Showing posts with label Movies – Category Intros. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movies – Category Intros. Show all posts

Thursday, June 11, 2015

The Top Ten Lesser-Known Films from Game of Thrones Actors

Note: there are no spoilers in this post for Game of Thrones, regardless of how little of the show you may have seen.

As I write this the fifth season of the TV show Game of Thrones has one episode left to air.  Once again several new characters were introduced.  It was the addition of two of the performers – Keisha Castle-Hughes and Jonathan Pryce – that got me thinking about a couple of great movies they did.  I then started mentally wandering through other cast members and I soon realized that there were quite a few good movies out there that the actors and actresses on the TV show had been involved in.  I decided to build a Top Ten list.

Friday, January 9, 2015

Announcing: Steve’s Selections

In 2015 I will have a new kind of post.  Oh, it will still be a movie review, but the origin of it will be different.  Instead of just doing reviews for a set of films all having something in common, I will be also be reviewing films suggested to me by Steve Honeywell at 1001plus.  In return he will be reviewing films that I have suggested to him.

Last year I noticed Steve doing this with another blogger and I liked the concept.  Hell, the biggest reason I started and have continued this site is to recommend films, books, hikes, etc. to others.  Unless someone comes back afterwards to leave a comment telling you what they thought of the film, though, you never really know what people’s reactions were.  This way you can read a review of the film from a person whose opinion you respect.

Steve and I will be doing one review a month - posting them on the second Monday.  The first one up will be my next post in three days’ time.

Steve and I each selected films we liked and genuinely hoped the other would like, too.  There is a chance, though, that I might get done watching one of the films Steve selected and I find that it’s not one I would recommend to others.  (“Recommended” means a rating of three stars or higher.)  To date I have only written full reviews for movies I would recommend.  On the chance that I have a selection from Steve that I would not recommend I will still be writing a full review.  This is a change in concept for this site.  (That’s why I only have Labels for 3, 4, and 5 star films.)

Each of us tried to pick a wide range of genres, rather than concentrating on only one or two that we particularly liked.  The only real criteria are that these had to be films that the other had not yet seen.  (Both of us were going to assign 1989’s Dead Again to the other, but each of us had already watched it.) 

Steve additionally asked me to pick films not on one of his Oscar lists since he was going to see those at some point anyway, so he therefore was looking to see great movies he might not otherwise have ever watched.

Without further ado, here are the 12 films Steve has selected for me:


And here are the ones I chose for Steve and his reviews of them:

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

A Great Year for Movies - 1939

Scarecrow: I haven't got a brain...only straw.
Dorothy: How can you talk if you haven't got a brain?
Scarecrow: I don't know, but some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't they?
Dorothy: Yes, I guess you're right.

                                                                       --- The Wizard of Oz

If you stop to think about it, the movies that came out in 1939 were released 75 years ago.  Many of them have been forgotten, some justly, some unjustly.  And some of them are among the all time classics in movie history.

In honor of their 75th anniversary I am going to be recommending my five top rated films from 1939, along with the ones from the 1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die list that received three stars from me.

Why am I doing this category?  Why this year?  It is because I consider 1939 to be the best year for movies in all of cinema history.  1994 would be second, in case you are curious.  I discussed that year here.  By the way, 1954 and 1974 are also standouts. 

I won’t be reviewing them now, but so that these good films at least get some notice, here are other 1939 movies that I would recommend:  The Story of Vernon and Irene Castle, Dark Victory, Goodbye Mr. Chips, Young Mr. Lincoln, and Of Mice and Men

Here are the 1939 movies I have seen that I would not recommend: Destry Rides Again, Gunga Din, and Babes in Arms.  All are 2.5 star movies, which means they were okay, but not good enough to recommend.

There are some notable 1939 movies that I have not seen.  If you have a particular favorite among them, please let me know:  The Four Feathers, The Women, Son of Frankenstein, Gulliver’s Travels, The Roaring Twenties, Buck Rogers, The Story of Alexander Graham Bell, Beau Geste, Drums Along the Mohawk, and Midnight.  I have not seen Love Affair yet, but since it is a Best Picture nominee I will watch it eventually.  I am pretty sure I have seen both The Hound of the Baskervilles and The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, but I am not positive.

As I post the reviews, I will come back and add links here for those posts:

1.  Mr.Smith Goes to Washington – (posted May 6, 2012)

Gone with the Wind
Stagecoach
Only Angels Have Wings
Ninotchka
Daybreak
The Story of the Last Chrysanthemum

On to the reviews…

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Westerns That Are Not Set In The West

“Mos Eisley spaceport: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.  We must be cautious.” – Obi-Wan Kenobi, Star Wars

Think of all the different kinds of movie genres: drama, comedy, horror, romantic comedy, musical, thriller, action, science fiction, fantasy, etc.  What do these genre names have in common?  They all describe the content of what is in the movie.  And that content can occur in any possible setting or time period.

At first glance, the one exception to this is the Western genre.  Instead of describing what is in it, it describes where and when it is set.  Say “western” and people picture the American West, Monument Valley, desert, cacti, mid 1800s technology, etc.  It’s the only major movie genre that is like that.  (No, “Foreign” doesn’t count since that describes the language being spoken in the film, not where it is set.  Watch The Wedding Banquet sometime.  And some people miss the fact that a movie set in outer space does not have to be science fiction.  It was sad how often I saw Gravity described as “sci-fi”.  It’s a drama set in contemporary near Earth orbit.  And while we’re at it, science fiction doesn’t have to be set in the future.)

But at second glance, is “western” really describing only the setting?  I’m sure it started out that way, but over the decades it has also come to describe the kind of story you can expect almost as much as when you hear “horror” or “romantic comedy”.  When hearing the term “western” some people certainly are picturing desert, but others are picturing tales of good guys vs. bad guys, revenge on someone who has hurt a family member, gunslingers, desolation, a stranger riding into town and helping a widow save her land, etc.

And there are films with the classic western setting that have nothing to do with any of the classic western stories and themes.  Take From Noon to Three (1976).  It certainly starts like you would expect, but it goes in a whole other direction that people probably are not expecting when they think of a western.  And that doesn’t hold a candle to Dead Man (1995) when it comes to a classic western setting presenting a story far removed from that of the classic western film.

Consider the following story: farm boy from the boondocks meets an old gunslinger who shows him the ropes.  After riding into town where all the bad guys and action are they join up with a disreputable criminal with a heart of gold and later a fancy woman out of her element.  Farm boy wants to get revenge on the man who killed his father.  And that man is the former protégé of the old gunslinger who was once very close to him until the protégé betrayed him.  If that’s not a western, I don’t know what is.  If you haven’t figured it out already, I just described Star Wars.

Aside from science fiction, the samurai films of Akira Kurosawa were certainly influenced by American westerns, to the point that some of them even ended up getting remade as out and out westerns (Seven Samurai = The Magnificent Seven, Yojimbo = A Fistful of Dollars, Sanjuro = For a Few Dollars More, etc.)

And the American West isn’t the only place with lawless wide open spaces.  A film such as The Good, the Bad, the Weird (2008) is set in Manchuria – which is both literally and metaphorically the Wild West for the 1930s Koreans that are the main characters in it.  The Sundowners (1960) is set in the Australian outback in the 1920s and features a family living and riding in what might as well be a stagecoach while driving sheep.  Django Unchained (2012) is certainly set in the right time period, but it’s in the American South not the West.  It echoes so much of the classic western, though, that writer/director Quentin Tarantino referred to it as a “Southern”.

All of these films and more are Westerns in everything except name.  These are the kinds of movies I will be recommending in this category.  As I review the films I will come back and add the links for them here.

Tampopo (1985)
Star Wars (1977)
The Good, the Bad, the Weird (2008)
The Sundowners (1960)
Yojimbo (1961)

Firefly (posted May 5, 2011)
Serenity (posted May 5, 2011)
Seven Samurai (posted October 7, 2011)
Django Unchained (posted February 4, 2013)

On to the reviews…

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Movies with Interracial Relationships

Young Boy with Coffee – “Excuse me, I happened to be passing, and I thought you might like some coffee.”
Little Girl – “Oh, that's very nice of you, thank you.”
Young Boy with Coffee – “Cream?”
Little Girl – “No, thank you, I take it black, like my men.”
                                                – Airplane! (1980)                   

If there’s one subject in most of movie history that pretty much guaranteed controversy it was having an interracial relationship in it, especially if it was black/white.  This category won’t be restricted just to those two races, though.  There will be various combinations among the films.

And by “relationships” I don’t mean buddy movies such as Lethal Weapon, Shanghai Noon, or the like.  No, I mean relationships where two people are romantically or sexually connected to each other (at least as far as it was allowed to go for the time period the film was made.)

Because there have been so many films like this in recent years, I am going to limit this category to those movies where the relationship is a sizable or key component to the film.  This means I will be excluding movies like The Royal Tenenbaums where it is an ensemble and there just happens to be an interracial couple among the characters.

In the interest of showing how things have changed over the years I will be posting reviews of my recommended films in chronological order – oldest to newest.  I've placed the years there to give you an idea of what the range will be.  As I review the films I will come back and add the links for them here. 

Monster's Ball (2001)
O (2001) - (posted July 28, 2012)

On to the reviews…

Saturday, March 8, 2014

Comedies That Become Dramas

“And if I laugh at any mortal thing,
‘Tis that I may not weep.” – Don Juan, Lord Byron

“Some things are of that nature as to make
One’s fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache.” – Pilgrim’s Progress, John Bunyan


I still have some key 2013 films to see before I can post my Top 10 Films of 2013, so I will do a new category in the meantime.

When I say “comedies that become dramas” I don’t mean the films that mix comedy and drama together (i.e. “dramadies” or “comedy/dramas”.)  No, I mean films that start out pretty much as straight comedies with lot of laughs then take a turn somewhere in the middle and become dramas with little, if any, humor.  This can be a difficult transition to make without losing the audience.  The films that do manage to achieve this are well worth recommending.

And I am not referring to films that simply tack a sad ending onto a comedy.  I can’t think of any film off the top of my head that was able to make that work without feeling manipulative.  No, this category is for films that spend extensive parts of their run time as first a comedy, then as a drama, with little mixing of the two.

As I review the films I will come back and add the links for them here.

Defendor (2009) – posted February 23, 2011
Pleasantville (1998) – posted September 17, 2012
Something Wild (1986) – posted July 5, 2013
On to the reviews…

Monday, December 9, 2013

Gloria Grahame Movies

“It wasn’t the way I looked at a man; it was the thought behind it.” – Gloria Grahame

If you do not watch many older films your first reaction is probably “Who’s Gloria Grahame?”  Well, she was sort of the Angelina Jolie of her day – the Angelina Jolie before she became a U.N. Goodwill Ambassador and started a mini-U.N. of her own.  For about ten years Jolie had this sexy, bad girl, don’t know what she’s going to do next, tongues always wagging about her, image.  That was Gloria Grahame from the mid 1940s to the mid 1950s.

Like Jolie, Grahame was known for her sex appeal onscreen, especially the way that she looked at men (hence the quote above.)  Despite some people wanting to disregard her because of her sexiness she got more challenging roles, culminating in a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for The Bad and the Beautiful (1952).  Jolie had a very similar arc, winning her Best Supporting Actress Oscar for Girl, Interrupted (1999).

And after Jolie, in her joy at winning the Oscar, kissed her brother quickly on the lips and then in her acceptance speech said she loved her brother, the gossip mill started with all kinds of stories about “incestuous love affairs.”  Jolie was able to put those behind her. Unfortunately, Grahame was not able to put her scandal behind her.

Her second marriage was to director Nicholas Ray – a man 12 years older than her.  That ended in divorce, then after a third marriage also ended in divorce, Grahame married Anthony Ray – Nicholas Ray’s son and her former stepson.  He was 14 years younger than her.  This started rumors that her marriage to Nicholas Ray had ended because he had caught her in bed with his then 14 year old son Anthony.  Grahame also had children with each of these husbands.  Those must have been some fun family reunions.

(In case you’re wondering, Grahame’s son with Nicholas Ray would have been both a half-brother to Grahame’s two sons with Anthony Ray, and simultaneously an uncle to them, too.  That son by Nicholas Ray would also have been both a half-brother to Anthony Ray and simultaneously his stepson.  Got all that?)

Despite any rumors about her offscreen life, her career onscreen had an impressive ten year arc, from a brief, but memorable, appearance in 1946’s It’s a Wonderful Life that got her noticed, through the big budget 1955 musical Oklahoma.  Her personal awards included an Oscar nomination for Crossfire (1947) and her win for The Bad and the Beautiful.  In my opinion she probably deserved nominations for her work in both In a Lonely Place (1950) and The Big Heat (1953).

Finally, I did a very popular post on celebrity look-alikes back in 2011.  It’s had more than four times the number of hits of any other post I have done.  If you’ve never seen it, you can find it here.  Anyway, while I was watching the 2006 film The Fall there were times that I would have sworn that actress Justine Waddell was a clone of Gloria Grahame.  Here are pictures of the two of them.

Gloria Grahame
Justine Waddell in The Fall


As I review the films I will come back and add the links for them here.


On to the reviews…

Monday, November 4, 2013

Movies with Evil Doctors and Mad Scientists

“She’s the Dr. Doom to my Mr. Fantastic, the Dr. Octopus to my Spider-Man, the Dr. Sivana to my Captain Marvel.  [pause as realization hits]  You know, it’s amazing how many supervillains have advanced degrees.  You’d think the Masters programs would do a better job of filtering them out.” – Dr. Sheldon Leonard, The Big Bang Theory

I’m doing this category only after a little bit of hesitation, and partially because I just really like the quote above.  I hesitated because as someone with an interest in science and knowledge it often bothers me in films when a similar character almost inevitably ends up being evil, or at least led astray and harmed by his/her thirst for knowledge.  The evil scientist is as much a stock character as the bad guy with a foreign accent.  Unlike the latter archetype, nobody is out there protesting when smart people turn out to be evil.  It’s apparently okay to dump on them because, well, they’re smart.  Beat them up in school, see them suffer in movies; it’s all connected. 

One of the reasons I like the film Contact (1997) so much is that it is the rare film that treats science and scientists with respect.  It’s also a rare film that treats faith with respect.  To have both together in one movie is nothing short of remarkable.  You can read my review of it here.

Films have used these kinds of evil characters almost from the first days of the invention of the movie camera and they have continued right up to the films that are still being released today.  That doesn’t mean that all movies that use it are bad, though; far from it.  I will be reviewing some of the classics of the genre.  And the fact that the mad scientist is such a cliché makes it ripe for parody and reinvention.  I will review a couple of those kinds of films, too.  In all, I will be posting ten new reviews.

I won’t be including any James Bond movies since almost all of them would qualify and this category would end up being one on Bond instead.  I also won’t be including Bond parodies like Dr. Goldfoot and the Bikini Machine (1965) – starring Vincent Price and Frankie Avalon, no less!  I do like the title, though.

You will not find any torture porn horror movies such as The Human Centipede here.  I haven’t seen it, but I know what happens and you couldn’t pay me to watch that.

Finally, you may be expecting me to include the film Dr. Strangelove (1964), but Peter Sellers’ mugging for the camera as the title character is actually my least favorite part of that movie.  I will be including a film which references that character, though.

As I review the films I will come back and add the links for them here.

The City of Lost Children (1995) – posted January 11, 2011
X-Men: First Class (2011) – posted June 11, 2011
Iron Man 3 (2013) – posted May 3, 2013
Young Frankenstein (1974) – posted September 5, 2013

On to the reviews…

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Great Eyes

“He has his father’s eyes.” – Roman Castevet, Rosemary’s Baby

Pretty much every actor or actress that is attractive (which is most of them) has nice eyes.  That’s just a given.  Some performers, though, stand out for their eyes even within this sea of attractiveness.  Some even became famous precisely because of their eyes.  This category is designed to select some films that I would recommend that have these performers in them.

Now “great” doesn’t always have to mean “beautiful”; it just means that they catch your attention and hold it.  I’ve included a couple of actors that were very well known for their unique eyes.  Don’t worry, though, ladies (and some gentlemen).  Even though I am a poor judge of what makes a man attractive, I think I’ve got some examples for you in this category that will satisfy.  In fact, here’s Paul Newman for you right now.
 
His eyes are at the top of the picture, folks.

I’ve decided to go with a set of very well known films alternated with some that are more obscure, but still worth your time.  I’ve placed close-ups of the performers’ eyes below.  You’ll probably recognize some of them.  And no, none are Yoda; I only used real people. 

As I review the films I will come back and tell you who they are, along with adding links to their movies that I reviewed.

Paul Newman (top) and Elizabeth Taylor

Alexis Bledel

Peter O'Toole

Sheetal Sheth (top) and Lisa Ray

Marty Feldman

Kate Bosworth

Jack Elam


Charlotte Ayanna
The Insatiable (2007) – posted April 22, 2013

Ray Liotta
Something Wild (1986) – posted July 5, 2013


On to the reviews…

Monday, July 22, 2013

Submarine Movies

“Who’s the U-boat commander?” – Service Manager, Risky Business

Those who have seen the movie Risky Business (1983) will recognize that quote and probably smile in remembrance of what it accompanies.  Those who have not seen the film, should.  I won’t spoil this moment for you by explaining the humor; you should see it in the context of the movie.

The concept of a submarine has been around for centuries.  As far back as the American Revolutionary War the U.S. military used an experimental craft named the Acorn that could travel under the surface of the water.  It was used to attack the HMS Eagle, the flagship of the British Navy in 1776.  Around fifteen years ago a forgotten piece of history - an American Civil War Confederate States submarine named the Hunley – was found, recovered, and researched.  It was the first submarine to ever successfully sink a naval military ship, although it also sank before it could return.  A few years later in 1870 Jules Verne wrote the novel 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea about Captain Nemo and his fantastic submarine The Nautilus.

When most people hear the words “submarine movie”, though, it probably brings to mind one of two things: Cold War subs with nuclear missiles pointed at the enemy, or WWII subs playing cat and mouse with enemy ships.  While I will certainly have at least one film fitting each of those descriptions, there are other kinds of submarine movies that are well worth seeing, including some that have nothing at all to do with war, some that are funny, and some that don’t even take place in a body of water.

I will not be including films that happen to have a submarine in them, like Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), or even movies like 1941 (1979) which have submarines in subplots.  For the purposes of this category, “submarine movie” will be one where the large majority of the events take place on a sub and/or because of a sub.

As always, to post a review of a film here I have to like it enough to recommend it to others (at least 3 stars out of 5).  This means if you were looking forward to a review of Down Periscope (1996) then I’m afraid you are going to be disappointed.

On another note: you might be able to help me.  When brainstorming what movies to include in this category I noticed that I had nothing newer than 2002, and it’s a film I’ve already posted a review of in another category (K-19: The Widowmaker).  Have you seen a good submarine film made in the last ten years or so?  In addition, I’ve never seen Yellow Submarine (1968).  I’ve seen both A Hard Days Night (1964) and Help! (1965).  I loved the music in them, of course, but found the jokes to be purely for kids.  I know I’d like the music in Yellow Submarine, but is the humor in it more of the same, just animated?


K-19: The Widowmaker (2002) – (posted October 31, 2011)
Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1961) – (posted April 6, 2012)

On to the reviews…

Sunday, May 5, 2013

2013 Big Summer Movies Schedule and Reviews

“Summer!” – The cast of Firefly/Serenity (they would yell Summer Glau’s name whenever they messed up a line because she reportedly never screwed up herself.)

The purpose of this post is to give you a quick reference for the big films that are coming out this summer movie season.  I will be writing separate reviews of the movies I see that are good enough to recommend, and I will put the links to those here.  If the movie is not good enough to recommend I will add a short review into this post.  Either way you may want to save this post for future reference.

[By the way, you can see my 2011 Big Summer Movies and 2012 Big Summer Movies posts by clicking on those titles.]

Note – so many movies come out every summer, and so many of the smaller ones get moved around or even postponed, that I concentrate on the “big” movies.  These are the ones that are heavily advertised, expensive to make, have big names in them, and/or have had their opening dates scheduled for a long time. 

First, the list, then a little more about each movie:

May:

3rd
Iron Man 3
10th
Nothing looks big (maybe The Great Gatsby)
17th
Star Trek into Darkness
24th
Fast & Furious 6

The Hangover Part III
Skip it.  See below.
31st
After Earth
Not horrible, but not recommendable either.  See below.


June:

7th
Nothing looks big (After Earth left a hole)

14th
Man of Steel
21st
Monsters University

World War Z
Not horrible, but not recommendable either.  See below.
28th
Nothing looks big (maybe The Heat)



July:

3rd
Despicable Me 2

The Lone Ranger
Skip it.  See below.
12th
Pacific Rim
So bad it's almost good.  See below.
19th
Nothing looks big (maybe Red 2)

26th
The Wolverine
Silly ending hurts movie.  See below.


August:

2nd
Nothing looks big (maybe the 300 prequel)

9th
Elysium
Shakycam in Space.  See below.
16th
Kick-Ass 2
23rd
Nothing looks big (maybe Mortal Instruments)

30th
Nothing looks big (maybe One Direction)



May 3rd:

Title:  Iron Man 3

Stars:  Robert Downey, Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Ben Kingsley, Guy Pearce

Summary:  Iron Man returns, but how have the events of The Avengers movie affected Tony Stark, and who is this new terrorist threat called The Mandarin?

Review:  Read my review here


May 17th:

Title:  Star Trek into Darkness

Stars:  All the crew from the first film, plus Benedict Cumberbatch and Alice Eve

Summary:  Sequel to the Star Trek reboot with J.J. Abrams pointing his shakycam lens on a reboot of another iconic Star Trek story.  Will it play with fans?

Review: Read my review here


May 24th:

Title:  Fast & Furious 6

Stars:  Everyone from every prior movie

Summary:  Director Justin Lin actually made this a franchise, with each film from number 3 on being better than the ones before.  Can he continue the streak?

Review: Read my review here

Title:  The Hangover Part III

Stars:  All the same guys, plus Heather Graham returns, and Melissa McCarthy is added to the mix.

Summary:  Everyone bands together to try to help one of their own, but their road trip gets interrupted by a kidnapping.  Will this end the trilogy with a bang or a whimper?

Review:  I thought the first one was hilarious and the second one okay.  I literally did not laugh once during this entire third movie.  There are some attempts at humor, but they fall flat.  Instead they try to focus more on the adventures the guys get into, but those really don't hold much entertainment or suspense in them.  This is just an all around not very good movie.


May 31st:

Title:  After Earth

Stars:  Will Smith, Jaden Smith

Summary:  Will and his son re-team for a film, but this time they are in a big science fiction movie where they play a father and son who get stranded on Earth 1,000 years after humanity abandoned it.  The father is injured and the son must go for help.  Will there be too much Jaden and not enough Will to satisfy movie viewers?

Review:  This movie is not as horrible as you may have heard.  Much of that is backlash against M. Night Shyamalan in general, and against Will Smith trying to push his son on the movie-going public in particular.  People expecting to see a "Will Smith movie" instead get a "Jaden Smith movie".  The son is the star and Will just speaks instructions to him.  Unfortunately, Will Smith seems to see his fearless military leader character as someone who would speak and act like a robot and Jaden just doesn't have the acting skills yet to carry a movie as the lead.  This isn't a bad movie plot-wise, but there's just not enough there to recommend it.


June 14th:

Title:  Man of Steel

Stars:  Henry Cavill, Michael Shannon, Amy Adams, Russell Crowe, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne

Summary:  Zack Snyder’s attempt to reboot the Superman story.  Like Bryan Singer before him Snyder feels he has to “fix” both the iconic costume and the origin story.  Will he succeed, or is he making the same mistake Singer did with Superman Returns?

Review: Read my review here


June 21st:

Title:  Monsters University

Stars:  voices of John Goodman and Billy Crystal

Summary:  Pixar’s prequel to their 2001 film Monsters, Inc.  See how Mike and Sully first meet in college and how they learn to become monsters.  Is Pixar cannibalizing yet another previously popular film, or do they have a real winner on their hands?  (And enough is enough; where is the damn Incredibles sequel already?)

Review: Read my review here

Title:  World War Z

Stars:  Brad Pitt

Summary:  Pitt takes on the zombie apocalypse movie genre.  Buzz was good for it until people learned that massive re-shoots had to be ordered to try to save the film.  Zombie fans will turn out for it in droves, but will it bring in the other movie viewers?

Review: The plot was okay up until it reaches the point where they apparently decided to completely change things. From that point on it was completely nonsensical. Combine this with the fact that another director has been infected with the shakycam virus and most of the action scenes were impossible to follow. Making matters worse is that three major action scenes are shot in very low light, combined with shakycam, just to make sure you can't see what is happening.  This film is trying really, really hard to be 28 Days Later, but it ends up being 28 Weeks Later.


July 3rd:

Title: Despicable Me 2

Stars:  voices of Steve Carell and Al Pacino

Summary:  Sequel to the surprise 2010 hit.  This time Gru is recruited by the Anti-Villain league to try to stop a dangerous new bad guy.  Will it have the magic of the first film or is this just a cash grab by the studio?

Review: Read my review here

Title: The Lone Ranger

Stars:  Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, Helena Bonham Carter

Summary:  Reboot of the Lone Ranger story, but this time with Gore Verbinski at the helm.  Depp plays Tonto, with Hammer as the title character.  Will this be another great Verbinski/Depp pairing (Pirates of the Caribbean, Rango) or will their string of successes end here?

Review: There is a very good action sequence involving two trains at the climax of the movie. Unfortunately, it takes two hours to get to that point and it's about the only thing positive I can say about the film.

Most of the attempts at humor do not work and pretty much every single white man in the film is evil, for no other apparent reason than that they are white men. The one that isn't (the title character) is an idiot. A few other white men who have not yet had a chance to show how they are evil are quickly killed. Every single Indian, Chinese, and black man, however, is noble, brave, and good, all while being betrayed, beaten, and killed by white men. Gee, I wonder why this movie failed at the box office in a country whose large majority of the population is white?

Oh, and Depp simply plays Capt. Jack Sparrow again, just with a "me big heap Indian" accent.


July 12th:

Title:  Pacific Rim

Stars:  Ron Perlman, Idris Elba, and a young, photogenic, international cast

Summary:  Giant monsters from another dimension have invaded Earth and man builds giant robots to combat them.  Anticipation for this film is high, and you should never doubt director Guillermo del Toro, but I just keep getting a Godzilla vs. Mecha-Godzilla feel every time I see the trailer.  Will it be able to sustain itself after the first weekend?

Review: This movie is really silly. In fact, it actually moves into the "so bad it's good" territory for large stretches. I was laughing at several scenes in this film (and not the few that were supposed to be funny.)

A bunch of giant monsters come out of a trench in the ocean so mankind's response it to build 300 foot tall robots to punch them really, really hard? I knew this going in, of course, but I was hoping it would entertain my inner 8 year old boy. Even an 8 year old was rolling his eyes at this.

They say at the beginning that planes, tanks, AND MISSILES (my emphasis) took six days to stop the first monster. As the movie shows, though, pretty much anything can stop them - except being punched by a giant robot. After eventually giving up on the punching, the robots kill them by electrocution, swords, bombs, and...wait for it...missiles launched from the robots.

Another solution is to build massive walls around tens of thousands of miles of Pacific coastline to keep the monsters out...instead of building a thousand feet of wall cap over the trench they are coming out of?  And mankind waits for the monsters to approach shore and destroy cities before trying to stop them instead of just positioning defenses right outside the trench the monsters are coming out of?

But maybe there's a good human angle to the film? Nope. Every character is either bland or an asshole, except for the Japanese pilot played by Rinko Kikuchi, who was also the best thing about 2006's Babel.  The CGI is good, but you don't get to enjoy it much since almost all of the major action scenes take place at night and/or in the rain/water so you can't see much of what is going on.

Pacific Rim is this summer's Battleship - big, loud, incredibly stupid...and unintentionally funny in so many places that you may still enjoy yourself. If you must see it I'd wait and rent it for a buck when it comes to DVD.


July 26th:

Title:  The Wolverine

Stars:  Hugh Jackman

Summary:  Long-delayed sequel to 2009’s X-Men Origins: Wolverine.  This time around the film is based on the classic tale of Wolverine’s time in Japan and his attempts to fend off an old enemy while figuring out his future.  Is there still enough interest in this character or is this one too many movies with Wolverine in it?

Review:  I was conflicted on how to rate this film. On the one hand, the first hour and forty minutes were mostly a good movie. On the other hand, the last fifteen minutes were completely silly. The ending is the part of the film that leaves the most lasting impression when you are done with it, though.

We get something a little different in this movie: a superhero character study. It's a good look at the burdens Logan carries around with him. Yes, there are a few action sequences (complete with heavy shakycam) thrown in here and there, but by and large it's a quieter, more thoughtful movie than you may expect. Then in the last 15 minutes they completely undo everything with all kinds of silliness regarding both the adamantium in Logan, as well as what you can do with it in general.

Also, there is a credits sequence that creates yet another continuity problem with the X-Men movies.

So, I really wish that the writers could have come up with any other way to end the movie than the one they chose. Had they done so, this would have gotten a high enough rating for me to recommend it.


August 9th:

Title:  Elysium

Stars:  Matt Damon, Jodie Foster, Sharlto Copley

Summary:  A space station holds all the rich people, while the Earth is where all the poor live.  Can one man rectify this situation?  This is director Neill Blomkamp’s first film since 2009’s District 9.  That movie was much loved by critics, but was only a modest success at the box office.  Has there been enough growth in his fan base since then to make this a hit, or will this film be his “sophomore slump”?

Review:  Elysium, aka Shakycam in Space, had a decent concept, but a poor execution. Jodie Foster was completely wasted and out of place in her role. The entire plot point of changing code was silly because it can simply be changed back in a matter of seconds by going to the last backup. And the shakycam levels in the quiet parts of the film were set to "earthquake", while during the action sequences they were set to "paint mixer". There was a 10 minute stretch in the middle of the movie where I literally could not tell you a single thing that happened. I'm assuming some people died because those characters never showed up again, but you couldn't prove it by me.


August 16th:

Title:  Kick-Ass 2

Stars:  Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloe Grace Moretz, Jim Carrey, Christopher Mintz-Plasse

Summary:  Sequel to the fantastic 2010 film Kick-Ass with the title character and Hit Girl returning to combat the threat of the Red Mist.  This time around they have a whole team of other heroes to help them, but Red Mist has countered with a team of villains.  Will this be as great as the first one, or is the release date change from late June to mid-August a bad sign that the studio doubts the box office potential of this film?

Review: Read my review here