Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Oh, The Good Old Times
As you can probably see, I just posted every review I've ever written, so you can get a taste of what my reviews are like. Yes, I realize that the last movies I reviewed were released in April and it is now July. Fret not, impatient reader, for I am working on a review of a newly released movie that I expect to be up within the next day or so. To save you the time and trouble of having to scroll down through multiple pages of my reviews to get to a specific post, you can look to the little Archive Box on the right side of the screen to skip to individual ones.
The Losers Review
Many modern-day movies have to cater to the short attention span of today’s youth, often causing the production value to suffer. When done right, however, the result can be fun and exciting.
Fast, explosive, and in-your-face, The Losers takes the action-comedy genre by storm. A big screen adaptation of a lesser-known comic book sounds like a stretch, like Hollywood is getting desperate. As they are. The Losers, however, proves that when backed into a corner, the movie industry can pop out something enjoyable.
The Losers is vaguely reminiscent of the 1980s television show The A-Team (which is getting a movie adaptation as well, to be released this coming summer). A team of CIA black ops, called the Losers, is betrayed and left to die during a mission in Bolivia, resulting in their going into hiding while they develop a plan to get their old lives back.
The nonstop action throughout The Losers could keep the attention of even the most attention deficit-stricken viewer, but the most enjoyable aspect of the movie is its stars. The first scene introduces all of the main characters, what assets they bring to the team, and their sense of a humor, an integral part of the entire project.
Out of all of the Losers, Jensen, the communications and technology specialist, truly steals the show. He could be considered the “comic relief” character, but since the majority of the characters are hilarious, he will be remembered by many viewers as “the funniest one.” Jensen is played by Chris Evans, who has displayed proficiency as a wise-cracking action star multiple times in the past, in movies such as Push and Fantastic Four. His career is picking up at such a swift rate that he has already been cast as the infamous super-soldier Captain America in the movie The First Avenger: Captain America, slated for release in 2011.
Men will be tempted to see The Losers for more than just its over-the-top action and slick sense of humor. Aisha, played by Zoë Saldana (Star Trek), can easily be classified as this movie’s “eye candy.” Stunningly beautiful with bigger weapons than the men and a morally ambiguous cause, Aisha epitomizes the “tough action girl” role, and she wears this title with pride.
One of the only complaints about The Losers is its use of the “shaky cam” filming style, which attempts to make the action feel more realistic. In a movie riddled with explosions, crazy weapons and huge gun battles, is realism a concept that has any hope for salvation? The shaky camera is by no means unique to The Losers; countless action flicks in the past have employed this pointless technique. It didn’t work then and it doesn’t work now. A complaint aimed more towards the action movie genre as a whole than The Losers specifically, the shaky camera must stop. Not only is it nauseating, it makes the movie incredibly hard to follow.
The Losers is based on an action-packed comic book series, and it stays true to its roots. “The Losers is a fourteen year old boy’s idea of ‘freaking awesome,’” says Mike McGranaghan of AisleSeat.com.
With plenty of shoot-outs, explosions, comedy and beautiful women, this movie is not attempting to reinvent a genre or go down as the greatest comic book movie of all time. It strives to entertain its audience during the entirety of its runtime, and it does just that. Says Brett Erlich of The Rotten Tomatoes Show, “…The action’s good, and Chris Evans and company are entertaining.”
The Runaways Review
One woman has stood out among all others a musical rebel. She wanted to run away. She had a bad reputation and didn’t care. She loved rock n’ roll. She was Joan Jett.
The musical biopic The Runaways follows the true story of Joan Jett before she became the world-renowned punk-rock sensation she was in the late 1970s. With little more than an electric guitar and a fleeting dream of starting the first all-girl rock band, Joan Jett is not your typical 1975 girly-girl. This dream seems unobtainable, until she meets with a man by the name of Kim Fowley, an eccentric, foul-mouthed record producer who is intrigued by her talent and drive. They recruit four other girls, including Cherie Currie, and the five girls form the first ever all-girl rock band: The Runaways.
The Runaways could easily be called a risk that paid off. Recruiting Kristen Stewart (Twilight), infamous for her lack of acting skills as the boring, monotone Bella Swan, to play the vulgar, sexual, tough, hard-rocking Joan Jett may turn some people off, but she is able to break her mold just enough to fit Joan Jett’s shoes quite well. Similarly, having Dakota Fanning (Push), America’s seemingly most innocent child star, play the drug-addicted, comparably sexual Cherie Currie seems like an inappropriate move. Again, she works very well in The Runaways, with her surprisingly strong vocals backing up an enjoyable performance.
The Runaways holds nothing back in its depiction of the band’s past: everything from the sex to the drugs to the lack of guidance is present. This movie is absolutely not for impressionable, young minds; the ideas it may give them are terrifying, but to someone who can watch the movie without being influenced by its very heavy subject matter, this story of an American rock icon is an interesting one.
Clash of the Titans Review
People often turn their noses up at the thought of a classic movie being remade, immediately dismissing it as a horrible movie and “just another way to make money.” To prove them wrong is beyond satisfying to the filmmaker.
Greek mythology has seen its fair share of movies, both A-list and laughably B-grade quality. This year sees
Clash of the Titans, in the short few weeks since its release, has been absolutely destroyed by critics and fans alike. Scathing reviews that never quite specify what was wrong with it swarm the internet, while viewers tell their friends how horrible it was. Never has a movie been so grossly misunderstood.
When viewing a movie on Greek mythology, most people set an extremely high standard in their minds, considering its source. They come to expect an astounding epic, one that will hands down win every cinematic award, blow them away with an unbelievably original story, and be as monumental as the stories from which the movie is based. Should said movie be anything less than cinematic perfection, it is suddenly a “terrible movie.”
Clash of the Titans is not trying to win any awards. It is not trying to break any records. It is certainly not trying to astound people with an original story, considering it is a remake. All Clash of the Titans is trying to do is take an interesting, widely-loved topic (Greek mythology) and make an in-your-face action movie out of it. To this effect, it succeeds.
Sam Worthington is one of
After the success of Avatar, many movies have adopted the 3D “fusion camera system” employed by James Cameron. Clash of the Titans was not originally filmed in 3D, but was delayed approximately one month from its original release date to be reworked into 3D. The style adds an extra layer of excitement to the film, but since the movie was not originally intended to be in 3D, it works just as well without it, and is not necessary to enjoy it.
Despite boasting a star-studded cast, the real stars of Clash of the Titans are the Titans themselves. The snake-haired Medusa, the jet black, winged Pegasus, and the vaguely Cloverfield-esque Kraken are just a few of the creatures that grace the screen, creating a visually fascinating and action-packed masterpiece.
Repo Men Review
With the current state of the American economy, it is only natural that
Repo Men is set in the near future, when large companies sell artificial organs called antiforges that people can purchase to replace any of their organs that may be damaged or debilitated. The organs are sold at outrageous prices, and if the buyer cannot afford the monthly payments, the company sends a man to find the buyer and “repossess” the organ in question. Remy, a repo man, struggles to balance his job with his family, and decides to leave repo and start selling the organs. During one final repo job, however, he experiences an accident that gets an antiforg heart inserted into his body. As Remy’s career begins to suffer and he falls behind on payments, it is a race against time to find a way to pay for his new heart before he becomes a victim of what he once was.
Jude Law (The Talented Mr. Ripley), fresh off the set of Sherlock Holmes, stars in Repo Men, and has truly found his calling: grotesque, bloody action. When he isn’t slicing open a body to remove an antiforg, he’s slicing open a live person with knives. By the movie’s end, he has mutilated a countless number of people. The over-the-top action role suits him well, hopefully leading to similar roles in the future for Jude “The Butcher” Law.
Repo Men’s not-so-subtle commentary on America’s current economic status will hit close to home for many people, but the humor used throughout and the extreme exaggeration of the topic keep the movie from being a whiny, “fix this problem now” stand against “the man,” instead being an enjoyable satire on America’s uncontrollable spending, and the resulting consequences.
One of the few complaints about Repo Men comes in the form of Jude Law’s costar, Forest Whitaker (Vantage Point). He plays the role of Remy’s long time best friend and coworker, who cannot come to terms with Remy’s accident. While he acts the part well, many of the intense action/fight scenes involving him don’t seem as convincing as they could have, had a slightly younger actor been cast.
Boasting some of the most intense fight scenes seen in a recent movie, Repo Men is not for the viewer looking for a light-hearted trip to the movies, or one with a weak stomach. Numerous scenes could cause certain viewers to avert their eyes, mainly the extremely graphic removal of people’s organs. The amount of blood and gore in the movie is incredible for those who can stomach it, though not everyone will be able to.
Cop Out Review
Lethal Weapon,
Cop Out is a comedy about two
The buddy cop genre has been seen countless times, from hits such as Lethal Weapon to absolute flops such as Starsky and Hutch. Cop Out falls somewhere in between the two, though which side it sways closer to is unclear.
Bruce Willis (Die Hard) has established a career for himself as the foul-mouthed action icon, but playing Jimmy, what is seen is more of a grumpy old man who uses that grumpiness for humor. Had this been tried in any other instance, this tactic most likely would not have worked. Cast alongside Tracy Morgan (TV’s 30 Rock) and his loud, eccentric style of comedy, however, the duo’s on screen chemistry is surprisingly strong, and the both of them compliment each other quite well.
There are several points where the movie loses its way, the most notable being the scenes from the protagonist’s perspective. It is understandable that there would be a slight dip in humor when seeing what happens in a ruthless Mexican gang, but the complete lack of any comedy and the sudden dark tone the movie gains is a strange departure from what the rest of the movie tries to be.
The shining beacon of hope in the humor-confusion that is Cop Out is the thief who steals Jimmy’s baseball card, played by Seann William Scott. Teenagers will most likely know him by his infamous late 90s role, however: Steve Stifler. That’s right; Stifler from American Pie saves Cop Out from being another forgettable buddy cop movie. He plays the acrobatic, ADD-stricken thief who doesn’t know when to shut his mouth, leading to absolutely hilarious exchanges with every single character he communicates with. Scott is the King Midas in this story: every scene his presence graces turns into pure, cinematic gold.
Cop Out debuted right behind Shutter Island in the number two spot at the box office on its opening weekend, but it did not necessarily make waves with critics. Kit Bowen of TheMovieKit.com says, “Is it a Cop Out to make a throwback to the ’80s buddy cop comedy instead of doing something original? Maybe, but at least it’ll make you laugh out loud a few times.”
The Best Movies of 2009
The process of making a movie may be long and arduous, but when those months of hard work and millions of dollars spent on that film make it to the big screen, the entire ordeal is worth it.
In the article that follows, a personal list of the top ten movies released in 2009 is documented. This list does not take into account any sort of box office sales or critic ratings; it is simply to enlighten readers on the best movies of the past year.
The tenth best movie to come out of 2009 is Drag Me to Hell. Drag Me to Hell is a horror flick from the director of the Spider-Man and Evil Dead series, Sam Raimi. It stars the always lovely Alison Lohman (Flicka) as a loan officer who is cursed by an old woman she evicts, who must then find a way to lift the curse in three days. Drag Me to Hell may be a horror movie, but it is pleasantly tame; at points, it is actually meant to be slightly comedic. There are no unnecessarily graphic mutilations or heart-stopping thrills that one might expect from a horror movie, due mainly to its PG-13 rating. That being said, the movie is still very much a horror movie, boasting plenty of gross-out scenes that will please any horror fan. Combine this with an excellent cast and a very enjoyable style of direction, Drag Me to Hell is a horror movie that will not soon be forgotten.
Number nine on the list goes to the drama Brothers. Boasting a cast that most current day directors dream of having, Brothers is about a man who is taken prisoner in
Coming in at number eight is the horror comedy Zombieland. Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland) stars as a weak college student who survives the zombie apocalypse due to a very strict set of rules. He teams up with Woody Harrelson (The Messenger) in an attempt to find a safe haven from the horde of undead, which they believe to be across the country in
The number seven spot is given to the highly controversial adaptation of a 1980s graphic novel, Watchmen. In an alternate version of 1985, several superheroes have retired from their duties, only to be brought back into their work due to worldwide political turmoil. Since the original graphic novel was released, many have tried to make it into a movie, but the content was so controversial that it never made it to the silver screen. Finally making its big screen debut, director Zak Snyder has achieved the impossible. Watchmen easily earns its R rating, coming as close to an NC-17 rating as could still be called R, but this does not mean it is crude or unnecessarily graphic. It is directed incredibly, the cast goes beyond getting into character and almost becomes the character, and the story is amazingly intriguing for a superhero movie.
Just missing the top five with spot number six is the surprise blockbuster comedy, The Hangover. After a bachelor party gone wrong and no memory of the previous night, three friends must search the city of
Entering the top five, the number five best movie of 2009 is the current record –holder for highest grossing movie of all time, Avatar. Hundreds of years in the future, humans have discovered another planet called Pandora, where they try to drive out the native alien race in an attempt to reach the mineral deposit the planet contains. As if the multi-billion dollar movie has not been praised enough already, there is not much to say about it that has not been said already. Avatar is the visual equivalent to winning the lottery, especially in the infamous 3D, as the scenery of the movie is beyond stunning. The acting, the style of direction, the writing… Everything about the movie is revolutionary, and not experiencing it should be considered a crime.
While the concept of any movie beating Avatar may seem blasphemous to some readers, the remainder of the list is the opinion of the writer, and nothing more. Moving on to number four, the spot is awarded to this list’s only indie movie, Away We Go. A comedy about two expectant parents, Away We Go centers on an unmarried couple, played by John Krasinski (TV’s The Office) and Maya Rudolph (TV’s Saturday Night Live) who travel across the country to find the “perfect home” to start their new family. As a quick disclaimer, this movie is not for everyone. The movie may be seen as boring to certain viewers, but to those who can enjoy a laid back movie, Away We Go is gold. While Maya Rudolph acts her part very well and is thoroughly enjoyable to watch, the credit for the movie’s brilliance goes to John Krasinski and his razor-sharp wit. He can seamlessly transition from sarcastic to ridiculous to serious, and taking into consideration Away We Go’s style of direction, this is a skill that makes the movie both incredibly real and hilarious.
The third best movie of 2009 is the romantic comedy The Proposal. After an uptight boss’s work visa expires, she forces her young assistant to marry her so as to avoid being deported back to
Just barely missing the top spot is Orphan, coming in at number two. After a tragic miscarriage, a married couple decides to adopt a Russian orphan. Upon bringing her home, trouble starts to brew, as mysterious events begin to unfold. Horror, thriller, whatever genre this movie is branded with, it does it well. The almost palpable tension felt throughout the movie makes Orphan stressful in the most enjoyable possible way. An interesting tactic employed by the director is to delay the scares from when the audience thinks they will come, keeping the pacing and atmosphere engrossing. Orphan can easily be enjoyed by viewers who don’t typically watch horror movies, due to the lack of anything terrifying or overly grotesque, but will absolutely deliver even to the most hardcore horror fans.
Finally, the number one best movie of 2009 is the bro-mantic comedy, I Love You, Man. After getting engaged to the woman of his dreams, Peter realizes that he has no male friends, and must find a best friend to be his Best Man. The epitome of a smart comedy, I Love You, Man is a hilariously heart-warming movie that takes the concept of a “bromance” to new levels. Paul Rudd (Role Models) and Jason Segel (Forgetting Sarah Marshall) lead an all-star cast to the spot of the most enjoyable movie of the year, with hilarious and unforgettable scenes including garage bands, Rush concerts, and games of golf. I Love You, Man revolutionizes the smart comedy genre, hopefully paving the way for more movies like it in the future.
The Worst Movies of 2009
There is nothing more disappointing than spending the time and money to see a movie in the theater and being horribly let down.
The following is a personal list of the 10 worst movies to come out of 2009. These movies aren’t necessarily box office flops, just poorly made films that never should have made it to the big screen.
The number ten worst movie to come out of 2009 is Land of the Lost. An adventure comedy starring Will Ferrell (Anchorman) as an eccentric paleontologist who discovers another dimension, Land of the Lost simply does not contain enough humor to warrant a viewing. This is a shame, considering its lead actor’s comedic brilliance. Co-starring the similarly hilarious Danny McBride (Pineapple Express) did not help this movie’s appeal. What was an attempt at a family-friendly adventure comedy ended as a sad excuse for a summer blockbuster.
Number nine on the list is The Taking of Pelham 123. This remake of the 1974 classic of the same name did little to measure up to the prestige of the original. Starring Denzel Washington (Training Day) and John Travolta (Grease), the plot centers around
Coming in at number eight is the comedy that can barely even be called a comedy, Couples Retreat. Boasting a tremendous cast including Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, and Jon Favreau, this disappointment of a film is about four couples who travel to a Hawaiian retreat to partake in couples skill-building exercises. Filled to the brim with depression-inducing marital problems such as divorce and adultery, the only part of the movie that doesn’t have the potential to force someone to take the leap is the scenery of the Hawaiian retreat, and even its effect is lessened by the conflicting talents (or lack thereof) of its onscreen cast.
Lucky to have even made the number seven spot is Jennifer’s Body, the latest entry into the strange “teen horror comedy” genre. Megan Fox stars as a possessed cheerleader who begins to eat boys to satiate the demon living within her, much to the dismay of her small town. There really is no way to try and make an effective appeal to this movie’s credibility; it is as ridiculous as it sounds. Acted horribly, as perverse as the age group for which it is targeted, and containing even less humor than it does plot, Jennifer’s Body is but another entry into Megan Fox’s career of non-acting.
Claiming the title of the sixth worst movie of 2009 is the action flick Taken. Liam Neeson stars as an ex-secret agent whose daughter is kidnapped overseas, and he takes it upon himself to get her back. Taken has several fairly decent action sequences, but other than that, the movie really has nothing else for audiences. The plot’s depth is reminiscent to that of a Saturday morning cartoon episode: Neeson’s daughter is taken, Neeson goes to get her back. The origin of the movie’s simplicity could be explained, with proper evidence given: the plot is simple enough to allow for the action to thrive, which may have been the focus of the movie, but more plot development would have been appreciated. Taken easily earns the award for “Best ADD Movie of 2009.”
District 9, the disastrous train wreck of a motion picture, slips into the number five spot. When aliens land in South Africa, the government forces them to live in a refugee camp known as “District 9,” and a government agent played by Sharlto Copley is sent to relocate them. Before being cast in this role, Copley had never acted, and his inexperience is almost painfully obvious to the viewing audience. Combine that with the fact that it was director Neill Blomkampf’s first major movie direction, and the movie reeks of inexperience. It is blatantly obvious that more time was put into the visuals of the movie than the writing or acting, because visually, the movie is a treat. Looking deeper, the movie is trash dressed up in a pretty bow, which does not change the fact that it is still a piece of garbage.
Moving down the list to number four yields yet another teen comedy, this time in the form of Fired Up!. Typical teen comedy: two football players ditch football camp to go to cheerleading camp to pick up girls, and outrageous hi-jinks ensue. Watching the trailer to this movie is sufficient; an actual viewing of this movie is an almost laughable concept. Despite the fact that Fired Up! is just a small teen comedy, any movie as pathetically acted and unbelievably predictable as this should not have made it to the big screen.
The third worst movie to stumble out of 2009 is the dark comedy Adventureland. Slowly wading through an already depressing life, James Brennan, played by Jessie Eisenberg (Zombieland), finds out that in order to finance a summer trip, he has to take a job at a local amusement park. Yet another genre-misnomer, this flick is by no means a comedy, though the “dark” part is certainly correct. Boasting an incredibly underused cast, the movie’s potential pokes its head through at a few points throughout the unnecessarily long runtime, but is quickly covered up by the almost depressing performances given by its stars. With a script devoid of humor but full of sex and drugs, Adventureland is essentially a guide telling teens how not to go through life.
The number two spot on the list goes to Year One. Taking place in (you guessed it) the year 1, two hunter-gatherers are banished from their village and embark on a quest. That may sound like a poorly described plot, but there is nothing else to say about it; that is the plot. This “quest” that hunter-gatherers Jack Black (
Finally, the number one worst movie to come out of 2009 is the third and (fortunately) final teen comedy, I Love You, Beth Cooper. When a nerdy valedictorian declares his love for cheerleader beauty queen Beth Cooper, played by Hayden Panettiere (TV’s Heroes), a night of epic proportions unravels, full of angry raccoons, murderous army men, and… towel fights. This movie’s lack of humor is not only disappointing, it is downright infuriating. The actors try far too hard to be comical, and in the end, they embarrass not only themselves, but the director as well. It is an undeniable trend among this list that all three teen comedies have something to do with cheerleaders, so for any future directors out there, take this advice: do not make your movie about cheerleaders.
Couples Retreat Review
Marital problems are a difficult hardship to go through, often ending in pain and suffering. Marital problems would, however, be a welcome reprieve from the pain and suffering brought on by Couples Retreat.
Couples Retreat, directed by Peter Billingsley, is a comedy about four couples who go to an exotic resort, expecting a week of fun and relaxation. When they arrive, they soon realize that their stay is not all fun and games: the point of the vacation is a series of couples’ skill-building exercises. Let the trials and tribulations of the couples commence, with everything ranging from shark attacks to intense Guitar Hero face-offs.
The MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America), the association that rates and categorizes movies, appears to have taken a vacation on the day that Couples Retreat was proposed. To call this movie a comedy would be to call Titanic an action movie or to call Die Hard a romance. There simply is not enough humor in the movie to earn the title of comedy. So many times throughout its surprising (and unnecessarily long) 113 minute runtime were instances of jokes faltering in a way that shamed its on-screen cast.
This cast is both a blessing and a curse for Couples Retreat. Boasting such massive names as Vince Vaughn (Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story), Jon Favreau (Swingers), Jason Bateman (TV’s Arrested Development), Malin Akerman (Watchmen), Kristen Bell (Forgetting Sarah Marshall), and more, the amount of familiarity the audience can feel with the movie is abundant. The negative side to this is that the director does a horrible job of trying to use each actor equally, whether they are a main character or a supporting character. This leads to an awkward phenomenon of the importance of certain characters randomly spiking in the middle of the story, for reasons that can’t even be explained when the film is over.
Cooperation among the cast is important in any movie, but here, it is more of a competition. All of the actors not only compete for screen time, but it seems that they are constantly vying to be the viewer’s favorite character. None of the actors were content to say, “I acknowledge the fact that I’m not the main character in this story, so I won’t try so hard.” Instead, they said, “I’m not the main character? Let’s just do something about that, shall we?” This subtle yet constant on-screen battle among the actors ruins what could have been a good movie.
Most of the movie’s very few laughs reside in sexual innuendos and implications, which lose their way about halfway through the movie and become annoying. A banana hammock-clad Fabio-look-alike implying sex in the form of yoga can be funny for only so long before it becomes uncomfortable.
Not at all a surprise, critics were not pleased with the sloppy showing that was Couples Retreat. RottenTomatoes.com gave it an astoundingly low 11% on their “Tomato Meter,” and Ellen Fox of The Rotten Tomatoes Show says, “it’s about as much fun as being forced to sit through a timeshare presentation.”
Zombieland Review
Stereotypical zombie movies such as Night of the Living Dead capitalize on the more horrific aspect of zombies. Zombieland focuses on a different, significantly more enjoyable aspect: their humorous side.
Zombieland, a horror/comedy from director Ruben Fleischer, stars Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland) as the protagonist/narrator. He is an overly cautious college student who has survived in post-zombie-apocalyptic America due to his own irrational set of rules. This ridiculous list includes such rules as “limber up” and “don’t be a hero”. On his way back to his hometown of Columbus, Ohio, he meets up with a man who is on his way to Tallahassee, Florida, played by Woody Harrelson (TV’s Cheers). The two men decide to travel together, but for the sake of not “getting too close” to one another, they don’t exchange names. Instead, they refer to each other by the names of the cities they are attempting to reach: Columbus and Tallahassee, respectively. They meet two sisters, played by Emma Stone (Superbad) and Abigail Breslin (Little Miss Sunshine), who tell them that there is an amusement park in California that is supposedly zombie-free. The group joins forces and embarks on a cross-country, zombie-slaying road trip to safety.
A comedy about zombies (apparently called a “zom-com”) may sound like an unconventional idea, but Zombieland proves that if executed correctly, the idea can be developed into comedic brilliance. All four actors in this movie give hilarious and believable performances of each of their characters. Each one of them falls deeply into character in a way that shines a light of realism on them. With four completely different acting styles on screen at one time, there is plenty of room for awkward conversations, failed jokes, or otherwise poor comedic chemistry. Fortunately, Eisenberg, Harrelson, Stone, and Breslin mesh together so well it appears as if they had acted together for years.
Eisenberg, recovering from his disgraceful lapse in judgment that was Adventureland, plays a similar role in Zombieland, albeit in a more humorous way this time around. His nervous, quiet acting style is a perfect comedic medium when put on screen next to Harrelson. The most enjoyable parts of the movie are the two actors’ verbal exchanges, ranging from their standoff first meeting to their search for a Twinkie in a zombie-infested grocery store. The two complement each other impeccably, allowing one to effectively bounce jokes off of the other.
Despite being a comedy, Zombieland is a zombie flick through and through. With as much gore, bloodshed, and maiming as could be expected from a movie about a zombie outbreak, a lack of violence is in no way a concern here. In fact, the violence frequently combines with the comedy for several hilarious zombie kills.
The majority of comedies today are either afraid to put emotional elements into their movie or do so in a horrible way, but Zombieland yet again pulls this off. Not only is the director not afraid to weave heart into the movie, but he does it well. There are just enough emotional elements to make it seem more tangible to the audience, but not so many that it overshadows the comedy and softens the movie.
With the exception of The Hangover, most recent comedies have failed to impress critics. Following its trend of shattering all previous expectations surrounding it, Zombieland again surprises by wowing critics, achieving an 88% on RottenTomatoes.com’s “Tomato Meter”. Ellen Fox of The Rotten Tomatoes Show says, “A lot of other films have tried and failed to combine gore, laughs, and smarts: Zombieland gets the recipe right, and even throws in a handful of heart.”
Gamer Review
Any kid who plays video games has been told at one point or another, “Video games are melting your brain.” What if those games could blow that brain right out of their head?
Gamer is a science fiction action film from director Mark Neveldine. In the year 2034, internet gaming has evolved from simply being a hobby in people’s free time to being a way of life. A man by the name of Ken Castle, played by Michael C. Hall (TV’s Dexter), has become a billionaire by creating a massively successful online game called “Slayers.” The game revolutionizes video gaming in the sense that instead of controlling a computer-generated character, the player controls a human being in full-scale combat. All of the humans being controlled are convicts who have volunteered to participate in the game. The government has made them a deal: if they can survive thirty rounds of “Slayers,” their crimes will be pardoned and they will be released from prison. Until Kable, played by Gerard Butler (300), no one had survived even fifteen games, much less the twenty seven that he has lasted. Castle can not allow Kable to go free; Kable knows too much of the true history of “Slayers,” and the game soon becomes a race to escape.
Anyone who enjoys loud, nonstop, explosive action movies will most likely enjoy Gamer. From beginning to end, the movie is riddled with gunfights, explosions, and violence. Gore abounds in the movie, as well; there are about as many instances of flying limbs and blood splatter as there are characters in the movie. Many casual viewers may find this violence a bit excessive, but action junkies will not be disappointed.
The simple plot of the movie allows Gerard Butler to do what he does best: kill people. Gamer knows what it is and doesn’t try to be anything it’s not: it is an action movie through and through, and it succeeds. The plot sets up the chaos perfectly: people try to kill Kable, Kable kills them instead. Gerard Butler plays the action hero role well. With little dialogue, rugged looks, and a gruff voce, he displays a natural comfort in the field of action movies.
That being said, the movie isn’t flawless. Gamer has little to nothing for those who don’t enjoy action movies. The plot does nothing more than reinforce the movie’s action sequences, so those looking for a conspiracy movie with an engaging plot are completely left out in the cold.
It is generally common sense when making a movie that if the director is able to get multiple popular actors, those actors should be utilized to their full potential. This is not the case with Gamer. Its star-studded cast is merely in the movie to attract fans of these actors. Successfully signing actors such as Alison Lohman, Terry Crews, Kyra Sedgwick, John Leguizamo, Ludacris, and Milo Ventimiglia gave the movie incredible potential to have multiple well-developed characters. Sadly, every single one of these actors was not only underused, but the performances they gave were less than ideal.
The movie did surprisingly poor at the box office. Over the course of a month, it has only managed to rake in $18 million, an amount which most summer blockbusters manage to blow away in their first weekend. Gamer also disappointed critics: Kirk Honeycutt of the Hollywood Reporter says, “Crass, nonstop action triumphs over narrative and character in this movie-length simulation of a video game.”
District 9 Review
Over the years, there have been dozens of movies with aliens, oppressive organizations, and flashy gun battles that were groundbreaking and original. District 9 is not one of those movies.
A science fiction film directed by first time director Neill Blomkampf, District 9 is about a race of aliens whose ship runs out of fuel above Johannesburg, South Africa. The aliens, called “prawns,” are brought down to earth and put into a slum neighborhood known as District 9. There, they are isolated from the rest of society and unable to leave. The main character, Wikus van de Merwe, is somewhat of an ambassador for the humans. He goes door to door, serving the prawns eviction notices to move them to a new area: District 10. Upon entering the “house” (the term being used very loosely) of one of them, he is sprayed with an alien liquid, and his body begins to change. Hunted by the government due to this transformation, Wikus has to find a way to escape and revert back to being himself, both physically and mentally.
The sheer amount of inexperience in the production of District 9 is beyond hindering to the movie’s success: it is crippling. Not only was this Neill Blomkampf’s first major direction, but Sharlto Copley, the actor who plays Wikus, had never acted prior to working on the movie.
Copley over-acts in many of the movie’s scenes, in what could only be classified as a failed attempt to stir some sort of emotion from the audience. Any director with even the slightest amount of experience would have made a point to correct a problem of this caliber. Neill Blomkampf, however, must have found this display of groan-inducing, overly-dramatized non-acting to be enjoyable.
District 9’s plot changes so many times throughout the course of its unnecessarily long 112 minute runtime that the main objective of the movie becomes unclear. Had Blomkampf stuck to one path and developed it instead of changing his mind every five minutes, the movie may have stood a chance. On second thought, simply having the combination of Blomkampf and Copley on the same set doomed the movie from the beginning.
The movie’s only saving grace is its visual presentation. The special effects were pleasant to view, however it is not nearly enough to actually warrant a viewing of the movie. The movie may have been more enjoyable had it disregarded its symbolic and emotional elements and been a straight action flick, but such a statement would be considered blasphemy to Blomkampf. It had the visuals: the special effects were the only bearable part of the movie, but it is impossible to make a good movie off visuals alone. A $250,000 sports car might look beautiful on the outside, but if someone puts the engine of a beat up lawnmower in it, it’s not going to accomplish much.
While Blomkampf somehow managed to brainwash thousands of critics into seeing some hidden positive attribute of the movie, the few critics able to hold off his influence have the right idea: Armond White of NYPress.com says, “District 9 represents the sloppiest and dopiest pop cinema – the kind that comes from a second-rate film culture.” Blomkampf also managed to lure the rest of America into his inexperienced clutches, allowing District 9 to debut at number 1 at the box office. There is no way for America to justify its actions for allowing this to happen, or in any way attempt to lessen the damage done by this nationwide lapse in judgment.
Orphan Review
Throughout the years, many famous movies such as The Omen and The Bad Seed have played on one simple concept to gain fame: small children are terrifying.
This concept proves true in Orphan, a thriller from director Jaume Collet-Serra. Orphan stars Vera Farmiga (The Boy in the Stripped Pajamas, The Departed) and Peter Sarsgaard (Jarhead, Rendition) as Kate and John, a married couple recovering from a tragic miscarriage. The couple decides, in order to share their love with a child who needs it, to go to an orphanage and adopt a child. There, they meet Esther, played by Isabelle Fuhrman (Hounddog, TV’s Tonight Show with Jay Leno), a 9 year old Russian girl with a passion for painting. Esther is very mature for her age and makes an instant connection with Kate and John. After they adopt her, they soon notice that strange things begin to happen around her. Trouble seems to follow Esther, and Kate and John discover that there is more to their daughter than originally thought.
Orphan is an excellent movie, even to those who normally don’t enjoy scary movies. The plot is incredibly well-developed, with so many twists that you begin to stop trying to figure out the movie on your own and allow the movie to shatter your expectations. The acting was refreshingly believable: Fuhrman plays Esther so terrifyingly convincing that you forget the actress is only 12 years old. Farmiga, who plays Kate, is able to add an interesting level of vulnerability to her character that allows the audience to both sympathize with and ridicule her.
The movie is branded with the horror genre, though in reality, it is much more of a suspense/thriller. Orphan’s scares are not through excessive gore or things popping out at the screen, but through the constant, almost tangible tension that hangs over the whole movie’s atmosphere. At multiple times, it withholds the scares from when the audience thinks they will happen. By doing this, the mild nature of the shock has more of an impact.
Many movies that have recently been released have suffered from a weak plot, but Orphan’s plot is the driving force of the movie. From the first meeting with Esther to the final climactic scene, the audience is, whether they like it or not, suckered into the story.
Similar in shock value to thrillers such as Fatal Attraction, the movie prides itself from moments that make the audience gasp and groan. Many instances throughout utilize not excessive, but still stomach-churning visuals, such as blood splatter or broken bones. The movie makes them rather graphic, and they’re sheer eye candy to someone with a strong enough stomach.
A refreshing change from other horrors, the movie has many instances of dark humor, allowing the movie to diverge from the plot while still maintaining its dark atmosphere.
Among critics, Orphan received many mixed reviews. It received only a 55% out of 100% on RottenTomatoes.com, with many critics calling the movie “formulaic” and “sleazy.” Other critics disagreed, praising the movie for its originality: Roger Ebert says, “You want a good horror film about a child from hell, you got one.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)