagers with catlike reflexes slap around cobras and try not to get bitten.
But Rambo’s quiet existence is interrupted by a do-gooder church group that wishes to take medical supplies upriver to the suffering people in Burma, a dangerous place where genocide and “the longest running civil war in the world” is taking place. After flatly refusing too many times for a sensible screenplay, Rambo is persuaded to be their boat-man-river-guide by Sarah (Julie Benz), a naïve, all-about-causes gal that seems to have some sway over him. So, Rambo takes them up the dangerous river. And that’s all I will describe of the plot, since the previews were reasonable about not revealing too much, for once.
What you really need to know about “Rambo” is that it is brutal, graphic, ferocious and upsetting. The MPPA rating describes the type of content; but in reality, the horrific tragedies depicted in this movie are indescribable. Unfortunately, I’m typically not very sensitive about violence, but there were moments when even I felt overwhelmed by it. Be warned. “Rambo” is more than just an action film; it seems to me to be a document of war.
If such things are truly happening in our world today, a cobra swatter’s life is comparatively as cushy as an ice cream taste tester’s … or a movie critic’s.
Directed by Sylvester Stallone
Sylvester Stallone / Julie Benz / Matthew Marsden
War / Action 93 min.
MPAA: R (for strong graphic bloody violence, sexual assaults, grisly images and language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 224
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 25, 2008
Hollywood loves trends. It simply can’t help itself. The newest trend of marketability, which really isn’t new but is both weird and amusing, is revisiting old ‘80s action stars in a reprisal of their roles from 20 years earlier: A 52-year-old Bruce Willis returned as that resilient cop, John McClane, in last year’s “Live Free or Die Hard.” On May 22 of this year we’ll get to see a 65-year-old Harrison Ford pick up his whip and return as Indiana Jones. 2006 gave us Sylvester Stallone in yet another installment of “Rocky” at the ripe, old age of 61.
And now he’s back as Rambo. The children of the ‘80s have been smiled upon again. And really, 50s and 60s aren’t all that old, but these age ranges seem to be pushing it for the action genre. SAG comes to mean more than just Screen Actors Guild.
Unlike “Rocky Balboa,” “Rambo” is excellent if we judge it according to its dual purpose: Naturally, people want to go see “Rambo” because they want to see John Rambo shoot-up and blow-up everything and everybody that disgruntles him. Check. And in David Letterman’s interview with the film’s writer and director, Sylvester Stallone, he said he intentionally wanted it to be this violent and graphic to raise awareness of the atrocities occurring in Burma. Check. “Rambo” achieves what it set out to do, ergo, it’s excellent because it does these two things effectively.
But the film will have its critics. Because it rivals the explicit, graphic depictions of war found in “Saving Private Ryan” (1998), there will be those who call it “over-the-top” (which is funny when describing Sly Stallone movies), gratuitous and excessive in its body count. Perhaps, but the same things could also be said of war, in general.
John Rambo lives in present-day Thailand where he captures cobras and other dangerous snakes for the Maesa Snake Village, a touristy place that has daily shows where villagers with catlike reflexes slap around cobras and try not to get bitten.
But Rambo’s quiet existence is interrupted by a do-gooder church group that wishes to take medical supplies upriver to the suffering people in Burma, a dangerous place where genocide and “the longest running civil war in the world” is taking place. After flatly refusing too many times for a sensible screenplay, Rambo is persuaded to be their boat-man-river-guide by Sarah (Julie Benz), a naïve, all-about-causes gal that seems to have some sway over him. So, Rambo takes them up the dangerous river. And that’s all I will describe of the plot, since the previews were reasonable about not revealing too much, for once.
What you really need to know about “Rambo” is that it is brutal, graphic, ferocious and upsetting. The MPPA rating describes the type of content; but in reality, the horrific tragedies depicted in this movie are indescribable. Unfortunately, I’m typically not very sensitive about violence, but there were moments when even I felt overwhelmed by it. Be warned. “Rambo” is more than just an action film; it seems to me to be a document of war.
If such things are truly happening in our world today, a cobra swatter’s life is comparatively as cushy as an ice cream taste tester’s … or a movie critic’s.
Directed by Sylvester Stallone
Sylvester Stallone / Julie Benz / Matthew Marsden
War / Action 93 min.
MPAA: R (for strong graphic bloody violence, sexual assaults, grisly images and language)
U.S. Release Date: January 25, 2008
Copyright 2008: 224
First Sunday (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
X Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 25, 2008
I think I know how the filmmakers of “First Sunday” must feel. I have two CDs that I’ve produced of my own original music that will fade from the memory of the rest of the world, but they will always be special to me. Similarly, “First Sunday” is a textbook example of a movie that will quickly be forgotten forever … and probably should be.
Durell Washington (Ice Cube) struggles to live in inner-city Baltimore, where he’s separated from his wife, Omunique (Regina Hall) but still very much attached to his son. When Omunique threatens to move to Atlanta with his boy, Durell needs to find $17,342 to get her to stay. Why that much? It’s not really important; let’s just get through this.
Tracy Morgan (“30 Rock”) plays Durell’s pal, LeeJohn, a man who needs money to repay $12,000 to some rough customers. Again, there’s a reason for that specified amount that has to do with pimped-out wheelchairs, but it doesn’t matter. In order to free themselves from their financial woes, the pair plans to rob the First Hope Church, a charismatic congregation that’s been blessed with highly lucrative fundraising results.
“First Sunday” is an African-American comedy, and it is one that employs stupidity humor. What is stupidity humor? It’s humor where the characters overact and exhibit impossible displays of stupidity. Or, stupidity humor is humor where stupidity is a prerequisite for laughter. But if you looked it up in the dictionary, it would simply read “Larry the Cable Guy humor.” (I’m sorry, but when it comes to Larry the Cable Guy, I find dead puppies funnier.)
Ice Cube plays the straight man, and Tracy Morgan is supposed to be the funny one. But if I had to pinpoint a bright spot in this movie, it would be Katt Williams’ performance as Rickey, the church choir director. Williams steals the show from Morgan, and pretty much everyone else.
“First Sunday” is edited like a movie trailer, takes too long to get where it’s going, slows down too much in the middle, and tries to turn from silly to sentimental, which just doesn’t work. In short, “First Sunday” makes a mockery of churches, courtrooms and old, has-been rappers. At least it probably won’t be the worst movie of the year … there’s an upcoming Larry the Cable Guy movie whose movie trailer takes the phrase “trailer trash” to a whole new level.
Directed by David E. Talbert
Ice Cube / Tracy Morgan / Katt Williams
Comedy 98 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, some sexual humor, and brief drug references)
U.S. Release Date: January 11, 2008
Copyright 2008: 223
O Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
X Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 25, 2008
I think I know how the filmmakers of “First Sunday” must feel. I have two CDs that I’ve produced of my own original music that will fade from the memory of the rest of the world, but they will always be special to me. Similarly, “First Sunday” is a textbook example of a movie that will quickly be forgotten forever … and probably should be.
Durell Washington (Ice Cube) struggles to live in inner-city Baltimore, where he’s separated from his wife, Omunique (Regina Hall) but still very much attached to his son. When Omunique threatens to move to Atlanta with his boy, Durell needs to find $17,342 to get her to stay. Why that much? It’s not really important; let’s just get through this.
Tracy Morgan (“30 Rock”) plays Durell’s pal, LeeJohn, a man who needs money to repay $12,000 to some rough customers. Again, there’s a reason for that specified amount that has to do with pimped-out wheelchairs, but it doesn’t matter. In order to free themselves from their financial woes, the pair plans to rob the First Hope Church, a charismatic congregation that’s been blessed with highly lucrative fundraising results.
“First Sunday” is an African-American comedy, and it is one that employs stupidity humor. What is stupidity humor? It’s humor where the characters overact and exhibit impossible displays of stupidity. Or, stupidity humor is humor where stupidity is a prerequisite for laughter. But if you looked it up in the dictionary, it would simply read “Larry the Cable Guy humor.” (I’m sorry, but when it comes to Larry the Cable Guy, I find dead puppies funnier.)
Ice Cube plays the straight man, and Tracy Morgan is supposed to be the funny one. But if I had to pinpoint a bright spot in this movie, it would be Katt Williams’ performance as Rickey, the church choir director. Williams steals the show from Morgan, and pretty much everyone else.
“First Sunday” is edited like a movie trailer, takes too long to get where it’s going, slows down too much in the middle, and tries to turn from silly to sentimental, which just doesn’t work. In short, “First Sunday” makes a mockery of churches, courtrooms and old, has-been rappers. At least it probably won’t be the worst movie of the year … there’s an upcoming Larry the Cable Guy movie whose movie trailer takes the phrase “trailer trash” to a whole new level.
Directed by David E. Talbert
Ice Cube / Tracy Morgan / Katt Williams
Comedy 98 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, some sexual humor, and brief drug references)
U.S. Release Date: January 11, 2008
Copyright 2008: 223
Thursday, January 24, 2008
27 Dresses (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 24, 2008
Always a bridesmaid, never a bride … That’s the premise for “27 Dresses,” a romantic comedy that is what I call a “Frankenstein film.” Not because it’s about Frankenstein, but because it’s an unmistakable assembly of borrowed parts from “Runaway Bride” (1999), “My Best Friend’s Wedding” (1997), “The Wedding Planner” (2001) and “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days” (2003). If you liked those, you’ll like this.
Jane (Katherine Heigl) loves weddings, and always has since 1986 when she found her true purpose: helping someone on the most important day of her life. Accordingly, over the years Jane has contributed wonderfully as a bridesmaid in her many friends’ wedding parties, willingly wearing hideous dresses without complaint.
But her own big day eludes her still. The man she’d love to marry is also her boss, George (Edward Burns), but he is oblivious to her affections. When Jane’s little sister, Tess (Malin Akerman), comes to town, George takes notice and wedding bells quickly start ringing, much to Jane’s chagrin.
The perpetual bridesmaid faces another wedding, but this time Jane has to watch her little sister marry the man she loves. Meanwhile, a wily writer for the New York Journal named Kevin (James Marsden, in his most entertaining role) fancies Jane and begins to pursue her, adding further complications.
Honestly, “27 Dresses” is just another romantic comedy, which means it faithfully and predictably follows all the usual conventions and expectations. But “27 Dresses” is better than many other such comedies and is a worthy rental for date night or girls’ night. It’s no “Hitch” or “Fever Pitch” (two great romantic comedies from 2005), but it’s close.
There were, however, two notable elements that made “27 Dresses” stand out to me: Katherine Heigl’s character uses the word “books” in the ‘80s sense, which refers to speed or velocity. And this movie has an endearing musical scene involving Elton John’s song, “Bennie and the Jets,” which is just about unforgettable and worth the price of renting it.
Directed by Anne Fletcher
Katherine Heigl / James Marsden / Malin Akerman
Comedy / Romance 107 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, some innuendo and sexuality)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 223
O Excellent
X Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 24, 2008
Always a bridesmaid, never a bride … That’s the premise for “27 Dresses,” a romantic comedy that is what I call a “Frankenstein film.” Not because it’s about Frankenstein, but because it’s an unmistakable assembly of borrowed parts from “Runaway Bride” (1999), “My Best Friend’s Wedding” (1997), “The Wedding Planner” (2001) and “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days” (2003). If you liked those, you’ll like this.
Jane (Katherine Heigl) loves weddings, and always has since 1986 when she found her true purpose: helping someone on the most important day of her life. Accordingly, over the years Jane has contributed wonderfully as a bridesmaid in her many friends’ wedding parties, willingly wearing hideous dresses without complaint.
But her own big day eludes her still. The man she’d love to marry is also her boss, George (Edward Burns), but he is oblivious to her affections. When Jane’s little sister, Tess (Malin Akerman), comes to town, George takes notice and wedding bells quickly start ringing, much to Jane’s chagrin.
The perpetual bridesmaid faces another wedding, but this time Jane has to watch her little sister marry the man she loves. Meanwhile, a wily writer for the New York Journal named Kevin (James Marsden, in his most entertaining role) fancies Jane and begins to pursue her, adding further complications.
Honestly, “27 Dresses” is just another romantic comedy, which means it faithfully and predictably follows all the usual conventions and expectations. But “27 Dresses” is better than many other such comedies and is a worthy rental for date night or girls’ night. It’s no “Hitch” or “Fever Pitch” (two great romantic comedies from 2005), but it’s close.
There were, however, two notable elements that made “27 Dresses” stand out to me: Katherine Heigl’s character uses the word “books” in the ‘80s sense, which refers to speed or velocity. And this movie has an endearing musical scene involving Elton John’s song, “Bennie and the Jets,” which is just about unforgettable and worth the price of renting it.
Directed by Anne Fletcher
Katherine Heigl / James Marsden / Malin Akerman
Comedy / Romance 107 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, some innuendo and sexuality)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 223
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
The Nominees for the 80th Annual Academy Awards
2007 was a pretty good year for cinema. Accordingly, this morning 24 categories of celebrated nominees among last year’s movies were announced to compete for Academy Awards for outstanding film achievements. These are listed below.
The Academy Awards will be presented on Sunday, February 24, 2008, at the Kodak Theatre. This information was gathered from www.oscars.org
Note: “Academy Awards” and “Oscars” are copyrighted and belong to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. That being stated, I hope they don’t sue me for using those terms on this blog.
1. Best motion picture of the year:
“Atonement”
“Juno”
“Michael Clayton”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
2. Achievement in directing:
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“Juno”
“Michael Clayton”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
3. Performance by an actress in a leading role:
Cate Blanchett in “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”
Julie Christie in “Away From Her”
Marion Cotillard in “La Vie en Rose”
Laura Linney in “The Savages”
Ellen Page in “Juno”
4. Performance by an actor in a leading role:
George Clooney in “Michael Clayton”
Daniel Day-Lewis in “There Will Be Blood”
Johnny Depp in “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
Tommy Lee Jones in “In the Valley of Elah”
Viggo Mortensen in “Eastern Promises”
5. Performance by an actress in a supporting role:
Cate Blanchett in “I’m Not There”
Ruby Dee in “American Gangster”
Saoirse Ronan in “Atonement”
Amy Ryan in “Gone Baby Gone”
Tilda Swinton in “Michael Clayton”
6. Performance by an actor in a supporting role:
Casey Affleck in “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”
Javier Bardem in “No Country for Old Men”
Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Charlie Wilson’s War”
Hal Holbrook in “Into the Wild”
Tom Wilkinson in “Michael Clayton”
7. Adapted screenplay:
“Atonement”
“Away From Her”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
8. Original screenplay:
“Juno”
“Lars and the Real Girl”
“Michael Clayton”
“Ratatouille”
“The Savages”
9. Best documentary feature:
“No End in Sight”
“Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience”
“Sicko”
“Taxi to the Dark Side”
“War/Dance”
10. Best documentary short subject:
“Freeheld”
“La Corona (The Crown)”
“Salim Baba”
“Sari’s Mother”
11. Best foreign language film of the year:
“Beaufort” (Israel)
“The Counterfeiters” (Austria)
“Katyn” (Poland)
“Mongol” (Kazakhstan)
“12” (Russia)
12. Best animated feature film of the year:
“Persepolis”
“Ratatouille”
“Surf’s Up”
13. Best animated short film:
“I Met the Walrus”
“Madame Tutli-Putli”
“Meme Les Pigeons Vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go to Heaven)
“My Love (Moya Lyubov)”
“Peter & the Wolf”
14. Best live action short film:
“At Night”
“Il Supplente (The Substitute)”
“Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets)”
“Tanghi Argentini”
“The Tonto Woman”
15. Achievement in cinematography:
“The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”
“Atonement”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
16. Achievement in visual effects:
“The Golden Compass”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”
“Transformers”
17. Achievement in film editing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“Into the Wild”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
18. Achievement in sound editing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“No Country for Old Men”
“Ratatouille”
“There Will Be Blood”
“Transformers”
19. Achievement in sound mixing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“No Country for Old Men”
“Ratatouille”
“3:10 to Yuma”
“Transformers”
20. Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score):
“Atonement”
“The Kite Runner”
“Michael Clayton”
“Ratatouille”
“3:10 to Yuma”
21. Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original song):
“Falling Slowly” from “Once”
“Happy Working Song” from “Enchanted”
“Raise It Up” from “August Rush”
“So Close” from “Enchanted”
“That’s How You Know” from “Enchanted”
22. Achievement in art direction:
“American Gangster”
“Atonement”
“The Golden Compass”
“Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
“There Will Be Blood”
23. Achievement in costume design:
“Across the Universe”
“Atonement”
“Elizabeth: The Golden Age”
“La Vie en Rose”
“Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
24. Achievement in makeup:
“La Vie en Rose”
“Norbit”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”
The Academy Awards will be presented on Sunday, February 24, 2008, at the Kodak Theatre. This information was gathered from www.oscars.org
Note: “Academy Awards” and “Oscars” are copyrighted and belong to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. That being stated, I hope they don’t sue me for using those terms on this blog.
1. Best motion picture of the year:
“Atonement”
“Juno”
“Michael Clayton”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
2. Achievement in directing:
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“Juno”
“Michael Clayton”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
3. Performance by an actress in a leading role:
Cate Blanchett in “Elizabeth: The Golden Age”
Julie Christie in “Away From Her”
Marion Cotillard in “La Vie en Rose”
Laura Linney in “The Savages”
Ellen Page in “Juno”
4. Performance by an actor in a leading role:
George Clooney in “Michael Clayton”
Daniel Day-Lewis in “There Will Be Blood”
Johnny Depp in “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
Tommy Lee Jones in “In the Valley of Elah”
Viggo Mortensen in “Eastern Promises”
5. Performance by an actress in a supporting role:
Cate Blanchett in “I’m Not There”
Ruby Dee in “American Gangster”
Saoirse Ronan in “Atonement”
Amy Ryan in “Gone Baby Gone”
Tilda Swinton in “Michael Clayton”
6. Performance by an actor in a supporting role:
Casey Affleck in “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”
Javier Bardem in “No Country for Old Men”
Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Charlie Wilson’s War”
Hal Holbrook in “Into the Wild”
Tom Wilkinson in “Michael Clayton”
7. Adapted screenplay:
“Atonement”
“Away From Her”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
8. Original screenplay:
“Juno”
“Lars and the Real Girl”
“Michael Clayton”
“Ratatouille”
“The Savages”
9. Best documentary feature:
“No End in Sight”
“Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience”
“Sicko”
“Taxi to the Dark Side”
“War/Dance”
10. Best documentary short subject:
“Freeheld”
“La Corona (The Crown)”
“Salim Baba”
“Sari’s Mother”
11. Best foreign language film of the year:
“Beaufort” (Israel)
“The Counterfeiters” (Austria)
“Katyn” (Poland)
“Mongol” (Kazakhstan)
“12” (Russia)
12. Best animated feature film of the year:
“Persepolis”
“Ratatouille”
“Surf’s Up”
13. Best animated short film:
“I Met the Walrus”
“Madame Tutli-Putli”
“Meme Les Pigeons Vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go to Heaven)
“My Love (Moya Lyubov)”
“Peter & the Wolf”
14. Best live action short film:
“At Night”
“Il Supplente (The Substitute)”
“Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets)”
“Tanghi Argentini”
“The Tonto Woman”
15. Achievement in cinematography:
“The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”
“Atonement”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
16. Achievement in visual effects:
“The Golden Compass”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”
“Transformers”
17. Achievement in film editing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”
“Into the Wild”
“No Country for Old Men”
“There Will Be Blood”
18. Achievement in sound editing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“No Country for Old Men”
“Ratatouille”
“There Will Be Blood”
“Transformers”
19. Achievement in sound mixing:
“The Bourne Ultimatum”
“No Country for Old Men”
“Ratatouille”
“3:10 to Yuma”
“Transformers”
20. Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original score):
“Atonement”
“The Kite Runner”
“Michael Clayton”
“Ratatouille”
“3:10 to Yuma”
21. Achievement in music written for motion pictures (Original song):
“Falling Slowly” from “Once”
“Happy Working Song” from “Enchanted”
“Raise It Up” from “August Rush”
“So Close” from “Enchanted”
“That’s How You Know” from “Enchanted”
22. Achievement in art direction:
“American Gangster”
“Atonement”
“The Golden Compass”
“Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
“There Will Be Blood”
23. Achievement in costume design:
“Across the Universe”
“Atonement”
“Elizabeth: The Golden Age”
“La Vie en Rose”
“Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”
24. Achievement in makeup:
“La Vie en Rose”
“Norbit”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End”
The Bucket List (2008)
O Masterpiece
O Excellent
O Rental
X OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 22, 2008
Recently, I saw my favorite commercial of all time … yes, all time. It depicts an old man in a nursing home. One of the caretakers offers him a Coca-Cola, which he decides to try for the first time in his life. Upon tasting the beverage, he is evidently delighted. Then he says something like, “Wonder what else I haven’t tried?” Next we see a montage of the old man engaging in all kinds of thrill-seeking activities, having the time of his life. Never has a commercial made me so happy; it even brings tears.
“The Bucket List,” which is essentially the same idea, runs 97 minutes and fails to pack the punch that the 60-second Coke commercial has. What went wrong?
Jack Nicholson plays Edward Cole, an obscenely rich hospital owner who learns he has cancer. Morgan Freeman is Carter Chambers, a trivia savvy mechanic and family man who also has cancer. The two meet as hospital roommates and become fast friends. During their stay, the two make a list of everything they’d like to accomplish before they “kick the bucket,” hence the name; and they set out to achieve their goals together.
These quests give us Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman engaging in daredevil and rebellious-teenager acts, as well as traveling around the globe, seeing some of the world’s most famous places and waxing philosophical about the frailty and time restraints of mortality.
But “The Bucket List” goes wrong in three ways: First, we don’t really believe that Carter, the family man, would spend precious remaining days doing these things with a guy he just met, instead of his loved ones. And Edward isn’t the kind of character that would commit himself to such a friendship; he’s crusty, crotchety and self-absorbed.
Second, many of the things they choose to do are rather cliché: sky diving. How much better it could have been if the entire list were quirky, creative ideas, instead of Tim McGraw’s “Live Like You Were Dying” lyrics.
And third, even though we don’t love these characters, we like them well enough, especially Carter. Yet, the somber overtones fill the movie with dread because these two are suffering and dying with cancer, and we (and they) remember that the entire time, but especially during the first, weighty 20 minutes.
Even so, a couple moments in “The Bucket List” ring true, specifically two remarkable scenes (that I won’t describe) which illustrate how the simplest things in life are the most precious, by far outweighing any extravagant experience that money can buy.
“The Bucket List” is somewhat touching, but not as touching as you’re hoping. Indeed, it’s more of a downer. I wouldn’t pay theater dollars to see it; and I barely recommend it as a rental. “The Bucket List” is just OK, especially when compared to Coke commercials.
Directed by Rob Reiner
Jack Nicholson / Morgan Freeman / Sean Hayes
Comedy / Drama 97 min
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, including a sexual reference)
U.S. Release Date: January 11 , 2008
Copyright 2008: 221
O Excellent
O Rental
X OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 22, 2008
Recently, I saw my favorite commercial of all time … yes, all time. It depicts an old man in a nursing home. One of the caretakers offers him a Coca-Cola, which he decides to try for the first time in his life. Upon tasting the beverage, he is evidently delighted. Then he says something like, “Wonder what else I haven’t tried?” Next we see a montage of the old man engaging in all kinds of thrill-seeking activities, having the time of his life. Never has a commercial made me so happy; it even brings tears.
“The Bucket List,” which is essentially the same idea, runs 97 minutes and fails to pack the punch that the 60-second Coke commercial has. What went wrong?
Jack Nicholson plays Edward Cole, an obscenely rich hospital owner who learns he has cancer. Morgan Freeman is Carter Chambers, a trivia savvy mechanic and family man who also has cancer. The two meet as hospital roommates and become fast friends. During their stay, the two make a list of everything they’d like to accomplish before they “kick the bucket,” hence the name; and they set out to achieve their goals together.
These quests give us Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman engaging in daredevil and rebellious-teenager acts, as well as traveling around the globe, seeing some of the world’s most famous places and waxing philosophical about the frailty and time restraints of mortality.
But “The Bucket List” goes wrong in three ways: First, we don’t really believe that Carter, the family man, would spend precious remaining days doing these things with a guy he just met, instead of his loved ones. And Edward isn’t the kind of character that would commit himself to such a friendship; he’s crusty, crotchety and self-absorbed.
Second, many of the things they choose to do are rather cliché: sky diving. How much better it could have been if the entire list were quirky, creative ideas, instead of Tim McGraw’s “Live Like You Were Dying” lyrics.
And third, even though we don’t love these characters, we like them well enough, especially Carter. Yet, the somber overtones fill the movie with dread because these two are suffering and dying with cancer, and we (and they) remember that the entire time, but especially during the first, weighty 20 minutes.
Even so, a couple moments in “The Bucket List” ring true, specifically two remarkable scenes (that I won’t describe) which illustrate how the simplest things in life are the most precious, by far outweighing any extravagant experience that money can buy.
“The Bucket List” is somewhat touching, but not as touching as you’re hoping. Indeed, it’s more of a downer. I wouldn’t pay theater dollars to see it; and I barely recommend it as a rental. “The Bucket List” is just OK, especially when compared to Coke commercials.
Directed by Rob Reiner
Jack Nicholson / Morgan Freeman / Sean Hayes
Comedy / Drama 97 min
MPAA: PG-13 (for language, including a sexual reference)
U.S. Release Date: January 11 , 2008
Copyright 2008: 221
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Cloverfield (2008)
O Masterpiece
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 19, 2008
In 1963 a man named Abraham Zapruder unwittingly shot one of the best known film clips in American history, a video document that came to be known as the Zapruder film. Historians and survivors of the ‘60s know that this film captured the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Every documentary filmmaker dreams of being in the right place at the right time and making his or her own Zapruder film. But if an average Joe saw catastrophic events, with the world within his camera lens toppling around him, would he be able to keep the camera rolling to document history in the making? “Cloverfield” asks us to believe that he would.
The cleverness of “Cloverfield” is that the film itself is the footage from a camcorder that films ordinary people experiencing extraordinary events. This is not new, of course, because we’ve seen this done in “The Blair Witch Project” (1999), for instance.
But “Cloverfield” goes farther by breathing energy into tired genres like the monster-attacking-the-city movie and the disaster film. In fact, it even incorporates a spin on the convention where the best day of the protagonist’s life is also the worst, such as we’ve seen in “High Noon” (1952).
“Cloverfield” opens by showing us that we’re about to watch a film that is now government property, evidence. The video has footage from two dates: a casual day of fun between two lovers and a surprise going-away party that is interrupted by a monster’s attack on New York City. The former footage is mostly recorded over by the latter.
Sadly, most people won’t appreciate “Cloverfield.” The reactions I heard in the theater, along with those posted on the IMDb.com support my suspicion. There will be two primary complaints: Naysayers will claim that the film doesn’t have enough closure. (But let’s remember that “Cloverfield” was produced by J.J. Abrams, and any fans of the TV show “LOST” know that he loves to pose more questions than he answers.) And second, the entire movie is filmed with a shaky, handheld camera, which may affect those who are sensitive to motion sickness.
But “Cloverfield” isn’t about answering questions or comfortable cinematography; it’s about experiencing this disaster first-hand for yourself. Through the camera’s subjective point of view, we feel as though we’re running for our lives, along with everyone else.
The cast doesn’t have readily recognizable, big-name actors. This adds to the realism of following one random group of New Yorkers through the terror. And the dialogue isn’t overly clever or witty, but in a film like this, repetitive dialogue and abundant screaming enhance its believability. And one great thing about our identifying with the camera is that our usual “audience omniscience” is eliminated. We encounter developments when the characters do.
And don’t worry, you’ll actually get to see the monster, and it’s a decent-looking creature whose tendency to rampage is the fiercest I’ve seen when compared to the likes of King Kong or Godzilla.
Much controversy has erupted over the promotional posters which show a headless Statue of Liberty. People have complained that the filmmakers are using Sept. 11 to promote their movie. But New York and L.A. getting leveled has been happening in the cinema for decades.
Granted, it is hard to forget about Sept. 11 while watching New York City take a thrashing, but the military seems to be just as destructive as the monster. It made me wonder if this movie is meant to be a metaphor for the Iraq War: a monster that even our mighty military can’t stop. I can’t say for sure, but I bet if the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan carried a handheld camera with them during battle, they’d have a film even scarier than “Cloverfield.” Last year’s poignant “In the Valley of Elah” demonstrates this convincingly.
Directed by Matt Reeves
Michael Stahl-David / T.J. Miller / Jessica Lucas
Thriller 90 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for violence, terror and disturbing images)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 220
X Excellent
O Rental
O OK
O Mediocrity
O Avoid
Review by Jason Pyles / January 19, 2008
In 1963 a man named Abraham Zapruder unwittingly shot one of the best known film clips in American history, a video document that came to be known as the Zapruder film. Historians and survivors of the ‘60s know that this film captured the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Every documentary filmmaker dreams of being in the right place at the right time and making his or her own Zapruder film. But if an average Joe saw catastrophic events, with the world within his camera lens toppling around him, would he be able to keep the camera rolling to document history in the making? “Cloverfield” asks us to believe that he would.
The cleverness of “Cloverfield” is that the film itself is the footage from a camcorder that films ordinary people experiencing extraordinary events. This is not new, of course, because we’ve seen this done in “The Blair Witch Project” (1999), for instance.
But “Cloverfield” goes farther by breathing energy into tired genres like the monster-attacking-the-city movie and the disaster film. In fact, it even incorporates a spin on the convention where the best day of the protagonist’s life is also the worst, such as we’ve seen in “High Noon” (1952).
“Cloverfield” opens by showing us that we’re about to watch a film that is now government property, evidence. The video has footage from two dates: a casual day of fun between two lovers and a surprise going-away party that is interrupted by a monster’s attack on New York City. The former footage is mostly recorded over by the latter.
Sadly, most people won’t appreciate “Cloverfield.” The reactions I heard in the theater, along with those posted on the IMDb.com support my suspicion. There will be two primary complaints: Naysayers will claim that the film doesn’t have enough closure. (But let’s remember that “Cloverfield” was produced by J.J. Abrams, and any fans of the TV show “LOST” know that he loves to pose more questions than he answers.) And second, the entire movie is filmed with a shaky, handheld camera, which may affect those who are sensitive to motion sickness.
But “Cloverfield” isn’t about answering questions or comfortable cinematography; it’s about experiencing this disaster first-hand for yourself. Through the camera’s subjective point of view, we feel as though we’re running for our lives, along with everyone else.
The cast doesn’t have readily recognizable, big-name actors. This adds to the realism of following one random group of New Yorkers through the terror. And the dialogue isn’t overly clever or witty, but in a film like this, repetitive dialogue and abundant screaming enhance its believability. And one great thing about our identifying with the camera is that our usual “audience omniscience” is eliminated. We encounter developments when the characters do.
And don’t worry, you’ll actually get to see the monster, and it’s a decent-looking creature whose tendency to rampage is the fiercest I’ve seen when compared to the likes of King Kong or Godzilla.
Much controversy has erupted over the promotional posters which show a headless Statue of Liberty. People have complained that the filmmakers are using Sept. 11 to promote their movie. But New York and L.A. getting leveled has been happening in the cinema for decades.
Granted, it is hard to forget about Sept. 11 while watching New York City take a thrashing, but the military seems to be just as destructive as the monster. It made me wonder if this movie is meant to be a metaphor for the Iraq War: a monster that even our mighty military can’t stop. I can’t say for sure, but I bet if the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan carried a handheld camera with them during battle, they’d have a film even scarier than “Cloverfield.” Last year’s poignant “In the Valley of Elah” demonstrates this convincingly.
Directed by Matt Reeves
Michael Stahl-David / T.J. Miller / Jessica Lucas
Thriller 90 min.
MPAA: PG-13 (for violence, terror and disturbing images)
U.S. Release Date: January 18, 2008
Copyright 2008: 220
The Best Movies of 2007
Due to popular request, I have re-posted my end-of-the-year summary for 2007. Rest assured, I haven’t changed any of my judgments. It’s just that I’ve been asked to list my top 10, those I rated as “Excellent,” and those I rated as “Rental.”
Here again, my wife and I were in the hospital all through December, so unfortunately, my assessment of 2007 is admittedly incomplete and will have to go without considering any December releases.
The best picture of 2007 was “Gone Baby Gone,” but “In the Valley of Elah” was the most moving to me. The first eight movies listed below are must-sees.
The Top 10 of 2007
1. In the Valley of Elah
2. Gone Baby Gone
3. Lars and the Real Girl
4. 3:10 to Yuma
5. No Country for Old Men
6. The Kingdom
7. Rescue Dawn
8. Sunshine
9. Into the Wild
10. Resurrecting the Champ
Movies I rated as “Excellent” (definitely worth renting):
Transformers
Eastern Promises
Live Free or Die Hard
Michael Clayton
Dan in Real Life
Once
Enchanted
Stardust
Becoming Jane
Evan Almighty
The Simpsons Movie
28 Weeks Later
Disturbia
The Invasion
Amazing Grace
Lions for Lambs
Things We Lost in the Fire
Mr. Brooks
The Brave One
Surf’s Up
Ratatouille
Across the Universe
Movies I rated as “Rental” (also worth renting, but look for those listed above first):
American Gangster
30 Days of Night
Next
The Bourne Ultimatum
Spider-Man 3
Ocean’s Thirteen
Freedom Writers
Shooter
Martian Child
We Own the Night
Rendition
Lucky You
Fracture
Georgia Rule
Shrek the Third
Breach
Waitress
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Rush Hour 3
The Darjeeling Limited
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
The Astronaut Farmer
Brooklyn Rules
Hot Fuzz
Zodiac
No Reservations
Note: The worst movie of 2007 was “Delta Farce.” Avoid it at all costs.
Here again, my wife and I were in the hospital all through December, so unfortunately, my assessment of 2007 is admittedly incomplete and will have to go without considering any December releases.
The best picture of 2007 was “Gone Baby Gone,” but “In the Valley of Elah” was the most moving to me. The first eight movies listed below are must-sees.
The Top 10 of 2007
1. In the Valley of Elah
2. Gone Baby Gone
3. Lars and the Real Girl
4. 3:10 to Yuma
5. No Country for Old Men
6. The Kingdom
7. Rescue Dawn
8. Sunshine
9. Into the Wild
10. Resurrecting the Champ
Movies I rated as “Excellent” (definitely worth renting):
Transformers
Eastern Promises
Live Free or Die Hard
Michael Clayton
Dan in Real Life
Once
Enchanted
Stardust
Becoming Jane
Evan Almighty
The Simpsons Movie
28 Weeks Later
Disturbia
The Invasion
Amazing Grace
Lions for Lambs
Things We Lost in the Fire
Mr. Brooks
The Brave One
Surf’s Up
Ratatouille
Across the Universe
Movies I rated as “Rental” (also worth renting, but look for those listed above first):
American Gangster
30 Days of Night
Next
The Bourne Ultimatum
Spider-Man 3
Ocean’s Thirteen
Freedom Writers
Shooter
Martian Child
We Own the Night
Rendition
Lucky You
Fracture
Georgia Rule
Shrek the Third
Breach
Waitress
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Rush Hour 3
The Darjeeling Limited
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
The Astronaut Farmer
Brooklyn Rules
Hot Fuzz
Zodiac
No Reservations
Note: The worst movie of 2007 was “Delta Farce.” Avoid it at all costs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
