Tuesday, September 2, 2014

The Spectacular Now - 3 stars out of 10

The Spectacular Now - 3 stars out of 10

“The Spectacular Now” was anything but spectacular.  This snoozefest has some of the least believable acting and one of the worst scripts ever.  While the ending is poignant and the events leading up to it are important, the first 75 minutes are so bad that the conclusion loses its effectiveness.  This could have been one of the best coming-of-age endings since “Dead Poets Society” but instead, I question what percentage of people actually makes it to the end.  The first issue is the script.  There are moments that seem as if a teenager wrote it.  “I got into college.”  “You got into college?  That’s awesome!”  “Yeah, it’s pretty cool that I got into college.”  Who says that?  I was so confused when this film spoke in generalities.  Wouldn’t these characters find it important to mention which college?  What is the significance of Aimee being accepted into a college in Philadelphia if we have no clue what state they live in?  It could be in the south or it could be in Ohio for all we know.  Or my favorite: “You are the school’s star athlete!”  So… football?  Basketball?  Track?  Why does this character have to be a generic athlete?  What does this film gain by creating awkward dialogue to leave out details like the name of their school?  The second issue is the actors.  The director wanted to create a candid effect through simple dialogue and long tracking shots.  It felt like they were trying to replicate “Before Sunrise” with teenagers, but these actors simply do not have the acting chops of Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy.  Instead, Miles Teller and Shailene Woodley put on bland performances with flirtation so boring that it would not attract anybody.  The shame is that Woodley gives Aimee that "cute factor" and Teller has some amazing moments toward the end, but they are all overshadowed by the blandness that the script forces on them.  My largest issue with this film is the content.  This is basically the story of an alcoholic teenager who corrupts a nice girl in order to find himself, and everything works out in the end.  What message is this sending to moralistic teenage girls?  Why can’t Hollywood tell girls that they should help a jerk to become a better person, or better yet, try to find a nice guy instead of a jerk.  Why do we paint a picture that nice girls should lower their standards to find love?  This issue goes all the way back to “Grease” in the 70’s and our society simply has not learned because of these influences.  The critics loved the idea of this film but I think that they confused the final product for its potential.


[Pictured: Teller and Woodley make a much cuter couple when they aren't talking]

Monday, September 1, 2014

The Emperor's New Groove - 6 stars out of 10

The Emperor's New Groove - 6 stars out of 10

“The Emperor’s New Groove” is an oddity of the Disney canon.  The film is completely entertaining but lacks the storyline and character development of the beloved Disney classics.  This film was a production mess and it shows in the story’s complete lack of direction.  The initial concept of this film (when it was going to be called “Kingdom of the Sun”) was supposed to amount to a musical epic of Lion King proportions; instead, we are left with an unimpressive journey whose jokes are distracting and often used to draw our attention away from the (lack of) plot.  Examples include: Kuzco’s narration that interrupts the flow of the story in order to cross out characters with whiteboard markers, Kuzco (the character) arguing with Kuzco (the narrator), Pacha’s sitcom family, and an old man whose only purpose is to be thrown out of a window.  While the jokes are funny, they are only included because the story is not strong enough to be funny in its own rite.   This is a shame because this cast of voice actors is outstanding.  Patrick Warburton creates one of the funniest animated performances of all time as Kronk.  I will continue to watch this film over and over just for him.  His timing is perfection and, while much of Kronk’s humor is used to give the audience something memorable in lieu of a strong plot, you simply have to love his self-created theme music and interest in cooking.  David Spade’s voice is ideal for the bratty Kuzco and you really can’t go wrong with John Goodman.  I also love that the directors gave nods to a few Hollywood stars of yesteryear with Eartha Kitt as Yzma, Tom Jones as the Theme Song Guy, and John Fiedler (Piglet) in a cameo as the old man.  In the end, this is all overshadowed by the production issues and the new non-musical direction of Disney.  “Tarzan” began the trend with its musical sequences playing in the background instead of being sung by the characters, but this film eliminated the musical sequences completely.  “The Emperor’s New Groove” is full of entertaining moments and slapstick jokes but, with a plot that goes nowhere and a main character that is intentionally dis-likable, it lacks the magic that we have come to expect from Disney animated films.



[Pictured: Kronk, the real reason to watch this film]

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Secrets of the Tower of London - 6 stars out of 10

Secrets of the Tower of London - 6 stars out of 10

“Secrets of the Tower of London” is incredibly informative.  It explores the history of this iconic fortress and gives you an idea of what you can expect if you visit.  The tower plays a part in most of the important events in London over the past 1,000 years.  It has housed the Crown Jewels, been the sight of beheadings (including Henry VIII’s second wife Anne Boleyn), housed exotic animals, and seen the torture of many prisoners.  This history lesson explores the significance of the tower through many generations.  In addition to explaining everything that you can learn from visiting the tower, it also reveals the living quarters of the Beefeaters (once execution aides, now tour guides) and traditional ceremonies that are unseen to the public.  Whether you’ve visited or not, this documentary will change your view of the Tower of London.



[Pictured: The Tower of London on my 2012 trip to Europe]

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Rear Window (1954) - 9 stars out of 10

Rear Window (1954) - 9 stars out of 10

“Rear Window” is a Hitchcock classic and a fascinating piece of art.  Jimmy Stewart is in a wheelchair with a broken leg, and his only source of entertainment is watching his neighbors.  But when a suspicious sequence of events lead him to believe that a murder has been committed, he has to sort out the clues from his apartment rear window.  Every shot of this film is recorded from the apartment, placing us alongside of Stewart and allowing us our own opportunity to solve the case.  The script is genius, introducing us to all of the characters through observation.  We never hear them speak, unless it is an outburst that would be heard by the entire complex.  The film soundtrack is produced by the pianist across the courtyard, and only occurs when Stewart would be able to hear him.  The style of the music sometimes changes suddenly because that’s what happened in the apartment.  The “experience” of this film is amazing.  Jimmy Stewart’s acting is calculated and precise, and he is the perfect match for Grace Kelly.  Kelly is extravagant as Lisa, bringing the sweetness, sophistication, and class that the role demands.  Even better is the chemistry that develops between Stewart and Kelly as she begins to help solve the crime.  The film does move at a slow pace, but the pace enhances the suspense as we, just like Stewart, must wait for new developments.  Hitchcock does a great job of letting us believe that it’s all in Stewart’s head until the truth begins to e revealed, and once that revelation begins, the suspense builds to its nearly unbearable ending.  They sure don’t make them like this anymore.  I mean it, just look at “Disturbia”…  Don’t wait to see this one - “Rear Window” should be on everybody’s movie bucket list.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Non-stop (2014) - 6 stars out of 10

Non-stop (2014) - 6 stars out of 10

I wanted “Non-stop” to be terrible so that I could say "There is nothing more exciting than watching Liam Neeson text a bad guy for an hour and a half," but it ended up being really interesting.  The writers did a great job of keeping us guessing until the very end, and I might even watch this film again to figure out how the bad guy did it.  “Non-stop” does everything right as far as script, acting, twists, and action, but something makes it feel like “just another airplane emergency film.”  The story is unique and well executed but the progression of events is very routine and predictable.  Everything’s normal, someone realizes something is wrong, they get a few people involved in solving it, everyone begins to think that they are crazy, it turns out that they are right, panic ensues, time for the hero to save the day.  I couldn’t help but roll my eyes at the “my life is a mess but I am here to save you” speech - it was inevitable from the start.  It seemed like they were going a little too far with the stereotypical frightened girl, although it becomes justified once we learn the truth about Neeson.  I just wish that every other movie didn’t use the same idea.  The thing that sets this film apart from “Red Eye” and “Flightplan” is its use of social media to add a new, complex layer to the story.  Liam Neeson is his kick-butt self, perfectly falling into that stereotyped persona that we love.  Julianne Moore was underutilized but had a nice emotional moment, and I was particularly taken with Michelle Dockery as the flight attendant.  “Non-stop” won’t rock your world, but it’s definitely an entertaining variation on the airplane emergency film that we all love to watch. 

Monday, August 25, 2014

High Society (1956) - 6 stars out of 10

High Society (1956) - 6 stars out of 10

“High Society” is an enjoyable film but it will always live in the shadow of “The Philadelphia Story.”  This musical remake of the Cary Grant/Katharine Hepburn/Jimmy Stewart classic never had a chance of surpassing its predecessor, even with a catchy Cole Porter score and three superstars of its own.  It is often remembered as Grace Kelly’s final film.  This must have been a dream for her after playing the role of Tracy on stage in a production of “The Philadelphia Story.”  She performs with elegance and warmth but lacks the attitude of Katharine Hepburn that is now associated with the character.  The same goes for Frank Sinatra, whose singing is great and acting is enjoyable but he just couldn’t match the Oscar-winning performance of Stewart.  Bing Crosby suffers the same fate, not only because his performance falls short of Cary Grant, but also because he is an awkward 27 years older than Grace Kelly.  While we’re at it, I did not care for Celeste Holm as Liz Imbrie, particularly after seeing Ruth Hussey’s Oscar-nominated performance in the same role.  It is hard not to draw comparisons because “The Philadelphia Story” is simply so much better.  My favorite part of the film is the featuring of Louis Armstrong.  Similar to Duke Ellington in “Anatomy of a Murder,” I feel like this preserves Satchmo on film forever with his unique singing style and amazing personality.  From a singing perspective, the movie is great.  With three leads that are this talented, each song is better than the last.  From a script perspective, I understand that some things had to be changed to create an excuse for the musicians to be there, but I think that it weakened the story.  And those slow moments that keep “The Philadelphia Story” from being perfection?  They’re still there.  “High Society” is a good film that should be seen by all musical junkies but, if given a chance between these two films, you know which one I’d recommend.


[Pictured: Three Hollywood legends on one screen]

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Disneys California Adventure TV Special - 8 stars out of 10

Disneys California Adventure TV Special - 8 stars out of 10
January 2001
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syd6DbfYLTY

“Disneys California Adventure TV Special” was a very entertaining way to get to know the park.  Rather than an explanation of the rides or a bunch of big musical numbers to celebrate the opening, this tv special is a mini-movie that has Richard Kind and Barry Bostwick searching the park for Michael Eisner and two dimwitted cops (Colin Mochrie and Brad Sherwood) trying to track them down.  Throughout the course of the story, we experience most of the attractions, get a general feel for the park, and laugh.  By the end of the special, you’ll be itching to visit this unique theme park (which is a true testament to the park’s success, considering the negative reviews and attendance failure that loomed over the first few years of the park).  The pacing of the film is good, exploring each land and of course ending with California Screamin’.  Even though it seems like the park is too young to have a nostalgia factor, it does due to the amount of retheming that occurred when Bob Iger took over.  For guests who have still never been to the park today, this special definitely painted a pretty picture of the park and made me realize that there is a lot more there than I previously thought.  The park pulls many things from Disney Hollywood Studios but is definitely not a clone.  There are clever new ideas like Soarin’ and Grizzly River Run, as well as new additions that weren’t around at the time of this special.  There are also several iconic monuments here like Grizzly Peak, the Golden Gate Bridge, and that amazing ferris wheel.  The tv special isn’t an opening celebration like the others and there are no 1,076 member marching bands or balloons, but it doesn’t pretend to be that; instead, this special is a very clever piece of advertising that will easily hold your attention for 42 minutes.


[Pictured: The original Paradise Pier section of Disneys California Adventure]


Other Park Opening TV Specials: