‘Movies’ Articles
Written by Damian Hospital on 09 March 2010
How real is that?
District 9 review- the truth is if I had time I can go on and on about how this is the REAL sci-fi movie of 2009. It is a hardcore sci-fi thriller, but even that seems to diminish how great this movie is. It is a masterpiece of epic proportions, but in my opinion the lack of big name actors, the rated R-label, and the gritty realism and setting allowed people to pass on this movie and become ga-ga over Avatar.
District 9 has a premise that totally knocks other Hollywood alien movies right in their jaw. It is similar to Alien Nation, in that the aliens are not conquering invaders or even evil. Because they arrived in South Africa in 1982 their legal status is that of immigrants, and their social status is slightly higher than animals. District 9 is a Warsaw Ghetto of sorts. Go ahead and fast forward 20 years and you have a slum nightmare of epic proportions, especially since the alien culture is considered barbaric.
District 9 holds the mirror up to society about how we discriminate and assign civil rights based on common language and race. The movie is a social allegory, and the Prawns (the negative term used to describe the aliens) are marginalized. You can’t help but sympathize with them even though their appearance looks like a shrimp or cockroach- and that’s the point of the movie. In fact the Prawns are more human than the Nigerian arms dealers in the movie.
The cinematography is not for everyone (although I loved it)- the camera is like The Office and sometimes it flips from documentary to normal. I thought this made everything look realistic; it felt like Blackhawk Down at times. I wasn’t into the lead character Wikus van de Merwe at all, but again that was the point of this intellectual script- we see how Wikus transforms [pun].
As with every alien movie there is a conspiracy theory and this one is centered around the fact that humans can’t use alien weapons without their DNA. The government and corporations team up to genetically engineer the poor Prawns.
The obvious question is which movie was better: Avatar vs District 9. The answer is not clear cut. I think Avatar was the better overall movie for the masses and had some feel good Hollywood moments in it, while District 9 totally targets the sci-fi audience. District 9 is not for everyone- it may feel too realistic and there’s no real comedy, romance, or fantasy elements to it, like Avatar had.
Avatar, the highest grossing movie of all time (not adjusted for inflation), is more mainstream. Now for the handful of you who did not like Avatar (such as my friend CCB3), I have a feeling District 9 is what you wanted for a sci-fi epic. It’s a shame it was overshadowed in American theaters and not seen by audiences at the same level as Avatar or previous alien blockbusters like ID4, Starship Troopers, etc. If you thought War of the Worlds was good besides the ending, you should know that District 9 blows WotW out of the planet. There have been many, many attempts at alien movies and most of the time Hollywood dictates what we should expect and the movies are loaded with cliches, jokes, romance, or the military teaming up with scientists, but District 9 is able to stay real- maybe too real for some (but not for me).
District 9 made $203,600,000 worldwide with a $30 million budget, and it has a 90% Rotten Tomatoes rating. It was up for a few Oscar nominations. I think any true sci-fi fan can appreciate the script, story, plot, and tone; it feels like a multi-layered sci-fi classic novel. It totally kills any alien movie you’ve seen in modern times. One thing- there’s not really a traditional conclusion- it’s more like a cliffhanger a la Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. Sign me up for District 10, and this time I hope the South Africans are put in a prison camp.
| Directed by |
Neill Blomkamp |
| Produced by |
Peter Jackson
Carolynne Cunningham |
| Written by |
Neill Blomkamp
Terri Tatchell |
| Starring |
Sharlto Copley
Jason Cope
David James |
| Music by |
Clinton Shorter |
| Cinematography |
Trent Opaloch |
Tags: aliens, district 9, movie reviews, Movies, peter jackson, sci-fi movies
Posted in Movies, Review | 2 Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 07 March 2010
Anyone who says "just ignore" punks and they'll leave you alone hasn't been in NY in 1987.
Precious: Based on the Novel PUSH by Sapphire review- The two negative reviews from Rotten Tomatoes were written by Brits, who probably don’t like to think about Harlem, abject poverty, obesity, or incest. I also read the comments from others Brits and it seems to be a trend: they just don’t get it. Precious is a work of art. Yes, it’s depressing, full of injustice, politically incorrect, morbid, not enjoyable if you want to escape reality, and at times mocking, but it is still one of THE best movies of 2009, and I will never forget it.
There are other critics of Precious, and these are Drudge Report readers. I’m gonna have to leave those reasons as “nuff said” and leave it up to your imagination. This film was NOT targeted to the jaded British middle class or the U.S. Republicans or conservatives. This is a harsh and gritty movie, and it’s so sad that you don’t feel well after it’s over, which I guess offends some people as well. The fantasy scenes that Precious escapes to are probably over people’s heads, and the scenes may come off as mocking her.
Okay, enough with what the fringe are saying about Precious, let’s get down to reality. Precious is an indy film, so it can go where Hollywood films are afraid to. Believe me, it goes into places that you were probably afraid to explore: cheating on welfare, forced eating, hateful mother, sexually abusive father who is not there, unruly classrooms in the urban jungle, ignorant racism, down syndrome, AIDS, violent streets, graffiti everywhere, poorly education youth, and the REAL obstacles an inner city black girl has to deal with.
It’s about time a heavy woman was a lead actress. Heavy women are marginalized in society, and I loved the fact that Gabourey “Gabbie” Sidibe is able to deliver such a great performance. Mariah Carey is great in it- I didn’t even recognize her. Lenny Kravitz has a good small role. Mo’Nique probably is the best though, as the evil mother. She may very well be the worst mother ever portrayed in cinema. Director Lee Daniels pushes the envelope with his mix of reality of the urban nightmare and fantasy sequences. I read that the movie was just one cut due to the budget and nature of indie films.
Only those who deny the reality of the movie will be unmoved. So what’s the message of such a depressing film? It’s that principals, teachers, social workers, and nurses should stop practicing Lazy Man Ethics (LME) and go out of their way to give a deserving needy kid a break. It could be argued that’s who the target audience really is. The sad part about our society is how it seems like a miracle for educators or social workers to go above and beyond to help someone.
Tags: entertainment, movie reviews, Movies, precious
Posted in Movies, Review | 2 Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 06 March 2010
"Hold on, kid- weren't you in The Village?"
Due to the real world, I haven’t been able to write full blown reviews for movies I’ve seen with my wife. So here are quick one paragraph movie reviews for Kung Fu Panda (2008), What’s Eating Gilbert Grape (1993), Sling Blade (1996), Ninja Assassin (2009), Edward Scissorhands (1990), Fight Club (1999), Blow (2001), The Gods Must Be Crazy (1984), Hotel Rwanda (2004), The Wizard of Oz (1939), Dead Poet’s Society (1989), and Zombieland (2009).
Kung Fu Panda review: Started off a bit silly and full of commercialism, but got steam and went off the charts. Although the premise is simply a parody or satire of old Kung Fu movies, the message is strong and good for kids. The old tortoise had some very deep and true Buddhist advise. Funny cartoon, with good animation, and I recommend Kung Fu Panda with two thumbs up; it’s just not that original, and at times seems like a pastiche of Star Wars.
What’s Eating Gilbert Grape review: My wife and I were totally blown away by this movie, which focuses on a dysfunctional family in a small boring town. Leonardo DiCaprio is totally convincing as a retarded boy, Johnny Depp is super cute for the ladies, but the show stealer is their obese mother Darlene Cates. This is a twisted drama which holds up the reality mirror to your face about obesity, family shame, retardation, sexual frustration, and living in a backward town. Should be a classic movie that everyone knows, but the content can be offensive to those who want to deny reality.
Sling Blade review- Actor and Director Billy Bob Thorton, Dwight Yoakam, Lucas Black, and the underrated John Ritter teamed up for a timeless drama. Outstanding script, out-of-the-world acting, multi-layered story, and excellent directing make a first class classic. This is a sad story of an emotional disturbed yet gentle man trying to fit in society, and his innocent relationship with a boy with a drunk and abusive mother’s boyfriend. Perfect score from me and my wife- 2nd time I saw it.
Ninja Assassin review- Got into a fight with my wife about this one. I don’t find Rain, the star, to be physically attractive which is the only reason why women would want to see this movie. With a poor script, bad acting, bad filming, and unrealistic fight scenes, this felt like a 1992 low budget Hong Kong action movie instead of a 2009 Warner Bros movie written by JMS (J Michael Straczynski) and produced by Joel Silver and the Wachowski brothers. Would have made a great comic book graphic novel one-shot, but as a film it’s horrible. Based on the trailer, I thought it would be an action romance but there was no romance or comedy and there is way too much gore. Stay away unless you like Rain. If you are a guy, I think you have to be into video games to appreciate; the NES 8-bit 1988 Ninja Gaiden was more deep.
Edward Scissorhands review- First time we saw this Johnny Depp and Tim Burton movie. Probably overrated. The dark weird humor was innovative and original for its time. It’s a bizarre modern Gothic fairytale that I probably should have seen back in 1990 to truly appreciate it fully. I can see it being a cult classic for some- it’s enjoyable and stylistic. Could have done without the cliche suburban sex starved housewives.
Fight Club review- Is Fight Club a guy’s movie? My mom and wife didn’t dig it. I first saw it with Tony Vahl and my mind was blown, but my mom and wife didn’t like the violence or the angry white man post-modern sexually frustrated Godless rants against commercialism and society. I don’t think there’s any denying that Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, and Helena Bonham-Carter have outstanding acting performances. Director David Finch Fincher does what he does best. But I guess the dark tone, lack of morality, violence, chaotic direction, and sick and twisted plot isn’t for everyone. I still think Fight Club is a modern classic, but the 80% Rotten Tomatoes rating and the two thumbs down from the females in my life give me pause.
Blow review: Possibly Johnny Depp’s most realistic role. This is a gritty drug movie about the highs and lows of being a big-time drug dealer. The setting is totally retro and the acting and directing (Ted Demme) is superb. This is a high-stakes drama based on a true story. This was my third time watching it (first time was with Vahl) and the character betrayals were still emotional. For some reason only 55% of RT’s critics liked this; the RT community had an 85% approval rating. Should be in the 90’s.
The Gods Must Be Crazy review: Hysterical slap-stick classic comedy. It was funnier the first time I saw it because the jokes were so memorable that seeing them for the second time didn’t really do anything for me, but the movie still held up. Set in Africa, it’s about a bushman that finds a Coke bottle, and he and his tribe think it’s a gift from the gods. I saw this movie with my friend CCB3 and we were laughing non-stop.
Hotel Rwanda review: One of the best movies ever, this showcased the genocide that no one cared about by the Hutu people. Don Cheadle is the unwilling hero in this emotional drama. Where is the JUSTICE? Better than Schindler’s List. A++ ’nuff said.
The Wizard of Oz review: Probably the 20th time I saw this classic. Should be ranked #1 as the best movie of all time, I don’t care what anyone says anymore at this point.
Dead Poet’s Society review: Was required viewing at Boyd Anderson. Was have seen it at least 5 times. Robin Williams plays everyone’s favorite teacher, and the young cast teams up for a memorable emotional drama that will tear at your heartstrings. This is a coming of age story about prep school life and going up against the Establishment and Tradition. Painfully underrated at 84% RT Critics and 89% RT Community. Ethan Hawke is great as a rookie, and the evil dad (Kurtwood Smith) is quite a villain. There is not a happy ending here, folks.
Zombieland review- This was a well-done zombie movie. It seemed high-budget and had some good acting performances by Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg, Emma Stone, and Abigail Breslin. It’s a guilty pleasure film. It’s a gore action comedy as opposed to a scary horror movie. I can see why DailySkew icon Zane Black loved this movie- anyone into weapons, Apocalypse, and the end of civilization would love it. Not for senior citizens or kids, but everyone in-between should dig it. Nice date movie, since it is a cool movie, and seeing zombies die is always fun. Since I had to check my brain in at the front desk, it’s probably overrated.
Tags: Blow Johnny Depp, Dead Poet's Society, Edward Scissorhands, entertainment, Fight Club, Hotel Rwanda, Kung Fu Panda, movie reviews, Movies, Ninja Assassin, Sling Blade, The Gods Must Be Crazy, The Wizard of Oz, What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Zombieland
Posted in Movies, Review | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 18 February 2010
Yeah, let's just stand and gawk at the nice robot
War of the Worlds review- I finally saw this blockbuster last night. I had originally passed on it because of the hype machine and mixed reviews. War of the Worlds had plenty of suspense, paranoia, great special effects, a good performance by Tom Cruise, but I have to question the limitations of the first person point of view by director Steven Spielberg. There was so much more I wanted to know about the aliens (there’s no proof they are even Martians).
This was a “realistic” alien invasion- it was in NY and they went for the 9/11 feel. There was no backstory- it’s main focus seemed to be on the family of a divorced man and his two kids.
War of the Worlds is an engrossing sci-fi blockbuster, but it left so many questions open and the ending is awfully abrupt. I’m usually not the type of person at the movie theater to ask stupid questions, but after War of the Worlds ended, I asked my wife, “So what killed the aliens?” You see, with so many interpretations of H.G. Wells’ classic 1898 novel, I assumed nothing, and was looking for hints. There really weren’t any obvious hints during the movie to set up “germs”. I realize the movie is 1st person, and Tom Cruise’s character Ray had no access to the scientific community, but all we have to go on is Morgan Freeman’s ambiguous statements about microorganisms.
There’s never really an explanation for the red vines or anything, really. Again, I guess Spielberg wanted a different take than ID4, but with no potential for a sequel, I felt kinda ripped off.
A movie has to be judged by what happens onscreen, not what the producer or screenwriter says on a DVD bonus disk. The ending made sense only if you read the book, or if you follow Speilberg’s rule of having the movie through Ray’s eyes (i.e., he doesn’t know anything). The explanation could have been handled through a TV bulletin or from his family. Better yet, the way the aliens died could have been totally different from the book. It’s interesting that the “no explanation needed” has been used in War of the Worlds, Cloverfield, Star Trek, and a few other modern movies. It’s like the powers-that-be want to have it both ways (leave things mysterious on-screen, but talk about them freely during an interview).
There are tons of questions that Spielberg forces you to ask. I did a search and read some possible explainations. Most explanations are taken from the original book, which is a stretch since this is an Earth Zero film adaptation of H.G. Wells.
With all of my nitpicks, you may think I didn’t like War of the Worlds, but I liked it a lot. It’s just that with such an A-List actor like Cruise, an A-List director like Steven Spielberg, a huge budget, and great source material that it should have been THE sci-fi movie. Cloverfield was a better 1st person POV monster movie.
All of this being said, this movie was great- fear was the #1 emotion invoked, kind of like Signs. There were some scary jump-out-of-your seat scenes, and I was glued to the screen.
Tags: 2005, entertainment, movie reviews, Movies, sci-fi movies, Steven Spielberg, tom cruise, war of the worlds, war of the worlds review
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 17 February 2010
The rich will survive. Oh, and a cute Russian dog.
For all intents and purposes I should have hated 2012- it’s unrealistic, focuses on special effects, and, well it IS a natural disaster movie, which automatically forces me to leave 25% of my brain at the door. However, when push comes to shove, I liked 2012- a lot! Give me some 2022!
Although VERY far-fetched, the movie was engrossing from start to finish. There was even a message as well: religion doesn’t work, governments are corrupt, and money talks. There was no Al Gore Green symbolism either; the sun destroys the earth, period. If there’s one thing that I was surprised out: there wasn’t any 2012 Mayan doomsday subplot that was prevented. There’s not any mysticism at all, and no way to “decode” anything.
There are a bunch of characters in this disaster flick, and it felt more like a sci-fi blockbuster than Volcano or Twister. It is much better than Roland Emmerich’s previous disaster flick, 2004 The Day After Tomorrow, which Tony Vahl and I liked, so that is saying a lot when it comes to the genre of disaster movies.
There are some cool acting performances here, such as Oliver Platt (George Steinbrenner from Bronx is Burning, the Ultimate Enneagram Type 8), Woody Harrelson as a nutjob Enneagram Type 5 conspiracy theorist and talk show host who was proven right, and the star John Cusack, who is a struggling author who is divorced (Enneagram Type 6).
Again, 2012 is illogical and the characters are Hollywoodized, but the visuals and dramatic tension is great. Unlike other end-of-the-world movies, this is the BIG ONE. Earth finally gets it BAD. Death and destruction are abound. The President of the United States (Danny Glover) can’t even finish his final speech because the power goes out.
I recommend this movie to anyone under 40 that likes big loud movies with excellent graphics. This is a popcorn movie, of course. Don’t take kids to see this movie, though, it’s way too intense, and sure to give nightmares. If you have high expectations going in, you will be disappointed. Also, it seems to be too long for many viewers, but not me.
By the way, as much as critics like to kill 2012 (Rotten Tomatoes: 39%) it kinda reminded me of some of Michael Crichton’s novels and had some aspects of sci-fi master Sir Arthur C. Clarke (some themes from Rama and Childhood’s End- albeit a skewed version). Let’s face it, sci-fi IS far-fetched.
Here’s Tony Vahl’s latest thoughts on 2012:
I hope you had some cheese with that popcorn. Woody Harrelson rules. The main male lead, whatshisname, is a cool actor. I loved/hated the Russian Billionaire Boxer. Daniel Glover as President was hilarious, given his politics — he did a good job. The flight scenes out of L.A. and Vegas were over-the-top and edge-of-your-seat thrill rides. I loved the Saudi Prince’s reaction when he was told he’d have to pay in Euros. Being locked out of Noah’s Arc was bullshhh. Felt terrible for the Indian guy who got screwed even though he made the discovery. Injustice be done. Loved the advisor’s reaction to the opulent room he got the ship that could have fit a bunch of people.
Tags: 2012, 2012 review, entertainment, john cusask, john glover, mayan 2012, movie reviews, Movies, oliver platt, Roland Emmerich, woody harrelson
Posted in Movies | 1 Comment »
Written by Damian Hospital on 14 February 2010
Johhny Depp as John Dillinger
Public Enemies (2009) movie review- you’d think with a cast lead by Johnny Depp and Christian Bale and directed by Michael Mann, this movie would be a classic. Instead, the John Dillinger story has no emotion and takes liberties with history. I would have totally waived the criticism that Mann and the other scriptwriters took creative liberties with a historical crime drama for dramatic effect, but the only emotional scene was the last scene. So it’s not like they sacrificed historical accuracy for entertainment.
Public Enemies features fantastic acting performances, especially Johnny Depp, who didn’t even look like himself. I’m also sure that on paper the screenplay looks great. Although Mann’s direction was probably a bit too stylistic (long scenes, shaky camera, loud noises to scare you), that wasn’t the reason why the movie didn’t work. The setting looked like 1933 and the costumes and cars were very well done.
Public Enemies doesn’t work because there is just no emotional investment in Dillinger, his associates, his competitors, his mistress, or the FBI. It comes off as a neutral documentary, and I guess we’re supposed to slightly favor Dillinger over the abusive and incompetent FBI, lead by the twisted J Edgar Hoover. But it would be better to suspend our morals and root for Dillinger if Michael Mann showed us how hard the Great Depression was, and why John would become a folk hero by robbing banks. I mean, duh, banks are evil, right? And we are currently living in the Great REcession, right? Don’t you think we should have been hit with that emotional aspect?
Instead, Public Enemies feels like a dry non-fiction crime novel. Of course, the big skew is that it’s not even historically accurate, so if you are interested in John Dillinger you might as well watch a documentary.
I do grant that the last scene had emotion. It almost seemed like Michael Mann was trying to do a “Rosebud” on us after 2 hours 38 minutes. But by then, my ears where ringing from all of the machine gun fire and senseless decisions by the FBI, Dillinger, and his mistress.
The pacing is pretty bad..it really seems long. I think Michael Mann blew a golden opportunity to make a great movie about one of the most infamous characters in American history.
BUY Public Enemies (Special Edition) [Blu-ray]
Tags: Christian bale, entertainment, john dillinger, johnny depp, michael mann, movie reviews
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 12 February 2010
"I get paychecks for life for selling out to Disney. Ahhhh yeah, baby!"
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl review- there’s a reason why it took me around 6-7 years to see Pirates of the Caribbean. First off, I’m not a Disney fanatic. Secondly, a movie based on an amusement park ride sounds weird. Thirdly, I tend to shy away from blockbuster movies that all of my office workers gush about. Fourthly, I’m not a pirates fan from old Hollywood movies.
So you’ll excuse me if I tell you I was fighting myself to stay awake during this 3:32 hour film (is that right? That’s what Rotten Tomatoes says.) Okay, sure Johnny Depp had an outstanding performance as Jack Sparrow. However, I don’t like the Jack Sparrow character; he’s a rogue- how original.
The story itself switches from action to comedy to fantasy a lot. It never comes close to being an epic movie or a classic. But Jack Sparrow and the Pirates of the Caribbean sure have a large following.
I’d be hard-pressed to find some good things about Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. I liked the monkey. I wonder if he was the same monkey from Raiders of the Lost Ark. They all look alike, you know. Is that a racist statement? I hope not. Seriously, that monkey was a great actor just like the one from Indiana Jones.
Anyway, I shan’t be viewing Pirates of the Caribbean 2 or 3. Or 4, 5, or 6.
Pirates of the Caribbean is overrated. There I typed it. I put it out there. I’d call it a popcorn movie, but they have BRITISH ACCENTS, and the only British accents I can understand are from Star Wars: A New Hope.
Thank Odin I didn’t suggest this movie to watch; my wife picked it out, so it’s on her, not me. During the movie she said “No wonder Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 78%”.
Pass.
Click Here! to learn how to Backup Games On PC, PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, Gamecube, Psp, Nintendo Ds, Playstation, Ps One, and Ps2.
Tags: entertainment, Hollywood, johnny depp, movie reviews, Movies, pirates of the caribbean
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 31 January 2010
Limiting myself to ONE PARAGRAPH per movie review, here is a quick movie grab-bag for Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark, Bruno, Monsters Inc, Inglourious Basterds, and Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian.
Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark review: An innovative blockbuster, incredible directing, and truly is a timeless classic- pure entertainment and adventure. Yet after the 20th time I watched one of the best movies of all time, and certainly one that is on my Top 10 Favorite list, I realized how unrealistic the stunts were, how cliched the Nazi characters were, and how the plot wasn’t that easy to follow. Harrison Ford was irreplaceable. Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark (Special Edition)
Bruno review: I thought Bruno was supposed to be about how society hates gays, you know a social meaning in a comedy context, like Borat was about Jew-haters. The trailer was funny. Instead, Sacha Baron Cohen created a truly unfunny movie with no punchlines and forced X-rated scenes. Bruno sets the gay movement BACK, not forward. For me, I wasn’t offended about homosexuality- it was simply a dumb movie that allowed Sasha to show us his penis. One of the worst movies I ever saw. Should have been NC-17 or just labeled as a porn movie, instead of rated “R”. There is not “art” here, just filthy without meaning or humor. Brüno [Blu-ray]
Monsters, Inc review: Well, I liked it, but wouldn’t say it ranks in my top Pixar, Disney, or animated kids movies. I thought the script, setting, and plot seemed to be way over the heads of kids, which seemed like a marketing ploy to get adults to see it. A fun movie, nonetheless. The little human girl stole the show. Monsters, Inc. (4-Disc Edition) [Blu-ray]
Inglourious Basterds review: This is not an action movie, even with all the gore. Quentin Tarantino rewrites world history and created his life long dream project; the most unique Hitler assassination plot movie. Tarantino deconstructs the genre. It’s all about killing Nazis, Garth Ennis style. Christoph Waltz has an award-winning performance as an SS officer- one of the best villains you’ll ever see. I liked it. That being said, Tarantino is too stylish and it’s distracting. He “pays homage” to the spaghetti Westerns with extended 15-minute slow paced scenes to show dramatic tension. Characters debate German film directors and non-sequiturs rule supreme. Seems like Tarantino targeted film students and film critics, since many of the techniques were over my head. Inglourious Basterds (Two-Disc Special Edition)
Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian review: Although they changed a lot from the original NatM, it’s still as fun as the original, just not as fresh. Ben Stiller, sporting his worst haircut ever and probably mailing this movie in for a huge paycheck, is upstaged by Amy Adams, Owen Wilson, and Hank Azaria. If you liked the first one, you should like the second one, but realize that it’s just slightly not as good. Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian (Three-Disc Edition + Digital Copy + DVD) [Blu-ray]
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 28 January 2010
So with Dwayne Johnson (formerly known as
The Rock) starring in
The Tooth Fairy (15% Rotten Tomatoes rating) at your local movie theater, I decided to find out the answer to the question: “What is The Rock’s best movie?” Dwayne Johnson has been in a lot of movies since he retired from the WWE, and although Rotten Tomatoes critics ripped every single one, the fan ratings have been much higher. Over on the pro wrestling message boards, it seems as if every one of his movies are enjoyable (except
Doom, of course). (I, for one, loved
Gridiron Gang- an inspirational drama, in which Johnson taps into his natural Motivator mode, and was shocked at its 42% rating). It seems that the RT critics HATE macho action flicks and HATE Disney live action kid movies.
Anyway, let’s get to
The Rundown, which RT says is the best Rock movie (71%). Dwayne Johnson at that time was still billed The Rock ™, and this was his first lead in an action movie. Its goal was to make him the next
Arnold Schwarzenegger (who has a half second cameo). Johnson plays Beck, who is a “retriever” of debts; hired muscle for a
Gambler-type. Beck is good natured, but business is business. The Gambler sends Beck to get his son (Seann William Scott) from Brazil. Beck begrudgingly agrees; he really wants to get out of this bone crushing business and wants to own a restaurant on his own. Christopher Walken is running a slave gold mine in Brazil, and he’s after Sean William Scott’s character to find a hidden treasure. Rosario Dawson is the love interest/Brazilian rebel against Walken. There’s also a Scottish airplane pilot, who works with Beck.
The Good
- The fight scenes are well choreographed.
- The Rock has some good one-liners. “Option A…or Option B”. The Rock’s performance is good (if you don’t count Scorpion King, this was his first real acting lead) but he’s limited by the script.
- Director Peter Berg had some good shots at a night club and in the Amazon jungle [well, actually Hawaii in real life].
The Bad
- Seann William Scott. Need I say more? Talk about being type casted as an obnoxious, snobby, dumb, rich jock all the time. Seriously, if Sean William Scott is your sidekick in a movie, try to void the contract.
- Everything about the movie was predictable, and it’s full of Hollywood cliches (not the fun ones, though). It just didn’t have the charm of some of Arnold’s 1980’s action movies.
- Christopher Walken mailing it in…
- Probably not one of my wife’s favorite movies…..I think she woke up when the MONKEYS (!!) showed up and beat up The Rock and Seann William Scott.
- Can we ban Scottish accents in American movies? I’m still trying to figure out what Scotty from Star Trek was saying. It’s worse than Jar-Jar Binks. Subtitles, please? And why are the Scottish characters given the mantle to tell us plot details? Perhaps because the plot doesn’t make sense in English.
Conclusion: It’s not like there’s anything too bad about this movie, but there’s not a lot that’s good besides The Rock. This is for Rock fans only, or if you have an addiction for cliched action movies. This movie has no innovations and is not a genre buster, nor does it bring the action genre to new heights. It’s like a TNT movie that you turn on 30 minutes into the start, or if you’re over a relative’s house and there are a bunch of people walking around and talking.
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 27 January 2010
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen had one major thing going for it before I watched it: my expectations had been knocked down by Transformers 1. Although it still has tons of plot holes, poor acting, and is a (groan) teen movie, I liked Revenge of the Fallen better than TF1! I thought it was more like the comic books and cartoons because there was more action, it had a sci-fi feel, there was more Optimus Prime, and they got into the pre-history retcons with The Fallen and the Primes. I dug RotF.
The Good
- Optimus Prime vs Megatron II- wow, looks like my original criticisms were on the money. This time, Michael Bay and the screenwriters move the two titans to an unpopulated area, and Optimus fights heroically, but is killed by Megatron a la the original Transformers animated movie (STILL the best hehehehe).
- Action galore- battles were bigger and badder. They kept me distracted from thinking.
- Special effects- fantastic. Egypt was a great setting.
- Soundwave (voice only) and was nice to see Ravage, although I didn’t like his silver coat or one eye. And heaven forbid Ravage is a CASSETTE, right?
- Starscream showed some of his old personality. Wish he’d get more screentime, though.
- Sound effects (I love Starscream’s EMP bomb and other TS laser beams) and music fit the tone.
- Glad Optimus Prime is alive again. Whew….
- Creating a backstory for the Primes and having Jetfire be a relic got me pumped about reading my Transformers comic books in the future.
The Bad
- The freakin’ puny humans. I’m not going to spend more time talking about them. I was rooting for The Fallen to blow out the sun to shut them up. In the original Transformers comic books and most of the cartoons, the humans always seemed like insignificant background characters, who were so fragile, in the Bayverse, they are the focus.
- The millionaire stripper pig, what’s her name? Oh yeah, Megan Fox.
- Megatron having a master so soon.
- Still was hard for me to distinguish some Autobots from Decepticons.
- Hard to tell what’s going on, and who’s shooting at whom sometimes.
- Plot hole city.
- Length- 2:30??? I would have cut the college scenes out and a bunch of human stuff to make it around 1:40.
- Yes, those two twin Transformers- Amos and Andy- are signs of the demoralization of Western Society.
- Michael Bay’s vision and design of the robots are different than mine- I still don’t like that fact that most of the robots are too silver and most are relegated to being background characters.
- College campus. My wife, who was not born in the U.S., wanted to know if that’s what college life is like.
- Bad directing- scenes jump so fast I felt dizzy. I know he did it on purpose, too.
Conclusion: Revenge of the Fallen, PANNED by critics [20% RT rating], made a lot more money than the original blockbuster. You asked for a sequel America, and you got a better movie. This movie was more enjoyable than the first one, which was a culture shock for me, and it spent too much time on intros and trying to mainstream it for parents.
RotF gets the job done- it seems more targeted to fans of the robots in disguise. I find it amazing how so many critics and forum mutants kill RotF but gave the first movie praise. Continuing my Mortal Kombat analogy, I expected RotF to be like Mortal Kombat 2: Annihilation, which just had new characters and different actors, and was not as fresh as Mortal Kombat 1. However, I was pleasantly surprised that Transformers 2 was a little more enjoyable than Transformers 1.
Posted in Movies, Review | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 25 January 2010
Movie critics are especially hard on Ice Age, Ice Age: The Meltdown, and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (Rotten Tomatoes ranks Ice Age 1-3 as: 78%, 57%, and 45%). The leading complaints: they are derivative, they are Pixar Lite, have cliched characters, it’s commercial, monotonous, and unnecessary.
#Newsflash: They are kid’s movies. I know how hard this is for some high brow movie critic to digest, so I’ll say it again:
Ice Age is for kids. The inside adult jokes and themes on marriage and family are in the movies to appeal to mainstream parents. And as much as the critics kill
Ice Age for not being original, I just don’t think that’s being fair: animated children movies have become a genre all to themselves, and every genre has rules that kids come to expect. Kids don’t need the “sophistication” (ha!) of
Toy Story each time out. Here are my thoughts about the
Ice Age Trilogy:
The Good
- The setting- the animals are more unique compared to all of the other animated movies out there.
- It’s very funny.
- The characters are lovable. I like Diego the best, since he’s not as goofy as the others.
- The special effects are great.
- The voice actors stay the same for all three movies, and the tone remains the same, with the addition of a new character every movie. This allows all three movies to run smoothly if watched together (unlike, say, 1990’s Batman movies). In other words, if you liked Ice Age 1, you should like Ice Age 2 and Ice Age 3. I think the critics that run away from Ice Age with each new movie are not really reviewing the movie itself; they are protesting Hollywood being in the business of making money with sequels.
- I’d be shocked if a kid didn’t like any of these movies. I know there are exceptions, but the Ice Age trilogy just has all the elements of a great animated adventure for children.
The Bad
- Too much of that squirrel, Scrat. I liked him a lot after Ice Age 1, but instead of just bookending the movies, he’s way too prominent in the next two movies.
- With Ice Age 3 featuring dinosaurs, you can tell that the studio is running out of ideas, and the Ice Age series has just become an easy cash cow. [Of course, kids love dinosaurs, so they wouldn't list this as a bad element. Plus Ice Age 3 made a ton of money.]
- As much as I like the trilogy, Ice Age 4 has the potential to be a Ben Stiller parody trailer. BECAUSE YOU DEMANDED IT: ICE AGE: TH4W
Conclusion Uhmmm…Ice Age Trilogy rocks. I like to watch them over and over just like a kid.
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 25 January 2010
Tropic Thunder- on paper- should have been one of the best comedies of all time, considering the idea and cast, but its ridiculous storyline and adolescent humor overkill keeps it from being an all time classic for me. It just comes up short, but I still give it at least one thumb up. It’s still a funny comedy, and was usually enjoyable. All of the hype going into Tropic Thunder due to Robert Downey, Jr.’s blackface was unfounded. Those naysayers should have seen the freakin’ movie before protesting it [of course, that probably increased ticket sales due to the free advertising].
The Good
- Tropic Thunder’s fake trailers were extremely funny.
- Its lampooned universe is well-crafted and funny.
- Except for Ben Stiller playing himself again and hogging the screen, all of the actors were top notch. I didn’t know that was Tom Cruise until my wife pointed it out.
- Spoofing Vietnam War movies has hysterical.
- Poking fun at Hollywood is great.
- Self-conscious, self-referencing, and doesn’t take itself seriously (at all).
The Bad
- I love Ben Stiller, but it’s still a $90 million vanity project that didn’t quite meld due to the uneven script and directing (seems like they were wandering around in that jungle for hours).
- A parody of a parody…a cliche of a cliche…Ben Stiller reminds me of an “idea man” who can’t seem to convert the ambitious idea to an excellent work of art due to bathroom humor, juvenile antics, and wanting to “prove a point”.
- Seems like the actors and crew had more fun making it than I did watching it.
Conclusion- I recommend this for adults who are into movie spoofs. Although it was enjoyable, I think it’s a tad overrated (82% Rotten Tomatoes, same as
Avatar; also compare to Jack Black’s
Nacho Libre insanely low 39% rating, come on!). Comedies are not my genre; I like drama and sci-fi the best. If macho comedy is your favorite genre, you’ll dig it.
Posted in Movies | 4 Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 23 January 2010
Long time Transformers fan here, who was afraid to see the movie when it came out or on DVD because of Michael Bay and the costume changes….finally saw it last night. After all, if I gave G.I. Joe a chance, and Sherlock Holmes a chance, I might as well check in my brain and see a blockbuster action movie, right? Okay here goes:
The Good
- The voices of the Transformers were thankfully familiar, probably saved the movie for me.
- Special effects were outstanding.
- I liked earth’s history being changed because Megatron landed.
- Good mix of comedy and action.
- My wife liked it.
- Little inside jokes and homages sprinkled throughout the movie for fans in their 30’s (that would be me)
- That African-American hacker was funny, especially his house.
- Okay, here’s the thing- the rest of this Transformers 1 movie review is really, really negative. It doesn’t take away the fact that I had a nice 2 hours watching Transformers….BUT….(you’ve been warned).
The Bad
- My main issue for not seeing Transformers was because the fundamental vehicles and paint schemes were changed from the source material. I tried to keep an open mind about it. My first experience with a movie changing EVERYTHING from a toy-line, cartoon, and comic book was Masters of the Universe. Just because a movie makes money from the mainstream audience, and kids like it, doesn’t mean I should accept it automatically. (See WWE in 2010) I couldn’t tell the Decepticons from the Autobots at times. Repeat: the Transformers character designs were too detached from source. It was my one problem going into the movie, and one problem that was not resolved.
- Human actors were forgettable. Like Godzilla movies, the movie focused on the humans more than what the audiences really wanted to see. If it was too expensive to show the robots, then just cut 30 minutes of the human plots.
- Human characters were all cardboard. Don’t get me started on that girl, what’s her face, oh yeah, Megan Fox playing a high school chick.
- Let’s all continue to lower our standards, so all action movies are “good” just because they have action. Compare Transformers to Dark Knight, Watchmen, or Star Trek. ’nuff said.
- Plot-hole city- the whole backbone of the story is contained in a few casual sentences when the army is examining Megatron on ice. So all explanations for things that didn’t make sense, like “why did the spark only create Decepticons” are based on those few sentences. (The No-Prize is that the All-Spark was corrupted by the reverse engineering of Megatron.) But there is more strange logic- like the military and Autobots bringing the final battle in the middle of a city, where civilians get hit (just for the cinematic reasons).
- No real characterization of the Transformers. Although we see that Optimus Prime is compassionate and a noble hero, and we see Bumble-Bee caring for Sam…that’s about it. The Decepts were just killing machines…what happened to Starscream’s personality? Megatron? Arguably one of the top villains of pop-culture gets killed by Sam? Was that little robot Ravage, Rumble, Frenzy, or someone new? Does anything matter anymore (nihilism).
- Bumble-Bee switching cars in the tunnel and that little robot having the ability to transform into anything? Okay…
- Final battle between Megatron vs Optimus Prime? I’ll take Transformers: The Animated Movie any day.
- In-movie advertisements….HP, GM, Burger King…with all those sponsors, Michael Bay couldn’t have more robot scenes?
- Soundwave? Anyone? Hello? Soundwave?
- As you can see, I should have purged my memory of the original Transformers cartoons, toys, and comic books before seeing this movie. I’m being sarcastic. Why should I? So I can appreciate Michael F’N Bay? This is why people smoke weed- so all of those old Kung Fu movies and Steven Segal movies look great. Cloverfield – on a small budget- PWNS Transformers in terms of awe and suspense.
- This is a kiddie and teen movie. Sorry, guys.
Conclusion: A flawed movie, but enjoyable for what it is- a good POPCORN MOVIE, just like G.I. Joe and Sherlock Holmes. “I liked it” but my heart says something else. Don’t make it out to be something it’s not, folks. We’re in a sad state of affairs if Generation Z will consider this a classic. From now on, I will use the word craptastic to describe enjoyable action movies. I’m gonna see Transformers 2, just because I AM A SICK BASTICH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111
Transformers (Two-Disc Special Edition + BD Live) [Blu-ray]
Posted in Movies | 6 Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 20 January 2010
Sherlock Holmes movie review- Welcome to Sherlock Holmes 2.0. Like many other characters and franchises, Sherlock Holmes gets the reboot. Of course, in 2010 no one has ever seen older Sherlock Holmes movies or read any of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s work, so…MEET SHERLOCK HOLMES and DR. WATSON for the first time, everybody.
Robert Downey Jr. once again portrays an action hero like Iron Man, but with a different take. His Sherlock taps into the original canon in terms of his idiosyncratic and uncanny art of deduction. Remember folks, Batman and that doctor from HOUSE are based on Sherlock, not the other way around. Holmes is a bit of an anti-hero in this movie, and seems to be updated into a James Bond type action protagonist. Downey’s acting performance is excellent, although his British accent and quirky manic sentences make him hard to follow on many occasions. By the way: there’s no traditional hat, coat, or magnifying glass- just the pipe.
Dr. Watson (Jude Law) has run out of patience with Holmes. In fact, he has retired and wants to get married. It’s kind of tough to see Law as a sidekick, but he is loyal to Sherlock when it counts. Law has some solid acting here.
Lord Blackwood (Max Strong) is an awesome villain. Has he come back from the dead? The plot revolves around his black magic and a Masonic plot to rule the world.
Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) plays Catwoman.
Oh, and what a great hidden gem by Robert Maillet aka the former WWF pro wrestler Kurgan of the Truth Commission in 1997. He’s an unstoppable giant. Really hope he finds more acting work. If Robert Maillet ever reads this: you did great!!
Director Guy Ritchie seems to be getting ripped by many snobby critics. Why have any expectations for Guy Ritchie anyway? Seriously, I had to look him up on Wikipedia to see what else he has done in his life besides marrying Madonna. Ritchie did a great job directing. This is the Attention Deficit Disorder version of Sherlock Holmes, and the camera work and CGI were great. He didn’t write the script.
Serious, high-brow Holmesians probably hate this movie; I shudder to even check out the Sherlockian message board forums- they are probably riddled with the same complaints I’ve found at the G.I. Joe forums, comic book forums, Transformers forums, traditionalists on the Star Trek forums, The Day the Earth Stood Still vintage freaks, et al.
I personally have a tone deaf ear when it comes to thick British accents, but I was able to follow the plot even though I missed some dialog. The bottom line is that I didn’t need my thinking cap on- this was an action movie.
You’re reading this, and you must be like: “so did he like it?”
Well, my wife liked it a lot, so that’s always a relief. The Sherlock Holmes soundtrack was good, too.
I thought it was a good action flick. The only way Sherlock Holmes could have made $182 million in the U.S. is by being an action movie. Good lord, if it was a standard detective mystery, audiences would fall asleep with those stuffy Brits in the 1800’s.
It wasn’t deep or thought provoking enough for a Sherlock Holmes adventure, but it was entertaining enough for me. I guess the question is: does society need a new Sherlock Holmes movie with so many super heroes and action heroes in the movies all the time now? Answer: no.
Will I see the sequel with Professor Moriarty? As long as my buddy George gets me free tickets at his cousin’s movie theater, the answer is “yes”.
Similar to G.I. Joe, the movie is detached from the source material and got “Hollywoodized”, but I wasn’t offended by any liberties taken- it’s just that the core of Sherlock’s world is different- this isn’t your daddy’s Sherlock Holmes, so leave your expectations at the door. I can’t predict if you will like this forgettable movie.
Posted in Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 17 January 2010
Since 2010 has gotten off to such a great start, it’s time for my G.I. Joe: The Rise of the Cobra review- The key to enjoying the G.I. Joe movie is if you are in the target audience or not. Do you like action movies? Are you under 40? Do you like to keep your brain in neutral when watching an action movie? Wanna escape the real word for 2 hours? If you are a long time G.I. Joe fan from 1981, you may have some issues with…ah…changes that were made in this Hollywood adaptation. However, if you understand that the movie is a reinterpretation of G.I. Joe, you won’t get offended. If you never had any exposure to G.I. Joe- even better!
In many ways, G.I. Joe: The Rise of the Cobra is a lot like the 1995 Mortal Kombat movie; it’s not an award winner, doesn’t stick to the source material, is mindless, but somehow it translates into a very enjoyable movie, technical flaws and all.
Posted in GI JOE, Movies | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 02 January 2010
Avatar movie review- what can I say? Avatar is one the best movies I ever saw. It is an epic sci-fi movie that exceeded my expectations and more than lived up to the hype, which says a lot for such an ambition movie by James Cameron in terms of budget, marketing, and special effects.
The most important thing about a sci-fi movie is the story and message- I really don’t care about graphics as long as there is substance. However, I couldn’t avoid the fact that the Avatar movie broke all technological special effects and was a visual phenomena.
The message of the Avatar movie is that all living things depend on each other in the cycle of life, and that mankind should not exploit living things for greed. There are Avatar critics that believe that this is a New Age Green message, but this was already said by the Buddha thousands of years ago, and practiced by Native Americans in ancient times.
So let’s see, the story was great, the special effects were the best, there was great action scenes, a love story for the ladies out there, what else? Okay how about the acting? Well, Stephen Lang, who played Colonel Miles Quaritch stole the show, truthfully. He was the living embodiment of the U.S. Marines, and an Enneagram Type 3 Personality. His military double-speak and ruthlessness was genuine. Granted some of the scenes he was in and his dialog were cliche, but that’s part of the price we pay for a mainstream blockbuster movie.
Zoe Saldana (Star Trek -Uhura) was great, although she’s hard to judge since she was CGI..lol.
The rest of the Avatar characters were fine. The hero, Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington frustrated my wife at the beginning since he didn’t listen, and Tony Vahl had prepared me for this in his
Avatar movie review. But he wasn’t as bad as Luke Skywalker at the beginning of S
tar Wars: A New Hope. I mean, Jake is crippled and had to replace his brother, so I don’t blame him for listening to the Colonel or being out of control at the beginning. My wife wound up liking him, just like Tony Vahl was happy Jake grew as a character.
I really enjoyed the different
Avatar animals, creatures, and environments. I won’t spoil anything, but I had written that I didn’t think I’d see animals
[CENSORED] this year, but I did see it happen…lol…That brought a tear to my eye to finally see it.
The reason I’m raving about Avatar and give this movie two thumbs up for this Avatar movie review is because there are great emotional scenes in it. The climax reminded me of Braveheart and Lord of the Rings, but in a futuristic alien setting.
So who doesn’t like the Avatar movie and why is it only around 83% on Rotten Tomatoes? Well, there are old conservatives out there that are against the gimmicky 3-D CGI actors. There are close minded critics out there who can’t see past the Hollywood formula and movie budget. There are some who think natives are not original. Other movie critics write bad Avatar reviews because those reviews get more hits and comments on the internet than good Avatar movie reviews. I guess senior citizens may pass on Avatar, since this movie is not targeted for them. As far as bringing your little kids? You can pass on that due to the violence and light language I’m sure they hear home.
You have to watch the Avatar movie, even if you have to wait for the DVD, Avatar movie online download, or Netflix.
Posted in Movies | 9 Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 20 December 2009
The Spider-Man 4 movie, called “SPIDER-M4N” (notice the #4 in the title- I wonder if that will start a new trend of having numbers disguised as letters in movie titles) has been PUT ON HOLD indefinitely. According to IESB, director Sam Raimi has been working with an incomplete script and is having differences with Sony Pictures about the Spider-Man villains to be used. Raimi wants to use the Vulture (one of Spidey’s oldest- literally- foes, along with the Lizard, Sandman, and others). Sony simply wants to use whichever villains are “hot” in comics and animation now.
According to BeyondHollywood.com, Sony doesn’t like the Lizard even though Raimi has been using Dr. Curt Connors as a cameo and obviously wanted him to be in SPIDER-M4N (okay folks, I gotta admit it feels real lame to type the #4 as a letter.) Rumormill says that the Black Cat won’t be in the movie (that would have been cool), but the “Vulturess” will. So I guess the Vulture will be a hot female chick instead of an old man, like in the comic books. I guess young hot women are more attractive for reproductive fertility functions than geriatric bald men for audiences- I mean you DO go to the movies to see hot chicks in spandex, right? No wonder Raimi stopped movie production.
Yes, my friends this smells like a bomb right now. I have a feeling that there will be too many characters, super heroes, and super-villains in SPIDER-M4N, and the Spider-Man movie franchise will jump the shark similar to BATMAN AND ROBIN and BATMAN FOREVER in the 1990’s. Seriously, the Spider-Man trilogy is THE movie franchise for Generation Y and Generation Z (Lord of the Rings, be damned), why even mess with it anymore or do something stupid with the script?
Too bad Sony still has power of the franchise and not Disney. At this point Raimi and Marvel should rip up the script and film the Last Spider-Man story that JMS wrote in Amazing Spider-Man #500.
Based on what I read on the comic book forums, Generation Y has deemed Tobey Maguire “too old” [at 34] to play Peter Parker anymore anyway. [They sounded like DailySkew co-founder Tony Vahl's friend J. Bird who is always fixed on people's ages.] Frankly with the Watchmen movie and X-Men Origins: Wolverine being voted by the “internet community” as two of the most disappointing movies of 2009, I think it’s time for Marvel and DC to take a rest from churning out super-hero movies after Iron Man 2 (which can’t be as good as Iron Man 1). Just sayin’. I still believe that comic book writers should be the ones writing movie scripts. Okay, at the very least Tony Vahl and I should be getting these assignments. We’d do it for free, too (just pay for our expenses).
Posted in Movies, comics | No Comments »
Written by Damian Hospital on 18 December 2009
Where the Wild Things Are review- For someone like me, a boy raised in Brooklyn, New York (where author Maurice Sendak was raised and was inspired to write the 1963 classic children’s book) “Where the Wild Things Are” was not only required reading, but FUN reading. First let me make it clear- WTWTA only had around 10 sentences in it- it was a children’s book powered by drawings of fantastical monsters.
Question #1 for me was: how can you adapt a full length movie based on a few drawings?
After watching the movie (I had a free pass) I can say that the director Spike Jonze (who teemed up with Maurice Sendak) just used the barebone book and weaved a whole world powered on a child’s imagination, and finally gave those monsters I stared at as a kid personalities. After the initial feeling of “oh, this didn’t happen in the book” I realized how STUPID that comment is since the “book” is just a bunch of drawings. This movie is an entirely different piece of artistic work.
Yes, the Where the Wild Things Are movie is a work of art. It’s different than any movie you’ve ever saw in this sickening modern era of pop cinema. It is original, odd, offbeat, methaphoric, weird, and engaging. It leaves the crapfest that is New Moon (the new, new Star Wars trilogy) in the dust [I'm sorry, I just don't get Twilight, okay?].
And… it’s not for kids of today. It’s for the adult Baby Boomers and Generation X’ers who read the book when they were kids. The movie has a warped melancholic tone and dark mood since the opening scene. Of course, I thought Wall-E was dark, but kids liked that. Kids like the Harry Potter and Narnia movies, and they seem pretty serious as well. So I guess it all depends on your children. The good news is that there’s no sex, violence, or cursing, so it’s all about tone, and if they will find it entertaining.
Where the Wild Things Are is kinda like a throwback to The Neverending Story, Labyrinth, The Dark Crystal, or The Princess Bride and other 1980’s fantasy movies. One refreshing aspect of WTWTA is that the human scenes can take place in any era- there’s no fad technology that would instantly date the movie; it is a timeless tale about a lonely child wanting the attention of his mother, sister, and non-existent friends.
Child actor Max Records blew me away. That kid has super talent.
“Tony Soprano” does the voice of Max’s best monster friend and did a fantastic job.
The Mother reminded me of the neglectful mother archetype from the Amazing Stories anthology TV show in the 1980’s.
I thought the special effects would have been the most controversial aspect of the film, but after I just checked out Rotten Tomatoes while typing this review, I see that the target audience mystery and that the movie didn’t follow the book were the major issues naysayers had. For those critics who attack WTWTA for being over the heads of kids- how about just reviewing the movie for yourself? Did you like it or not?
Where the Wild Things Are is an imagintaive film with comedy and seriousness, and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to see the world through the eyes of a 9-year old single child. I can vouch for the kid.
Oh yeah, the Where the Wild Things Are soundtrack by Karen O and the Kids totally blew me away. I need to get my -ahem- hands on Where the Wild Things Are music TODAY.
Posted in Movies, Review, childhood memories | 1 Comment »
Written by Damian Hospital on 23 October 2009
Inside Man is one of the best modern thrillers of all time. I originally saw this movie with Tony Vahl in the movie theater and was blown away by it- I felt manic that night and was pumped, and this week I rewatched it with my wife; it held up.
For those of you who missed this hidden gem (WHY? ™ is it a hidden gem) it’s a modern day version of
Dog Day Afternoon, except with a TWIST ending.
Spike Lee is usually a controversial director, but this movie is tame to his reputation in terms of playing the race card, although he does manage to put a few realistic racist scenes in (police racism). Spike Lee did an outstanding job in all aspects of the movie.
The cast and acting is an All-Star team. Denzel Washington plays the same Enneagram Type 3 character that he always does but for some reason I never get tired of it, unlike Will Smith’s Enneagram Type 6 that he does all the time. (Am I racist for comparing two black actors?)
Clive Owen, though, steals the f’n show once again. This time he was an Enneagram Type 7 master thinker character. Was he a villain? Yes. Did we root for him? Yes. Was he the coolest bank robber of all time? Yes. Even the most straight men have mancrushes on Clive Owen.
Jodie Foster actually comes late in the movie, but she shines because of how tough and cut-throat she is.
Christopher Plummer is a great corrupt bank president.
Willem DaFoe doesn’t have a role that suits him (dumb LME police chief), and I can’t stop thinking about the Green Goblin when I see him.
The main criticism of Inside Man is that the plot is hard for people to follow (due to the World War II Nazi connection) and that it is unrealistic (hostage negotiations, escpape). I’m not going to argue with someone if they can’t understand the plot. Sorry.
WATCH AND BUY Inside Man [Blu-ray]
before Inside Man 2 comes out in 2010 (Oh, you didn’t know? Your @$$ better call someboddddddyyyyyyy!)
Posted in Movies, Review | No Comments »
