Limitless - 5 stars out of 10
I take issue with "Limitless" because of its glamorous portrayal of drugs. Sure, it does show some of the dangers of drug usage, but the other 80% of the movie teaches the falsehood that you can make a better life for yourself if you are on mind-altering drugs. Instead of ending this film in the "Requiem for a Dream" way (a.k.a. the way that things are in real life), the ending shows that if you take drugs and then up the dosage to a near-lethal level... your life will be better than it ever could have been without them. I would be surprised if a large number of impressionable teenagers will not become curious and try drugs as a result of this film. That being said, the film does have an interesting theme of the possibilities if we could access more of our brain and some decent action sequences. Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro play their roles well and it was actually easy to look past the impossibilities in the plot. Unfortunately, I really can't recommend this film because it gives a horribly skewed portrayal of drug usage. Instead of lying to the audience and delivering a message that drugs can help a person live a normal, healthy lifestyle, I wish that they would've given Ozzie Osbourne a cameo in the final scene and said "If drug usage does not kill you first, this is what the remainder of your life will be."
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Oliver & Company - 3 stars out of 10
Oliver & Company - 3 stars out of 10
The word that I would use to describe “Oliver & Company” is “underwhelming.” The original story by Charles Dickens leaves this film with so much potential in the realm of character development, emotional themes, and catchy music. Instead, we are left with a rushed and confused desire for more. Disney had found success by placing animated characters in a modern setting (such as Dumbo and 101 Dalmatians), and this film had the same potential with its unique 1980’s flair; unfortunately, the script failed to capitalize on this opportunity and instead created a 73-minute runtime (including credits) that feels like an undeveloped quick release, drastically falling short of Disney’s standard. In this short film, the characters and emotions are not given time to develop (like, at all) and it gives the film a sense of being hastily thrown together without consideration for the important themes introduced in Dickens’ story (i.e. saying “This is a kids movie. Cartoon dogs will be enough to satisfy them.”) This may account for my enjoyment as a child but criticism as an adult, and also might contribute to its box-office success in spite of negative reviews. The sense of being hastily thrown together is accented by the odd and unnecessary placement of the poodle’s show-stopping number (that literally stops the momentum of the film) by completely killing the 1980’s vibe. I understand that they probably put this in for Bette Midler but this is the antithesis of the writers creating a kids movie instead of a work of art like most of the Disney films. Unnecessary fluff is not the Disney way; in fact, I did not even know that this was a Disney film until a few years ago - I had assumed that it was the off-brand. The film will draw you in with its all-star cast (Billy Joel, Bette Midler, Cheech Marin, Roscoe Lee Browne, Dom DeLuise, Robert Loggia, etc.), but these stars are misused. I don’t understand why you would feature a 1980’s pop star (Joel) as the voice of one of the main characters... but then begin the movie with Huey Lewis (another 1980’s pop star) singing the first song. Also, an occasional monologue from the bulldog with Browne’s eloquent speaking tone would have been hilarious... but every line out of his mouth was about culture and it lost its charm after the eighth monologue. Finally, there is the issue of the gang. Oliver is seeking their acceptance when he is adopted during their first heist. I don’t understand their attachment to him (shouldn’t he become “one of them” first?) But then when they kidnap him after a short amount of time, he wants to go back to the house instead of wanting to hang out with the cool gang. If you had the chance wouldn’t you want to hang out with Dodger in lieu of living with some people that you just met? These moments work in Dickens’ story because they are given time to develop relationships. A simple thought toward pacing could have made this into a rewarding watch but instead, it has become one of the more confused Disney animated features.
The word that I would use to describe “Oliver & Company” is “underwhelming.” The original story by Charles Dickens leaves this film with so much potential in the realm of character development, emotional themes, and catchy music. Instead, we are left with a rushed and confused desire for more. Disney had found success by placing animated characters in a modern setting (such as Dumbo and 101 Dalmatians), and this film had the same potential with its unique 1980’s flair; unfortunately, the script failed to capitalize on this opportunity and instead created a 73-minute runtime (including credits) that feels like an undeveloped quick release, drastically falling short of Disney’s standard. In this short film, the characters and emotions are not given time to develop (like, at all) and it gives the film a sense of being hastily thrown together without consideration for the important themes introduced in Dickens’ story (i.e. saying “This is a kids movie. Cartoon dogs will be enough to satisfy them.”) This may account for my enjoyment as a child but criticism as an adult, and also might contribute to its box-office success in spite of negative reviews. The sense of being hastily thrown together is accented by the odd and unnecessary placement of the poodle’s show-stopping number (that literally stops the momentum of the film) by completely killing the 1980’s vibe. I understand that they probably put this in for Bette Midler but this is the antithesis of the writers creating a kids movie instead of a work of art like most of the Disney films. Unnecessary fluff is not the Disney way; in fact, I did not even know that this was a Disney film until a few years ago - I had assumed that it was the off-brand. The film will draw you in with its all-star cast (Billy Joel, Bette Midler, Cheech Marin, Roscoe Lee Browne, Dom DeLuise, Robert Loggia, etc.), but these stars are misused. I don’t understand why you would feature a 1980’s pop star (Joel) as the voice of one of the main characters... but then begin the movie with Huey Lewis (another 1980’s pop star) singing the first song. Also, an occasional monologue from the bulldog with Browne’s eloquent speaking tone would have been hilarious... but every line out of his mouth was about culture and it lost its charm after the eighth monologue. Finally, there is the issue of the gang. Oliver is seeking their acceptance when he is adopted during their first heist. I don’t understand their attachment to him (shouldn’t he become “one of them” first?) But then when they kidnap him after a short amount of time, he wants to go back to the house instead of wanting to hang out with the cool gang. If you had the chance wouldn’t you want to hang out with Dodger in lieu of living with some people that you just met? These moments work in Dickens’ story because they are given time to develop relationships. A simple thought toward pacing could have made this into a rewarding watch but instead, it has become one of the more confused Disney animated features.
I Wake Up Screaming - 8 stars out of 10
I Wake Up Screaming - 8 stars out of 10
“I Wake Up Screaming” is simply amazing. This is definitely in my Top 5 for Film Noir both for its unpredictable story and breathtaking acting. I am dumbfounded by this film’s failure at the box-office. It is perfectly cast as the trio of leads offer wonderful chemistry. I think that I may have fallen in love with Betty Grable a bit while watching this film. Her spunky attitude and big eyes will capture your heart and have you in a trance from start to finish. She is paired with Victor Mature (who has a perfect face for film noir) and Carole Landis (whose performance convinces me that her suicide was a tragic loss to the acting community). The story is enchanting as the guilt shifts from person to person, until the least-expecting ending comes to light. The film uses expert cinematography, particularly with the use of shadows throughout the film. I don’t care that the critics did not care for this film - it is one of the best of it’s genre and should not be overlooked.
“I Wake Up Screaming” is simply amazing. This is definitely in my Top 5 for Film Noir both for its unpredictable story and breathtaking acting. I am dumbfounded by this film’s failure at the box-office. It is perfectly cast as the trio of leads offer wonderful chemistry. I think that I may have fallen in love with Betty Grable a bit while watching this film. Her spunky attitude and big eyes will capture your heart and have you in a trance from start to finish. She is paired with Victor Mature (who has a perfect face for film noir) and Carole Landis (whose performance convinces me that her suicide was a tragic loss to the acting community). The story is enchanting as the guilt shifts from person to person, until the least-expecting ending comes to light. The film uses expert cinematography, particularly with the use of shadows throughout the film. I don’t care that the critics did not care for this film - it is one of the best of it’s genre and should not be overlooked.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Cronos - 4 stars out of 10
Cronos - 4 stars out of 10
Guillermo del Toro's debut is a vampire story that avoids all of the stereotypes. It is effective only alludes to the characteristics that are the focus of most vampire stories (stake through the heart, light sensitivity). Although it isn't my favorite film of this genre, I enjoyed this fresh, realistic approach. As I think back on it, I never really had a "yeah right" moment - the script was written pretty seamlessly to take us from real world to fantasy without us realizing (gee, can't think of any other del Toro pictures that do that... [cough Pan's Labrynth]). The story is interesting but I don't feel as if enough happened in this film. It was a bit one-dimensional in the respect that the story just goes from point A to point B without ever changing direction. This low rating is deceptive because I enjoyed it and thought that it was a good film, but the acting was just average and there are many other films that I would have enjoyed more.
Guillermo del Toro's debut is a vampire story that avoids all of the stereotypes. It is effective only alludes to the characteristics that are the focus of most vampire stories (stake through the heart, light sensitivity). Although it isn't my favorite film of this genre, I enjoyed this fresh, realistic approach. As I think back on it, I never really had a "yeah right" moment - the script was written pretty seamlessly to take us from real world to fantasy without us realizing (gee, can't think of any other del Toro pictures that do that... [cough Pan's Labrynth]). The story is interesting but I don't feel as if enough happened in this film. It was a bit one-dimensional in the respect that the story just goes from point A to point B without ever changing direction. This low rating is deceptive because I enjoyed it and thought that it was a good film, but the acting was just average and there are many other films that I would have enjoyed more.
Do the Right Thing - 8 stars out of 10
Do the Right Thing - 8 stars out of 10
"Do the Right Thing" is a slice of Americana, but not the slice of it that we typically like to advertise. Spike Lee takes a typical hot summer day and shows how a few personality clashes over insignificant events can escalate into violence and hate. The racial tension is disquieting and the penultimate scene is simply uncomfortable to watch. With a simple setting as a street of NYC with a pizza place and a market, and characters like and irresponsible delivery boy and big man with a boom box, it is tough to believe that this setting will become the medium for the upsetting events that unfold. Even though the story is very well written, the true charm of this movie is its vast array of characters, none of which has a "lead role." By not having a main character, the film puts the audience into the story, almost allowing each viewer to take on a role in the story. Unlike most films where you form an empathetic connection with one character, this film makes you connect with an entire race as your perspective shifts from one group of people to another in the middle of a scene. I honestly can't explain how, whether it is the unique camera angles or way that the script reads, but each scene takes on multiple first-person perspectives. You view the conflict as an Italian American, then suddenly view the conflict from an African American perception. Even though there is no stand-alone "lead actor," there are so many memorable performances. Danny Aiello's closing monologue is one of the most emotive of film in the 1980's and earned a deserving Oscar nomination. Spike Lee brings great depth to the character of Mookie, often unemotional and hiding the complex emotions and internal motivations that cannot be explained. John Turturro is intense, Ossie Davis has excellent mannerisims as Da Mayor, and Bill Nunn (the cop from Sister Act) gives my favorite performance of this film as Radio Raheem. His mere presence is intimidating at 6'3, but the thing that amazes me is the smooth flow of profanity from his mouth. There are so many f-words in this film, but it truly creates an atmosphere and a culture that is absolutely necessary to this movie. His speech is so natural, as if he grew up as this character. I also love him because he is from Pittsburgh... This really is an incredible script by Lee, as the story's slow progression over a 1-day period allows you to get to know a large volume of characters and their motivations in a short period of time. The ending is particularly poignant as life goes on the next morning, as if these events are commonplace in the world of the inner city. Although this film's graphic language will have your ears burning, it is an amazing achievement for Spike Lee.
"Do the Right Thing" is a slice of Americana, but not the slice of it that we typically like to advertise. Spike Lee takes a typical hot summer day and shows how a few personality clashes over insignificant events can escalate into violence and hate. The racial tension is disquieting and the penultimate scene is simply uncomfortable to watch. With a simple setting as a street of NYC with a pizza place and a market, and characters like and irresponsible delivery boy and big man with a boom box, it is tough to believe that this setting will become the medium for the upsetting events that unfold. Even though the story is very well written, the true charm of this movie is its vast array of characters, none of which has a "lead role." By not having a main character, the film puts the audience into the story, almost allowing each viewer to take on a role in the story. Unlike most films where you form an empathetic connection with one character, this film makes you connect with an entire race as your perspective shifts from one group of people to another in the middle of a scene. I honestly can't explain how, whether it is the unique camera angles or way that the script reads, but each scene takes on multiple first-person perspectives. You view the conflict as an Italian American, then suddenly view the conflict from an African American perception. Even though there is no stand-alone "lead actor," there are so many memorable performances. Danny Aiello's closing monologue is one of the most emotive of film in the 1980's and earned a deserving Oscar nomination. Spike Lee brings great depth to the character of Mookie, often unemotional and hiding the complex emotions and internal motivations that cannot be explained. John Turturro is intense, Ossie Davis has excellent mannerisims as Da Mayor, and Bill Nunn (the cop from Sister Act) gives my favorite performance of this film as Radio Raheem. His mere presence is intimidating at 6'3, but the thing that amazes me is the smooth flow of profanity from his mouth. There are so many f-words in this film, but it truly creates an atmosphere and a culture that is absolutely necessary to this movie. His speech is so natural, as if he grew up as this character. I also love him because he is from Pittsburgh... This really is an incredible script by Lee, as the story's slow progression over a 1-day period allows you to get to know a large volume of characters and their motivations in a short period of time. The ending is particularly poignant as life goes on the next morning, as if these events are commonplace in the world of the inner city. Although this film's graphic language will have your ears burning, it is an amazing achievement for Spike Lee.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Little Nicky - 4 stars out of 10
Little Nicky - 4 stars out of 10
I enjoyed this movie a lot more than I expected (though I had very low expectations). Although I thought that I'd dislike Adam Sandler's character, after about 20 minutes he became pretty loveable - this is the only reason that I was able to enjoy this film. I didn't care much for the demononic themes in this movie and felt that the plot was pretty weak; however, an unprecedented number of cameos used in clever and entertaining ways held my attention. The humor in Sandler's movies is usually fairly intelligent but this movie is all slapstick. I would watch parts of this movie if it was on tv for those entertaining moments, but I don't feel a need to watch this movie in its entirety again. Definitely not Sandler at his best.
I enjoyed this movie a lot more than I expected (though I had very low expectations). Although I thought that I'd dislike Adam Sandler's character, after about 20 minutes he became pretty loveable - this is the only reason that I was able to enjoy this film. I didn't care much for the demononic themes in this movie and felt that the plot was pretty weak; however, an unprecedented number of cameos used in clever and entertaining ways held my attention. The humor in Sandler's movies is usually fairly intelligent but this movie is all slapstick. I would watch parts of this movie if it was on tv for those entertaining moments, but I don't feel a need to watch this movie in its entirety again. Definitely not Sandler at his best.
The Hurt Locker - 6 stars out of 10
The Hurt Locker - 6 stars out of 10
This movie was good... but when compared to the movies nominated against it for the "Best Picture" Academy Award, I cannot understand how "The Hurt Locker" won. This movie failed to transport me into it's world in the same way as Avatar, Precious, or Up in the Air. Rather than feeling an emotional attachment to the characters and empathizing with their conflicts, I felt like I was watching a documentary... and that was another problem with this film. The film was shot in documentary style with first-person camera angles, shots zooming in around corners, and a shaking camera, and yet it was not intended to be a documentary. I was excited to see Guy Pearce and Ralph Fiennes' names on the credits, but their involvement cannot be considered more than a cameo. Jeremy Renner was okay but I would've rather seen the aforementioned actors. This unending display of machoism did not provide any twists or surprises. A few scenes made me hold my breath but other than that, I was indifferent to what might happen next. I felt a tiny bit of emotion in the last 10 minutes of the film but aside from that, I felt removed from the plot and waiting for something new to happen. Instead, I seemingly watched the same scene 4 times with a few random fights thrown in to split them up. If you want to enjoy this film more than me, be sure to walk into it with a low level of expectation.
This movie was good... but when compared to the movies nominated against it for the "Best Picture" Academy Award, I cannot understand how "The Hurt Locker" won. This movie failed to transport me into it's world in the same way as Avatar, Precious, or Up in the Air. Rather than feeling an emotional attachment to the characters and empathizing with their conflicts, I felt like I was watching a documentary... and that was another problem with this film. The film was shot in documentary style with first-person camera angles, shots zooming in around corners, and a shaking camera, and yet it was not intended to be a documentary. I was excited to see Guy Pearce and Ralph Fiennes' names on the credits, but their involvement cannot be considered more than a cameo. Jeremy Renner was okay but I would've rather seen the aforementioned actors. This unending display of machoism did not provide any twists or surprises. A few scenes made me hold my breath but other than that, I was indifferent to what might happen next. I felt a tiny bit of emotion in the last 10 minutes of the film but aside from that, I felt removed from the plot and waiting for something new to happen. Instead, I seemingly watched the same scene 4 times with a few random fights thrown in to split them up. If you want to enjoy this film more than me, be sure to walk into it with a low level of expectation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)