-
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
2009. Rated PG-13, 107 minutes.
Director: Gavin Hood.
Starring Hugh Jackman, Liev Schreiber, Danny Huston, Will.I.Am.
Plot: The origin story of the X-men's most popular mutant, Wolverine, duh.
The Good: It knows that its bread and butter is spectacular action sequences and fight scenes. Our hero gets his claws out early and often, slicing his way through bads guys against a backdrop of pyrotechnics and cgi. And all of it looks great. The story between those scenes is simple but effective, with a nice twist thrown in at the end.
The Bad: This movie makes some the same mistakes as its predecessor in the series, X-Men: The Last Stand. First, it suffers terribly from "more is less" syndrome. There are just too many mutants for one movie. At least for this movie. Characters are introduced then given a scene 60 seconds or less to showcase their power. And that's pretty much it, no matter how cool they are or how much we want to see them again. Then it rushes things along. Its not quite as abbreviated as The Last Stand but is isn't much longer. Wolverine is an interesting enough character to not only get his own movie but be allowed to breathe and grow within it. Had it taken its time and added maybe another 20 or 30 minutes, some of the complications dealt with in the comics could've been tackled. That may have separated it from the pack of superhero movies of which its firmly entrenched within.
The Ugly: A certain fight scene seems very much like a ripoff of the light saber duel featuring Darth Maul at the end of Star Wars - Episode I: The Phantom Menace.
Recommendation: Be honest, you knew if you were interested in this movie before you read one word. If you are, see it. Its solid fare for the genre but not the genre's best. If you're not, skip it. You're not missing anything special. One caveat, though: as usual, hardcore comic book fans might be a little put off by the liberties taken with a story they know and love.
The Opposite View: Mick La Salle, San Francisco Chronicle
What the Internet Says: 6.8/10 on imdb.com (10/11/09), 36% on rottentomatoes.com, 43/100 on metacritic.com
MY SCORE: 6/10Comment
-
Been on a little bit of superhero kick...
The Batman/Superman Movie: World's Finest
1998. Not Rated, 61 minutes.
Director: Toshihiko Masuda.
Starring Kevin Conroy, Tim Daly, Dana Delany, Mark Hamill.
The Joker (Hamill) steals a rare and valuable statue then travels to Metropolis in hopes of killing Superman (Daly). Despite decades of evidence to the contrary, this movie plays it as if our two heroes had never met before. Given that, it actually succeeds in giving us an interesting love triangle involving Superman and Bruce Wayne competing for Lois Lane's affections. Back to the hero stuff: things are always more interesting when the Joker in around. As usual Mark Hamill delivers a stellar performance as the Clown Prince of Crime and so does Arleen Sorkin as his sidekick Harley Quinn. There's plenty of action to go around. However, the animation is a tad below specs. Its okay but totally unspectactular.
MY SCORE: 7/10
Superman/Batman: Public Enemies
2009. Rated PG-13, 67 minutes.
Director: Sam Liu.
Starring Kevin Conroy, Tim Daly, Clancy Brown, Allison Mack.
Plot: Even though Lex Luthor (Brown) has apparently cleaned up and become the President of the United States, Superman (Daly) is still distrusting of him. There's also the little matter of a media made entirely of kryptonite on a collision course with Earth.
The Good: First and foremost, it doesn't mince on the action. Supes and Bats find themselves scrapping with numerous super-powered individuals. The story is written in a manner that facilitates a large number of cameos from the DC universe without the need for them to be developed as part of the story. Getting screentime for all those characters without the movie feeling rushed or cluttered is no small task yet its handled well, as is the bromance between our heroes. Fans of animated Bat-fare will no doubt enjoy the work done by long-time voice Kevin Conroy.
The Bad: Unfortunately, with a giant rock barreling towards Earth, it has too many elements that remind one of Michael Bay's Armageddon. This might not be so bad if Armageddon weren't so...um...bad. Also, as with just about anything "Superman" there's really only one story arc: Superman is super then gets weakened by kryptonite and then is re-superized when someone else gets rid of said kryptonite. If this is a spoiler for you then you've obviously no clue who Superman is.
The Ugly: Power Girl (Mack) is so disproportionately drawn and in such a low cut costume, you can't help but stare at her chest. And she seems to be rocking DD cups or better. Even one of the other characters comments on it.
Recommendation: Either you're a fan of animated superhero stuff, or you're not. This isn't changing anyone's mind one way or the other.
The Opposite View: John J. Puccio, DVDTown.com
What the Internet Says: 7.2/10 on imdb.com (10/11/09)
MY SCORE: 6/10Last edited by dell71; 10-11-2009, 12:22 PM.Comment
-
The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
2008. Rated PG-13, 79 minutes.
Director: Seth Gordon.
Starring Steve Wiebe, Billy Mitchell, Walter Day, Steve Sanders.
Steve Wiebe tries to break Billy Mitchell's nearly quarter-century old world record in Donkey Kong. On the surface, its a documentary about classic arcade games and the people who love them. I mean really love them. At its core, its a sports movie not unlike any number of underdog stories that have come before it. It happens to be a very well told true story. Its effectiveness largely comes from how skillfully it frames our two principals. Wiebe is a down-on-his-luck guy with a passion and talent for Donkey Kong. Despite his faults, he's a likeable guy who becomes moreso as the film progresses. His longing to fulfill his quest in infectious, making us root for him. On the other hand, Billy Mitchell is our villain. Despite the fact he's obviously a hero to many people in the arcade gaming community, you will hate him. That part about him being a hero to many adds an interesting dynamic to things and seems to be the source of Wiebe's struggles to gain recognition. Even if you've never been a gamer, the story draws you in and tugs a bit at your heartstrings.
MY SCORE: 8/10
Sidenote:
Though our hero and villain are both married, one can't help but wonder how many 40 year old virgins are on display, here.Comment
-
I caught this a few weeks ago, enjoyed it as well. A very fascinating look inside a subculture that you'd never get otherwise.
The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
2008. Rated PG-13, 79 minutes.
Director: Seth Gordon.
Starring Steve Wiebe, Billy Mitchell, Walter Day, Steve Sanders.
Steve Wiebe tries to break Billy Mitchell's nearly quarter-century old world record in Donkey Kong. On the surface, its a documentary about classic arcade games and the people who love them. I mean really love them. At its core, its a sports movie not unlike any number of underdog stories that have come before it. It happens to be a very well told true story. Its effectiveness largely comes from how skillfully it frames our two principals. Wiebe is a down-on-his-luck guy with a passion and talent for Donkey Kong. Despite his faults, he's a likeable guy who becomes moreso as the film progresses. His longing to fulfill his quest in infectious, making us root for him. On the other hand, Billy Mitchell is our villain. Despite the fact he's obviously a hero to many people in the arcade gaming community, you will hate him. That part about him being a hero to many adds an interesting dynamic to things and seems to be the source of Wiebe's struggles to gain recognition. Even if you've never been a gamer, the story draws you in and tugs a bit at your heartstrings.
MY SCORE: 8/10
Sidenote:
Though our hero and villain are both married, one can't help but wonder how many 40 year old virgins are on display, here.
Comment
-
As I'm wont to do in October, I'm about to go heavy on the horror flicks (actually started late September with The Uninvited, which I'll revisit). Not exclusively horror, mind you, but heavy nonetheless. Starting with...
My Bloody Valentine
1981. Rated R, 90 minutes.
Director: George Mihalka.
Starring Paul Kelman, Neil Affleck, Lori Hallier, Cynthia Dale.
A mining accident kills a number of miners while unaware local folk yuk it up at the town Valentine's Day party. One year later, Harry Warden, the lone survivor of said accident, murders a bunch of the good people of Valentine's Bluff. Now twenty years later, the town decides to have its first Valentine's celebration since the killings and whaddya know, people start dying again. Made during the early 80s, the golden age of slasher flicks, its achieved a cult following and some even regard it as a classic of the genre. Since I've seen dozens, if not hundreds of them, I feel safe saying its not. Its got a solid premise and even a decent twist. However, it commits the unforgivable sin for a slasher flick - it flinches. Let me explain. Most slasher flicks aren't really about scaring you, intrinsically anyway. They're about the visual fright, making us cringe at a succession of progressively gorier events. This movie often cuts away from the climactic moment prematurely. Too much of the action takes place barely off-screen. This genre's version of the money shot is oft-missing. A hack-fest without much hacking is just a hack job. What fans of these types of movies came to see isn't there. In fairness, the real slashing was done by censors as the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) ordered extensive cuts in order for the movie to recieve an 'R' rating as opposed to the 'X' they were threatening to slap it with (this is in the days before 'NC-17'). Though an "uncut" version was released in January of '09, some claim that even that version doesn't contain all of the lost footage which is said to have lots of gore. You can read more about it here. As it is, its okay and has its moments but comes off flat.
REAL MOVIE SCORE: 3.5/10
SLASHER FLICK SCORE: 5.5/10
My Bloody Valentine 3D
2009. Rated R, 107 minutes.
Director: Patrick Lussier.
Starring Jensen Ackles, Jaime King, Kerr Smith, Edi Gathegi.
Plot: A Valentine's Day accident kills a number of miners and puts the lone survivor, Harry Warden, into a coma. Exactly one year later, Harry wakes up and kills pretty much everyone in the hospital. Ten years following that, people start turning up dead again as the romantic holiday approaches.
The Good: It gives you what you came for. You watch a movie like this mainly to see people getting mutilated by a homicidal maniac. This film knows its audience and wisely panders to it. Our boogeyman shoves his pick-axe through the crown of a head, the back of another, through someone's abdomen...you get the picture. The story is also just suspenseful enough to keep things interesting and even handles its twist better than the original. Finally, having the movie in 3D is an added treat for fans.
The Bad: The bad dialogue is pretty much par for the slasher flck course but it lacks the humor of the original. Its intent on creating a menacing atmosphere, which it does, but it takes itself a little too seriously. Also, the national media element of the story should've been cut completely out of the picture. Its introduced like its going to play a major role. If it does, it would've been too much like Scream. Since it doesn't, it feels like a loose end.
The Ugly: The eyeball coming at ya in 3D.
Recommendation: For fans of the genre, this is a must-see. It improves upon the original in nearly every aspect. And its in 3D so the blood-splattering goodness comes right at you. If you're not a fan of these types of movies, the story isn't quite compelling enough for you to make an exception, you'll never get passed the blood and guts. For us sadistic types who love a good meat grinder, its right up our alley.
The Opposite View: I think I'll make slasher flicks exempt from this.
What the Internet Says: 5.8/10 on imdb.com (10/13/09), 58% on rottentomatoes.com, 51/100 on metacritic.com
REAL MOVIE SCORE: 5.5/10
SLASHER FLICK SCORE: 8.5/10Last edited by dell71; 10-14-2009, 07:06 AM.Comment
-
Dell, check out Dead Snow. It's essentially a Norwegian homage to Evil Dead, but I saw it in theatres this weekend and it was incredible. Nazi. Zombies. That's pretty much all you need to know about it
Comment
-
Comment
-
watched I Love you Man last night. hehehe....that was a great movie. Very funny and a lol alot. The ending got cheesy, but still kept me laughing all the way thru the credits.Comment
-
OK, its time to revisit this:
I've now watched the original...
The Uninvited
2009. Rated PG-13, 87 minutes.
Directors: Charles Guard, Thomas Guard.
Starring Emily Browning, Arielle Kebbel, Elizabeth Banks, David Strathairn.
Plot: A year or so after her mother died in a horrible fire, Anna (Browning) comes home from the mental institution. Of course, she still has ghastly visions and nightmares, a whiny older sister and dad's new girlfriend, and mom's ex-caretaker, appears to be...e-e-evil...muwahahahahaha...ahem...sorry. Anyhoo, it's a remake of the Korean movie A Tale of Two Sisters.
The Good: Whenever Anna starts seeing stuff, we get some fantastic visuals. There's not a drop of blood until very late in the movie but the sights are arresting, nonetheless. The twist at the end has been done before but its still fairly effective and almost enough to redeem the movie.
The Bad: It just plods along, re-enacting bits of better horror movies we've already seen. Though it's a remake of A Tale of Two Sisters, the movies that most readily come to mind are Pet Sematary and The Sixth Sense as it borrows heavily from both. Even if you don't see that comparison, there's another major problem: Elizabeth Banks is horribly miscast. She's supposed to be creepy, even a bit of a scary prospect for a stepmom but she can't quite pull it off. This is no knock on her acting ability in general, but she just doesn't seem to have a real dark side to pull from. It's too easy to tell that she's manufacturing vaguely mischevious facial expressions and delivers many of her lines flatly, mistaking monotone for menacing. The overall effect is we don't believe she had to do much of the conniving attributed to her to get into dad's bed. She's simply the hot blonde hanging around after his wife died; a wife that couldn't give him any for quite awhile anyway. Sorry to be blunt. Speaking of the dad, he's played by David Strathairn whom I respect a great deal as an actor. However, he seems to be slumming for a paycheck.
The Ugly: The wanna-be boyfriend's back bends at a rather impressive angle.
Recommendation: Fans of The Sixth Sense will likely eat this up and proclaim it an awesome movie. For me, it was way too formulaic, moved way too slow. Seriously, I had no idea 87 minutes could take so long. Still, the last 15 minutes or so elevates the rest of it, making it an overall decent watch that comes up a bit short. Personally, I'm going to seek out the original.
The Opposite View: Kurt Loder, MTV
What the Internet Says: 6.3/10 on imdb.com (9/28/09), 32% on rottentomatoes.com, 43/100 on metacritic.com
MY SCORE: 5/10
A Tale of Two Sisters AKA Janghwa, Hongryeon
2003. Rated R, 115 minutes.
Director: Ji-woon Kim.
Starring Su-jeong Lim, Jung-ah Yum, Geun-Young Moon, Kap-su Kim.
Plot: Su-Mi (Lim) comes home from a mental institution to a sister who idolizes her, a stepmother who hates her and a father who's confused by her but hopes she can come to grips with the event that got her committed in the first place.
The Good: It starts off like a teenager vs. stepmother melodrama but creepy things start happening, each a little creepier than the last. Before you know it you find yourself trapped within a horror movie that doesn't necessarily want to scare you but to screw with your head really badly. And yes, by the time its all said and done the movie along with your brain has been twisted into a knot. The capper is a wonderfully ambiguous ending, open to all sorts of interpretation. The whole thing would've fell apart if not for two outstanding performances from our leading ladies. Lim as Su-Mi is positively brilliant and Yum as the stepmother ranges from the evil stepmom to a hysterical psycho, to wildeyed and fearful and even a few moments as a reserved professional. It's truly remarkable work.
The Bad: It may start a little too slowly. Fans used to thrill-a-minute hack flicks with body parts flying everywhere might not give it the chance it deserves. It doesn't help that scaring isn't really the movie's aim. Disturbing you is, but works it way up to it rather than diving right at your jugular. Also, that ambiguous ending I love might be too vague for some. It will surely leave some scratching their heads wondering what they just saw.
The Ugly: Whoa...wha...where'd that hand come from?
Recommendation: This is for people into psychological horror flicks, having far more in common with the simmering build-up of Rosemary's Baby than the slice and dice meat-grinding of Friday the 13th. When the movie ends you'll have to decide what you think happened and no matter what conclusion you come to, its twisted. Subtitleophobes beware, we're speaking Korean.
The Opposite View: Jonathan Rosenbaum, Chicago Reader
What the Internet Says: 7.5/10 on imdb.com (10/14/09), 87% on rottentomatoes.com, 65/100 on metacritic.com
MY SCORE: 8.5/10
To compare: You'll need your brain for the original and may find yourself still working through it long after its over. You won't need it for the American remake as its simplified so much there's absolutely no room for interpretation rendering itself another ho-hum PG-13 horrorflick (evidenced by a runtime almost a half hour shorter). But it does give you more exciting visuals.Comment
-
Dell's Classics Presents:
Scarlet Street
1945. Not Rated, 103 minutes.
Director: Fritz Lang. Starring Edward G. Robinson, Joan Bennett, Dan Duryea, Rosalind Ivan.
Christopher (Robinson) is going through a middle-age crisis and feels trapped in a loveless marriage. When the young and beautiful Kitty (Bennett) shows some interest in him, he immediately fall head over heels. Believing him to be a wealthy and famous painter, Kitty sets out ot bilk him of his money at the behest of her abusive boyfriend Johnny (Duryea). Lots of lying and conniving ensues. This is an underrated WWII era gem with a dizzying number of plot twists. Each of them is expertly handled and continues the movie's spiral towards it's dark conclusion. In fact, it's ending is so dark I'm convinced that director Fritz Lang truly hates Christopher (see spoiler below). Edward G. Robinson trades in his more famous gangster motif for that of a square and is as brilliant as ever. MY SCORE: 10/10
(highlight to read, if interested)[/QUOTE]
NOTE: This was reviewed on page 1 coupled with another movie. I'm giving it it's own post for archiving purposes.Comment
-
still wanting to watch Scarlett street, since i need to see more Fritz LangLast edited by nflman2033; 10-15-2009, 05:06 PM.
Comment
-
going back through here, and some nice classics, Citizen Kane. Also glad you liked Bad Education, i dont' know how many Almodolvar films you have seen, but most of them are more about women than gay men. Hable Con Ella is a 10/10, Volver and All About My Mother are both solid 9's, I think i gave Bad Education an 8.
I see you watched the two Last Houses on the Left, now you have to watch The Virgin Spring which is a Classic.Last edited by nflman2033; 10-15-2009, 04:59 PM.Comment
-
im sure you've watched this movie dell and can tell me the title. Its about a couple whoa re poor and for I think there anniversery want to get each other special gifts so the woman cuts and sells her hair to buy him a chain to put his pocket watch on and he sells his pocket watch for a beautiful hair clip.Comment
-
I've also seen Volver which I liked, an 8 from me, but not the other 2, yet.
I'll def check out The Virgin Spring.
Hmmm...sounds like an O'Henry story I've read a few times - The Gift of the Magi (I know that's not it). Sounds familiar as a movie but not ringing a bell right offhand.Comment
Tweet
Comment