It's finally come to an end, Christopher Nolan put the final touches on the legend of the Dark Knight and boy did he do an excellent job of it. I'm going to assume anyone reading this is already in the loop as to what DKR is about so I'm just going to jump into the review.
CAST
DKR has a pretty well known cast going for it, at least if you're a fan of Nolan's work. Yup, you've seen most of them before and because they all did a great job I'm only going to concentrate on 4, the noobs: Marion Cotillard, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, and Tom Hardy. Marion Cotillard is that beutiful number you may remember as Leo's wife from Inception, in DKR she plays a woman with some power or at least some money, or both and I accepted her character every second she was on screen. Not only is she breathtaking she's also a good actress. She starts out as what feels like a throwaway character and builds from there, all the while doing it with grace. How about that handsome mofo Joseph Gordon-Levitt, do I really need to say more? He's JG-L, you either like him or you like him, in this film, I liked him. He played an excellent beat cop and a believably upstanding member of Gotham (we all know those are few and far between.) He ends up playing one of the more interesting roles in the film and I think a lot of that comes from his acting. He seems the most human of all the characters, he's the one guy the audience will definitely identify with, at least as far as his actions are concerned. Then we come to Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, now she knows how to strut her stuff pretty well in the film but her character didn't seem all too fleshed out. For what she was given however, Hathaway did a fair job with it. All of this coming from a guy who was never really an Anne Hathaway fan, I always thought she was just average, now I know she's a little bit above that. Did I want to know more (but not in the "she's a mysterious character" sort of way), sure, but I'm okay with what I got.
BANE!!!
Now we come to the main man (besides the Bat) Bane! I feel I need a different paragraph just for him. Tom Hardy's Bane is easily my favorite villain of the trilogy. Yes, the Joker was the coolest, but Bane was the most dramatic, the most personal. I feel like I'll be crucified for saying I liked Bane more than the Joker, but let me explain myself. I liked Bane for different reasons than the Joker. Ledger was given a character with no real development other than he's a crazy clown and turned in an awesome performance. Hardy was given a character with more depth to him and brought him to life. Again, Ledger had one hell of a performance, but Hardy is arguably at least as good for his character and I just happen to like Bane more. The performance certainly wasn't Bronson either (for any movie buffs reading this), but it wasn't supposed to be, and I still think Hardy did an excellent job in this role as well as Bronson. A lot of the personalization of the character comes from the writing, sure, but acting, it's all in Hardy's eyes. It kind of has to be (what with the mask and all.) There's more to Bane than just the crazy megalomania and you can see that in his eyes, or really, behind his eyes, somewhere inside him. Yes there's a person behind that mask and he feels just like the rest of us. Also, don't worry about his voice too much, they managed to clear it up a lot, just keep your ears open during his scenes.
SCORE
Speaking of keeping your ears open, let's talk about the score of the film. Hans Zimmer dishes out another amazing score. My favorite thing about his scoring of both this film and Dark Knight is what he did with the villains. Everytime I think of the Joker I hear that weird white noise and everytime I think of Bane from hear on out I'll hear the chant (I'm sure you've heard it already.) A good composer can define the sound of a movie a great composer can define the sound of a legend and Zimmer most certainly does that. Another thing I like is when the villain's sound plays, it doesn't just play while we see the character, it plays before. Doing that gives things an ominous feeling, when you hear the chant or the white noise you know something is waiting around the corner about to ruin your day.
DIRECTING
What can I say about Christopher Nolan without sounding biased? He's my favorite director and still is, there's just something about his films that draws me in and I completely get lost in his world. DKR definitely feels like the 3rd film in a trilogy, so it's got that going for it. Only negative thing I can say is that the first half drags a little. Or maybe a lot, but it's all set-up anyways and it does have entertaining moments in it so it's not that big of a problem. Incidentally, once the film picks up good gawd in the heavens above does it pick up. Certainly picking up the slack of the first half and then some, so really, it more than evens things out. I should also note that the 2hr 45min runtime doesn't feel that long, at least it didn't to me.
So there you have it, my review of DKR, everything from cast to directing was put together so well it has easily become my favorite Batman film. Best final note I can give about this film is lose any assumptions. Don't assume Bane's going to sound like shit, don't assume low or high expectations, don't assume any rumors you may have heard about it are true or false. If you can go into it with a clear and open mind and view the film as it's own seperate entity that's part of a bigger picture you will be more than pleasantly surprised. Even if you do assume things you'll still come out of the theater feeling like you saw a good film, I give The Dark Knight Rises an A+!
Monday, July 30, 2012
Friday, July 6, 2012
Spoiled Milk: The Amazing Spider-Man
Welcome loyal reader to a new blog post I like to call, "Spoiled Milk." Why call it that? 'Cause I'm going to take the movies I see and talk about the nitty gritty plot detail that didn't sit well with me. Spoiled Milk has two meanings essentially: 1) I'm going to spoil plot points, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! So yeah, spoiler alert and stuff, 2) movies are like milk, good for your bones, but if they spoil, things can go bad. Don't get me wrong, I love movies and let's be clear, I loved Amazing Spider-Man, but every movie has mistakes. I don't think mistakes bring a movie down, they're only natural. In fact, I think some mistakes, especially ones that can be cleared up can sometimes make a movie stronger. It's when everything goes wrong that a movie sucks. So please, don't let what I'm about to bring up make you think the movie is bad. I challenge you to think about the plot and come up with your own answers. Let's begin.
1) The Lab Tour Scene. Alright, I'm assuming anyone reading this has seen the movie, again, I warned you this whole post has spoilers. Something didn't sit right with me in this scene. Peter sneaks into a "Future Intern Tour" thing at Oscorp and is told by Gwen not to sneak off. So what does Peter do? He sneaks off. The issue that I have is that in a lab filled with dozens of white coated scientists NOBODY saw this hipster kid sneaking off into restricted areas and decided to say, "Hey kid, you can't be back here!" Sure, he was wearing a badge, but anyone with a brain, lets say a room full of smart scientist, could tell that he doesn't belong. Hell, I'm sure they knew a group of future interns where coming in today, any scientist could easily assume he's part of that group. Either way, it would have been smart to check his badge to confirm this rather than letting him walk away unnoticed. In fact, he does get noticed, by Gwen. An actual intern notices him but nobody else does? Bullshit. So that's my first issue, I can let it slide if you just consider that maybe Peter got lucky. Fine, moving on.
2) The Random Warehouse Scene. So Parker gets bit, then asks Gwen out and then goes skateboarding with hipster music to celebrate. But he celebrates in some random warehouse somewhere. Why? Does he skate there often? If so, why hasn't anybody caught him. Sure, he's alone, but the place doesn't look abandoned, it looks like people still use it. Maybe I just missed something with this one so I guess I can let it slide.
3) Unmasked by George Stacy Scene. So the vigilante that the cops are after gets unmasked by a cop and Peter spends a good couple of seconds showing his face to New Yorks Finest. I don't have a problem with why he showed it, I have a problem with why Peter Parkers face wasn't plastered all over the news the next day. Sure the public had been evacuated, so they wouldn't be there to take pictures. But police helicopters have cameras and they where right on him after his unmasking, spot light and all. George Stacy even warns Parker to leave at the end 'cause the cops will have to arrest him. So it's not like the NYPD will stop their man hunt. Spider-Man could convince George Stacy that vigilantes are sometime necessary, but ALL of "New York's Finest"? It's not like Stacy's going to be around to tell them to get rid of that helicopter footage that must have been taken. So what's stoping them? Here's what would happen the next day: the media plays helicopter footage of a tall gangly brunette teenager in a spider suit beating up a bunch of cops with the headline, "Can anyone identify this kid?" "Yeah, that's Peter Parker," says the guy who goes to school with Spider-Man. Andrew Garfield has a pretty recognizable face. Anyways, maybe George told them to scrap the footage before he died or something.
So there you have it, all the spoiled rotten parts of The Amazing Spider-Man. If you saw it, maybe you agree with me, if not, I would like your answers to these issues. If you have issues of your own, I'd like to hear them, maybe I missed one. Hope you enjoyed the read!
1) The Lab Tour Scene. Alright, I'm assuming anyone reading this has seen the movie, again, I warned you this whole post has spoilers. Something didn't sit right with me in this scene. Peter sneaks into a "Future Intern Tour" thing at Oscorp and is told by Gwen not to sneak off. So what does Peter do? He sneaks off. The issue that I have is that in a lab filled with dozens of white coated scientists NOBODY saw this hipster kid sneaking off into restricted areas and decided to say, "Hey kid, you can't be back here!" Sure, he was wearing a badge, but anyone with a brain, lets say a room full of smart scientist, could tell that he doesn't belong. Hell, I'm sure they knew a group of future interns where coming in today, any scientist could easily assume he's part of that group. Either way, it would have been smart to check his badge to confirm this rather than letting him walk away unnoticed. In fact, he does get noticed, by Gwen. An actual intern notices him but nobody else does? Bullshit. So that's my first issue, I can let it slide if you just consider that maybe Peter got lucky. Fine, moving on.
2) The Random Warehouse Scene. So Parker gets bit, then asks Gwen out and then goes skateboarding with hipster music to celebrate. But he celebrates in some random warehouse somewhere. Why? Does he skate there often? If so, why hasn't anybody caught him. Sure, he's alone, but the place doesn't look abandoned, it looks like people still use it. Maybe I just missed something with this one so I guess I can let it slide.
3) Unmasked by George Stacy Scene. So the vigilante that the cops are after gets unmasked by a cop and Peter spends a good couple of seconds showing his face to New Yorks Finest. I don't have a problem with why he showed it, I have a problem with why Peter Parkers face wasn't plastered all over the news the next day. Sure the public had been evacuated, so they wouldn't be there to take pictures. But police helicopters have cameras and they where right on him after his unmasking, spot light and all. George Stacy even warns Parker to leave at the end 'cause the cops will have to arrest him. So it's not like the NYPD will stop their man hunt. Spider-Man could convince George Stacy that vigilantes are sometime necessary, but ALL of "New York's Finest"? It's not like Stacy's going to be around to tell them to get rid of that helicopter footage that must have been taken. So what's stoping them? Here's what would happen the next day: the media plays helicopter footage of a tall gangly brunette teenager in a spider suit beating up a bunch of cops with the headline, "Can anyone identify this kid?" "Yeah, that's Peter Parker," says the guy who goes to school with Spider-Man. Andrew Garfield has a pretty recognizable face. Anyways, maybe George told them to scrap the footage before he died or something.
So there you have it, all the spoiled rotten parts of The Amazing Spider-Man. If you saw it, maybe you agree with me, if not, I would like your answers to these issues. If you have issues of your own, I'd like to hear them, maybe I missed one. Hope you enjoyed the read!
Movie Review: Amazing Spider-Man
Who would have guessed Nick Fury appears at the end of The Amazing Spider-Man? Just kidding! Although that would have been cool. Anyways, for this review I'm going to do things a tad differently, I'm going to take the Amazing Spider-Man and compare it to Sam Raimi's Spider-Man to see how they hold up. I know it probably won't be fair for one of the movies, but hey, this is the era of The Gritty Reboot, the Amazing Spider-Man wouldn't have gotten made if Raimi's 3rd movie didn't bomb and need a reboot. Let's get started.
So the Amazing Spider-Man was about a kid who gets bitten by a poisonous spider and gets super sick, he spends most of the movie in the hospital being kind to all the other sick folk which earns him the name, the Amazing Spider-Man. He dies at the end, it's tragic. Naw, that didn't happen, but do I really need to say what does? It's Spider-Man, kid gets bit, kid is now superhero, fights a giant lizard. It's pretty standard, but then, so was Raimi's, they're both superhero films, pretty standard stuff. This one, though, does something these new reboots are doing, revealing an origin that not many people are aware of. This provides a moderately new and fresh take on the hero, they don't expand on the origin plot too much in Amazing, but it's still there. Points to them.
Now we get to the cast and let me tell you, they're the most amazing part of the film. Sure Tobey was nerdy, but Andrew felt real, he wasn't just some nerdy kid with glasses, he was a nerdy kid with glasses who also wears contact lenses. Seriously though, his interaction with Emma (the love interest) felt a thousand times more realistic and awkward than anything Tobey and Kirsten could dish out. Flash Thompson also had a slightly bigger part, wasn't just some jack-ass bully. The bad guy Rhys Ifans (the lizard) wasn't my favorite though, his acting was good as Curt Connors but his Lizard dipped into Raimi's Schizo-Villain territory. Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben on the other hand, loved him. Sure he didn't feel as warm-hearted as Cliff Robertson's Ben, but Sheen felt like a mofugen parent and that counts for something. Overall, I'd have to give the point to Amazing for accomplishing the "gritty realism" aspect quite nicely with the characters.
Let's have the directors battle it out now. In one corner: Sam Raimi of Spider-Man. In the other: Marc Webb of The Amazing Spider-Man. Raimi had experience and plenty of movies under his belt and it showed in his movie with pomp and circumstance. Webb is fairly new, only doing 500 Days of Summer before this and a ton of music video directing. From a directorial stand point, Raimi did a far better job. A friend of mine mentioned that Amazing was paced wrong at points and I'd have to agree. Granted, most of it was stuff from Raimi's Spider-Man that they had to get out of the way quickly to move on, but other parts had it too. That being said, Webb did a decent job for being new to the major motion picture. However, I've got to give the point to Raimi on this one.
I'm going to talk about something now I've never mentioned before in my reviews: the score of the film. I'm only doing this because the Amazing Spider-Man had an interesting score. James Horner did the score for Amazing while THE Danny Elfman did the score for Spider-Man, yup, THE Danny Elfman. Both composers have given the sound to many a movie, Elfman however, is more recognized if you've watched any Tim Burton movie recently. I have to say, Elfman's work on Spider-Man was fantastic, it kept things fast paced and yet blended seamlessly into the movie, which is what a good score should be. Horner's work though, didn't. Most of the film had what I think was an indie rock soundtrack and even good moments like one with the lizard resorted to cliche monster movie piano strikes. Don't get me wrong, it's cool, just not fitting. So ultimately I'm giving the point to Raimi's Spider-Man.
Well that leaves them tied, how are we going to break this. I know, I know, which one stayed closest to the source material. I'm just going to say this now, the Amazing Spider-Man did. Raimi's Spider-Man had the Goblin in the movie and no Gwen Stacy. Instead we got the classic bridge scene but this time Mary Jane was the one being tossed off it and naturally she had to be saved. The Amazing Spider-Man takes Parker back to highschool with his first love, still has the bully Flash Thompson, but also gives us NYPD's George Stacy as a character. So I'm going to have to say, The Amazing Spider-Man wins.
It was a close call and the Raimi films are still really good and changed the way people think about superhero movies, but the Amazing Spider-Man is the result of that. It was allowed to be taken more seriously and had great effort put into it, yeah it had it's problems, but I feel it's the superior film. I give it an A+, see it for yourself, who knows, maybe you'll like the Raimi one better or something.
So the Amazing Spider-Man was about a kid who gets bitten by a poisonous spider and gets super sick, he spends most of the movie in the hospital being kind to all the other sick folk which earns him the name, the Amazing Spider-Man. He dies at the end, it's tragic. Naw, that didn't happen, but do I really need to say what does? It's Spider-Man, kid gets bit, kid is now superhero, fights a giant lizard. It's pretty standard, but then, so was Raimi's, they're both superhero films, pretty standard stuff. This one, though, does something these new reboots are doing, revealing an origin that not many people are aware of. This provides a moderately new and fresh take on the hero, they don't expand on the origin plot too much in Amazing, but it's still there. Points to them.
Now we get to the cast and let me tell you, they're the most amazing part of the film. Sure Tobey was nerdy, but Andrew felt real, he wasn't just some nerdy kid with glasses, he was a nerdy kid with glasses who also wears contact lenses. Seriously though, his interaction with Emma (the love interest) felt a thousand times more realistic and awkward than anything Tobey and Kirsten could dish out. Flash Thompson also had a slightly bigger part, wasn't just some jack-ass bully. The bad guy Rhys Ifans (the lizard) wasn't my favorite though, his acting was good as Curt Connors but his Lizard dipped into Raimi's Schizo-Villain territory. Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben on the other hand, loved him. Sure he didn't feel as warm-hearted as Cliff Robertson's Ben, but Sheen felt like a mofugen parent and that counts for something. Overall, I'd have to give the point to Amazing for accomplishing the "gritty realism" aspect quite nicely with the characters.
Let's have the directors battle it out now. In one corner: Sam Raimi of Spider-Man. In the other: Marc Webb of The Amazing Spider-Man. Raimi had experience and plenty of movies under his belt and it showed in his movie with pomp and circumstance. Webb is fairly new, only doing 500 Days of Summer before this and a ton of music video directing. From a directorial stand point, Raimi did a far better job. A friend of mine mentioned that Amazing was paced wrong at points and I'd have to agree. Granted, most of it was stuff from Raimi's Spider-Man that they had to get out of the way quickly to move on, but other parts had it too. That being said, Webb did a decent job for being new to the major motion picture. However, I've got to give the point to Raimi on this one.
I'm going to talk about something now I've never mentioned before in my reviews: the score of the film. I'm only doing this because the Amazing Spider-Man had an interesting score. James Horner did the score for Amazing while THE Danny Elfman did the score for Spider-Man, yup, THE Danny Elfman. Both composers have given the sound to many a movie, Elfman however, is more recognized if you've watched any Tim Burton movie recently. I have to say, Elfman's work on Spider-Man was fantastic, it kept things fast paced and yet blended seamlessly into the movie, which is what a good score should be. Horner's work though, didn't. Most of the film had what I think was an indie rock soundtrack and even good moments like one with the lizard resorted to cliche monster movie piano strikes. Don't get me wrong, it's cool, just not fitting. So ultimately I'm giving the point to Raimi's Spider-Man.
Well that leaves them tied, how are we going to break this. I know, I know, which one stayed closest to the source material. I'm just going to say this now, the Amazing Spider-Man did. Raimi's Spider-Man had the Goblin in the movie and no Gwen Stacy. Instead we got the classic bridge scene but this time Mary Jane was the one being tossed off it and naturally she had to be saved. The Amazing Spider-Man takes Parker back to highschool with his first love, still has the bully Flash Thompson, but also gives us NYPD's George Stacy as a character. So I'm going to have to say, The Amazing Spider-Man wins.
It was a close call and the Raimi films are still really good and changed the way people think about superhero movies, but the Amazing Spider-Man is the result of that. It was allowed to be taken more seriously and had great effort put into it, yeah it had it's problems, but I feel it's the superior film. I give it an A+, see it for yourself, who knows, maybe you'll like the Raimi one better or something.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Movie Review: The Hunger Games
Here are a 1,001 things I liked about this film in natural succession.
1,001: Just kidding, although if you gave me enough time I could name at least a couple of hundred things I liked about The Hunger Games. The first thing I've got to say is that it was intense. I don't sit on the edge of my seat for most movies and when I do it's usually because I have to go to the bathroom. But my goodness this movie just pulls you in and keeps you going throughout. All of the acting was exquisite. This is the part where I usually talk about each actor I liked, but if I did that you'd die of starvation before you finished reading. I'm only going to mention the lead actress and that's only because I liked her character more in the movie than I have from the parts that I've read in book. (I've only actually read up to the part where Katniss trains for the games.)
Second thing I can mention is the directing. I have to mention the directing here because it was some of the finest directing I've seen in a movie. Granted, the movie had odd directing at one or two moments, but when it was good it was great and it was 98% good directing. *SPOILER* The scene where Rue dies, it made me question life and death, it was all sorts of powerful and moving. *END SPOILER*
The final thing I feel I should bring up in this review is the weird controversy surrounding the casting of this film. Apparently people got really racist over the casting of the characters Rue and Cinna as black people, because they didn't view the characters to be dark skinned. I think this is some weird marketing strategy and the whole thing is set up. One of the things you'll hear is that they're pretty much described as African American in the book. Rue has "satiny brown skin," that's a direct quote, google search that for second and laugh at the stupidity of people who apparently don't know what satiny brown looks like. Either way, both actors did extremely well, freaken Lenny Kravitz played Cinna. Yes, THE Lenny "I'll make you wet with my words when I sing to you" Kravitz.
Anyways, that's all I've really got say. I give this movie an A++, see it, even if you haven't read the book. Or at least read up to Chapter 5 to get the gist of what you need to know about weird things like what the hell a Mockingjay is. In fact, I'm afraid to read the sequels because I don't want them to spoil the movies! It may just be my opinion, but I think the movie may just be better than the book, I'll let you know when I finish reading it. Thank you for reading this, enjoy your day, and may the odds be ever in your favor.
1,001: Just kidding, although if you gave me enough time I could name at least a couple of hundred things I liked about The Hunger Games. The first thing I've got to say is that it was intense. I don't sit on the edge of my seat for most movies and when I do it's usually because I have to go to the bathroom. But my goodness this movie just pulls you in and keeps you going throughout. All of the acting was exquisite. This is the part where I usually talk about each actor I liked, but if I did that you'd die of starvation before you finished reading. I'm only going to mention the lead actress and that's only because I liked her character more in the movie than I have from the parts that I've read in book. (I've only actually read up to the part where Katniss trains for the games.)
Second thing I can mention is the directing. I have to mention the directing here because it was some of the finest directing I've seen in a movie. Granted, the movie had odd directing at one or two moments, but when it was good it was great and it was 98% good directing. *SPOILER* The scene where Rue dies, it made me question life and death, it was all sorts of powerful and moving. *END SPOILER*
The final thing I feel I should bring up in this review is the weird controversy surrounding the casting of this film. Apparently people got really racist over the casting of the characters Rue and Cinna as black people, because they didn't view the characters to be dark skinned. I think this is some weird marketing strategy and the whole thing is set up. One of the things you'll hear is that they're pretty much described as African American in the book. Rue has "satiny brown skin," that's a direct quote, google search that for second and laugh at the stupidity of people who apparently don't know what satiny brown looks like. Either way, both actors did extremely well, freaken Lenny Kravitz played Cinna. Yes, THE Lenny "I'll make you wet with my words when I sing to you" Kravitz.
Anyways, that's all I've really got say. I give this movie an A++, see it, even if you haven't read the book. Or at least read up to Chapter 5 to get the gist of what you need to know about weird things like what the hell a Mockingjay is. In fact, I'm afraid to read the sequels because I don't want them to spoil the movies! It may just be my opinion, but I think the movie may just be better than the book, I'll let you know when I finish reading it. Thank you for reading this, enjoy your day, and may the odds be ever in your favor.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Movie Review: 21 Jump Street
Who would have thought that Channing Tatum could be funny? Not to sound like I'm typcasting him, hollywood's doing a good job of that. He typically gets cast as the boyfriend role in a romance. It is for this reason that 21 Jump Street will blow your mind, and your wallet, 'cause you're gonna wanna see it over and over again.
For those of us who were not alive in the 80's, 21 Jump Street is about some young looking cops who go undercover at high schools to do things like drug busts and whatnot. The original 21 Jump was taken seriously as a drama. But in the same nature as Starsky and Hutch and The Dukes of Hazzard, serious shit from back in the day gets made into a comedy film. So lets talk about what makes this funny, we'll start with the acting of course.
I mentioned Channing Tatum already, but I didn't mention that he's the funniest one in the movie. Which isn't an insult to Jonah but a compliment to Channing, he was hilarious, I laughed the most during his scenes. That being said, Jonah Hill isn't that bad either, he just plays the character like typical Jonah Hill. Ice Cube did the same thing, he played Ice Cube. But the two are known for comedy and some people like them, the rest should see 21 Jump for Tatum. You shoul also see it for Ellie Kemper, who you may know as Erin from the Office, she also did a few things for the guys at Derrick Comedy... she was also born in Kansas City, I think I'm in love. One last thing, James Franco's younger brother is in this film and now that I know they're related, I can totally see the family resemblance, see if you can spot which role he plays when/if you see it.
I don't want to mention the two directors specifically, 'cause they're jack of all trades who have done a bunch of stuff across hollywood. So I'll just say that the directing and writing was great, there was comedy, action, and comedy-action.
Looks like this review was mostly about the acting, so I'll just leave you with a few positive comments. This movie is funny in many different kinds of ways and is all around good movie to see. I can't guarantee you'll enjoy it, but I can assume you probably will. That being said I give this movie an A+, best comedy of 2012 thus far, if you see it, take me with you, I'd like to see it again.
For those of us who were not alive in the 80's, 21 Jump Street is about some young looking cops who go undercover at high schools to do things like drug busts and whatnot. The original 21 Jump was taken seriously as a drama. But in the same nature as Starsky and Hutch and The Dukes of Hazzard, serious shit from back in the day gets made into a comedy film. So lets talk about what makes this funny, we'll start with the acting of course.
I mentioned Channing Tatum already, but I didn't mention that he's the funniest one in the movie. Which isn't an insult to Jonah but a compliment to Channing, he was hilarious, I laughed the most during his scenes. That being said, Jonah Hill isn't that bad either, he just plays the character like typical Jonah Hill. Ice Cube did the same thing, he played Ice Cube. But the two are known for comedy and some people like them, the rest should see 21 Jump for Tatum. You shoul also see it for Ellie Kemper, who you may know as Erin from the Office, she also did a few things for the guys at Derrick Comedy... she was also born in Kansas City, I think I'm in love. One last thing, James Franco's younger brother is in this film and now that I know they're related, I can totally see the family resemblance, see if you can spot which role he plays when/if you see it.
I don't want to mention the two directors specifically, 'cause they're jack of all trades who have done a bunch of stuff across hollywood. So I'll just say that the directing and writing was great, there was comedy, action, and comedy-action.
Looks like this review was mostly about the acting, so I'll just leave you with a few positive comments. This movie is funny in many different kinds of ways and is all around good movie to see. I can't guarantee you'll enjoy it, but I can assume you probably will. That being said I give this movie an A+, best comedy of 2012 thus far, if you see it, take me with you, I'd like to see it again.
Movie Review: John Carter
So there once was a story written by Edgar Rice Burroughs about a guy who ran around in a loincloth, it was called Tarzan. He also wrote a sci-fi about a guy who ran around in a loincloth and called it A Princess of Mars. It spawned an entire book series and was eventually made into the movie John Carter. The more you know!
John Carter is about a guy from the 1800's getting transported to Mars, finding out he has superstrength and can jump real high (who says white men can't jump?). He also gets caught in the middle of a war and falls in love with a princess... of mars, hence the title of the book.
The acting in this film was top notch. Bryan Cranston has a bit part, you may know him from such things as Malcom in the Middle and Breaking Bad. Willem Dafoe voices one of the CGI green martians and I didn't even know it was him. Lynn Collins runs around in hot-almost-revealing dresses and Taylor Kitsch's loincloth turns into a tent. Nothing too special to say about the acting, it's a Disney film, everything Disney does is gold including acting. Disney could take a crap, film it, and make billions at the box office. Anyways, lets take a look at the directing.
Andrew Stanton is the name of someone you've never heard of, unless you're a Disney fan. This guy's done a ton of stuff for them. Things like: Toy Story 1,2, and 3, Up, and pretty much every Disney film. So I can't really say anything bad about the guy, he obviously knows what he's doing.
On a completely unrelated note, but something I feel like I should menton, I fell asleep for the first 10-15 minutes of the film. Granted I was super tired at the time, but the first good chunk of the film is kind of boring. However, it's where a good deal of important set-ups happen for later plot points, so if you attend I'd suggest paying attention.
All-in-all it was a pretty good film. It defintetly doesn't hold a candle to Pirates, but at least it was better than Prince of Persion (which I didn't find all that bad.) That being said I give this film a B-, see it if you get the chance, but if you can't afford it now no worries on renting it or buying it on DVD. It's a nice little film, I had a problem with a certain plot point near the end, but I'll save that for anyone who's sees the film and wants to ask me about it. Anyways, thanks for reading!
John Carter is about a guy from the 1800's getting transported to Mars, finding out he has superstrength and can jump real high (who says white men can't jump?). He also gets caught in the middle of a war and falls in love with a princess... of mars, hence the title of the book.
The acting in this film was top notch. Bryan Cranston has a bit part, you may know him from such things as Malcom in the Middle and Breaking Bad. Willem Dafoe voices one of the CGI green martians and I didn't even know it was him. Lynn Collins runs around in hot-almost-revealing dresses and Taylor Kitsch's loincloth turns into a tent. Nothing too special to say about the acting, it's a Disney film, everything Disney does is gold including acting. Disney could take a crap, film it, and make billions at the box office. Anyways, lets take a look at the directing.
Andrew Stanton is the name of someone you've never heard of, unless you're a Disney fan. This guy's done a ton of stuff for them. Things like: Toy Story 1,2, and 3, Up, and pretty much every Disney film. So I can't really say anything bad about the guy, he obviously knows what he's doing.
On a completely unrelated note, but something I feel like I should menton, I fell asleep for the first 10-15 minutes of the film. Granted I was super tired at the time, but the first good chunk of the film is kind of boring. However, it's where a good deal of important set-ups happen for later plot points, so if you attend I'd suggest paying attention.
All-in-all it was a pretty good film. It defintetly doesn't hold a candle to Pirates, but at least it was better than Prince of Persion (which I didn't find all that bad.) That being said I give this film a B-, see it if you get the chance, but if you can't afford it now no worries on renting it or buying it on DVD. It's a nice little film, I had a problem with a certain plot point near the end, but I'll save that for anyone who's sees the film and wants to ask me about it. Anyways, thanks for reading!
Movie Review: Safe House
You ever see that one movie where Denzel Washington acts like Denzel Washington for 2hrs and everything looks grainy and dark. So you have seen Safe House, great, that's going to make my review a lot easier.
Safe House is about Denzel Washington being a traitor to the... well, to everybody. He gets held at a safe house for interrogation ran by Ryan Reynolds. It turns out this safe house is a cover for a male prostitution ring, so Denzel and Ryan have to infultrate it by taking their shirts off... and I'm totally bullshitting you, go dry off ladies. I won't reveal more about the actual plot of the film, but I will say that you've probably already seen it before. That being said, lets take a look at the acting.
I don't know if you caught this earlier, but just in case you didn't, Denzel Washington acts like Denzel Washingon for 2hrs. I'm not saying that's a bad things, Denzel is Denzel, I'm just saying no acting was required on his part. Ryan Reynolds on the other hand seemed to take his part seriously and actually did a convincing job in a dramatic action role. Mad-Eye Moody is also in this film, Brendan Gleeson for those who give a shit, he plays a CIA agent and his American accent is only somewhat believable. Now onto the director.
Remember how I said all of Denzel Washington's films look grainy and dark, well it turns out the director of Safe House... didn't direct any Denzel films before this. Looks like we know who was really pulling the strings during filming. Anyways, the guy directed your typical gritty action film and did a decent job I suppose.
In closing I will say that this movie was half way decent. Apart from an audience member whispering the plot of the film to someone who I assume was blind, I had an alright time. That being said, this is your typical Denzel Washington action movie, if you like that kind of stuff then go see it, if not then congrats you passed my gay test (this is Denzel and Reynolds in the same movie.) I'll give this film a C-, rent it on DVD or Blu-Ray, but only if you're having a Denzelathon. Thanks for reading!
Safe House is about Denzel Washington being a traitor to the... well, to everybody. He gets held at a safe house for interrogation ran by Ryan Reynolds. It turns out this safe house is a cover for a male prostitution ring, so Denzel and Ryan have to infultrate it by taking their shirts off... and I'm totally bullshitting you, go dry off ladies. I won't reveal more about the actual plot of the film, but I will say that you've probably already seen it before. That being said, lets take a look at the acting.
I don't know if you caught this earlier, but just in case you didn't, Denzel Washington acts like Denzel Washingon for 2hrs. I'm not saying that's a bad things, Denzel is Denzel, I'm just saying no acting was required on his part. Ryan Reynolds on the other hand seemed to take his part seriously and actually did a convincing job in a dramatic action role. Mad-Eye Moody is also in this film, Brendan Gleeson for those who give a shit, he plays a CIA agent and his American accent is only somewhat believable. Now onto the director.
Remember how I said all of Denzel Washington's films look grainy and dark, well it turns out the director of Safe House... didn't direct any Denzel films before this. Looks like we know who was really pulling the strings during filming. Anyways, the guy directed your typical gritty action film and did a decent job I suppose.
In closing I will say that this movie was half way decent. Apart from an audience member whispering the plot of the film to someone who I assume was blind, I had an alright time. That being said, this is your typical Denzel Washington action movie, if you like that kind of stuff then go see it, if not then congrats you passed my gay test (this is Denzel and Reynolds in the same movie.) I'll give this film a C-, rent it on DVD or Blu-Ray, but only if you're having a Denzelathon. Thanks for reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)