Buttered Popcorn: Buzzmans Movie Review Thread

[Houston]

Never heard of either Straw Dogs before, interesting...

 

[Buzzman]

J. Edgar (2011)

Leonardo DiCaprio stars in this riveting biopic as J. Edgar Hoover, the longtime FBI director as notorious for his overzealous methods of law enforcement as for the rumors regarding his cross-dressing and close relationship with protégé Clyde Tolson(Arnie Hammer).

J. Edgar was going to be a great movie. It just had to be. It had an all-star cast led by the always great Leonardo DiCaprio, Clint Eastwood was behind the camera working with a script from the screenwriter of Milk, and the film was placed in prime real estate to make an Oscar run. Funny how it was supposed to be. Instead what we got was a dynamite performance carrying a messy and cautious script that couldn’t establish a comfortable pace or focus on a clear subject.

There was plenty of material they could have dug up and thrown on screen through the life of J Edgar Hoover, but they seemed to get carried away a bit with just how much they could tackle. Important moments in his life are shown but quickly pushed aside trying to tackle on the next best thing that awaits you. This feels messy, rushed, and most importantly too vague. It might have turned out much better had they picked four or five defining moments for Hoover and ran away with them. Most of the interesting moments in Hoover’s professional career came from his contributions to the FBI and making it become the agency it represents today. He was a very intelligent man who used that very knowledge to work his way to the top and quickly I might add. It’s his field work and shady dealings that actually became a bore. They jump too much time without notification and sometimes can become a bit confusing to catch up. A simple years later at the bottom of the screen could have done wonders.

The films biggest strengths and weakness come when they explore J Edgars sexuality and the complicated relationship he forms with Clyde Tolson. The film certainly applies that he’s gay, but quickly cuts away from these moments between the two as if telling you to look away, this is wrong. It didn’t take enough risks and paid for it. The performance laid out here by DiCaprio is simply outstanding. It’s arguably the best performance of his career. Despite the script holding back, he shows the vulnerable and egotistical man Hoover was said to be. His counterpart Arnie Hammer as Clyde Tolson shows he is an young actor to watch out for following closely in the show of DiCaprio. The rest of the cast turned in fine, but very minor roles in comparison.

One of the film’s most curious aspects was using actual makeup to age the actors as they move along. It’s something that takes the eyes to adjust too, but outside of Arnie Hammer, they did an exceptional job of them. Leonardo DiCaprio was barely recognizable under all that rubber and makeup. This seemed to be the only risk the film decided to take, and if the rest of the film followed suit it might have been the quality it was expected to be. It’s not a bad film by any means, but years from now we’ll look back at this project and just wonder, what if……

Overall Score: 7/10

 

[Buzzman]

A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas (2011)

Following years of growing apart, Harold Lee (Cho) and Kumar Patel (Penn) have replaced each other with new friends and are preparing for their respective Yuletide celebrations. But when a mysterious package mistakenly arrives at Kumar's door on Christmas Eve, his attempt to redirect it to Harold's house ends with the "high grade" contents-and Harold's father-in-law's prize Christmas tree-going up in smoke. With his in-laws out of the house for the day, Harold decides to cover his tracks, rather than come clean. Reluctantly embarking on another ill-advised journey with Kumar through New York City, their search for the perfect replacement tree takes them through party heaven-and almost blows Christmas Eve sky high.

The first film in this series was a fun mildly successful comedy that was funny in all the right ways. The second one is a much divided film. Some loved it, but I was a part of that other group that thought it was a lazy cash grab sequel that was high on receptiveness and low on laughs. This third one released a red band trailer that was just too god damn funny to not anticipate it, so there it went, sucking back in. Only this time was different, this time it was creative, this time it was original, and this time it twas actually funny.

The story this time around isn’t as Christmas related as its advertised. Its more along the lines of an adventure film with the guys trying to find the perfect Christmas tree to replace the old one they burned down. Its linear plot moves them from outrageous scenario to outrageous scenario, but this time around they decide to try new things instead of bringing back countless cameos that the second film did. They make you laugh but never outstay their welcome. This quick pace kept the film allowing little in-between time to catch your breathe. The one reappearance that they just had to bring back was NPH playing NPH. This is the perfect definition of a cameo. He pops up, brings a ton of laughs and moves the characters right along their path. Quick, funny, and to the point. He even sends them off with a message telling them” See ya in the 4th one boys!.” Just classic. His “massage” had me rolling.

This isn’t some groundbreaking new film; it throws confetti at the screen simply because it can. With the 3D it actually looks fine. It reminds you that these characters need to comeback for another adventure because with a little effort, these films are fun. You can pretty much tell yourself if you’d give this one a go, but if you were in my situation, don’t let the second film throw away your experience with this one. It’s a hoot.

Overall Score: 8/10

 

[dell71]

Maybe I'll feel different after I see it, but I can't for the life of me figure out why a Harold & Kumar movie needs to be in 3D.

I enjoyed both of the first 2, btw. The 2nd in a "so bad it's awesome" way.

 

[Palooza]

Maybe I'll feel different after I see it, but I can't for the life of me figure out why a Harold & Kumar movie needs to be in 3D.

I enjoyed both of the first 2, btw. The 2nd in a "so bad it's awesome" way.

The funny part about the 3D was that it was so unnecessary, but they made it work. One of the coolest parts was that every time they smoked, the smoke was in 3D.

 

[Buzzman]

My Week With Marilyn (2011)

In the early summer of 1956, 23 year-old Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne), just down from Oxford and determined to make his way in the film business, worked as a lowly assistant on the set of 'The Prince and the Showgirl'. The film that famously united Sir Laurence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh) and Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams), who was also on honeymoon with her new husband, the playwright Aurthur Miller (Dougray Scott).

My Week with Marilyn is a film that knows exactly what strings to pull to give the appearance that what you are watching is incredible. It flashes its stars with “epic” speeches right about where they should be and glamour them around in some great costumes/set designs. The process of this story makes the film feel entirely clichéd, but it’s done so well that the impact it leaves on you is not deteriorated in the slightest.

The story that is told in My Week with Marilyn is obviously centered on Marylyn Monroe and how the publicity drowned her into a state of chaos. She’s actually acting when she’s in front of an audience, but behind the scenes she’s an unstable immature woman that is controlled as a mascot for Hollywood. It’s nothing that truly blows you away, nor comes as a surprise, but the pace of the film is executed extremely well. Just when the movie feels a bit too cheesy, light hearted drama, it turns into a far more serious spiral reveals the struggles Monroe went through when she was placed in the spotlight at the wrong time in her life. It’s a trend that stands true for actresses today and will last for as long as the business remains.

As for the performances, Michelle Williams has worked her way out of my hated pool the last few years and slowly ended up climbing all the way to the top for me with her performance as Marilyn Monroe. Instead of trying to imitate the real woman, she portrayed her own vision of the character and it works wonders because you never spend time trying to compare the two. She lays herself on the reel and shows the vulnerabilities and consequences that came with her fame. In the supporting role, Kenneth Branagh is dynamite. He plays a character I have almost to no information about, but there are numerous moments of the film where the entire scene is focused on him and he speaks with such control and precision, that all of your attention is entirely zoned in on him. It may even be the better of the two in a film that is full of wonderful performances. The weak link here though has to be Eddie Redmayne. He doesn’t do a terrible job, but the script limited his character to be more of a shadow following everyone else around. He feels overmatched and powerless.

This is a film that you may have a hard time falling in love with. It’s a good film filled with great moments that make it feel better than it actually was, but it doesn’t really matter because regardless of your opinion of how much you enjoyed it, you will enjoy it nonetheless. The performances alone by Williams and Branagh should get you to watch it, but everything else can just be icing on the cake.

Fun Fact: Kenneth Branagh actually directed Thor. He’s the double threat.

Overall Score: 8/10

 

[Buzzman]

The Ides of March (2011)

The Ides of March takes place during the frantic last days before a heavily contested Ohio presidential primary, when an up-and-coming campaign press secretary (Ryan Gosling) finds himself involved in a political scandal that threatens to upend his candidate's shot at the presidency

The Ides of March is a political thriller through and through. It follows the path countless other films have taken with manipulation, morale dilemmas, and back stabbing. It won’t ever be touted for its incredible creativity, but it does establish a solid story, filled with rich characters, and leaves you with an ending that isn’t exactly jaw-dropping but leaves the audience with a question where the answer is different for every person watching. It’s about the only great thing this good film actually accomplished.

In such a small role, George Clooney ends up being the focus of the entire film. It’s not necessarily the character that is glorified but the idea he represents that’s at the center of this web involving the lives of many. For Stephen Meyers, Mike Morris (Clooney) is everything he’s ever wanted. He truly believes he’s the man that can change the country and affect the lives on many positively. In doing so, he’ll go to great lengths to make sure he wins, but ends up becoming the very person he looked at with disgust. This characters transformation is believable, sort of depressing, and is consistently above of the line of entertaining with small dips into the stale category. At the end he’s left with a choice that has two drastically different consequences based on the route he chooses. This is where the audience gets involved and asks what you do?

The cast is filled with an all-star cast featuring the names of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, George Clooney, and Marisa Tomei. These names round out just the supporting cast with little to almost no screen time. It’s just amazing the talent Clooney was able to round up as a director. He must have called in a lot of favors. Ryan Gosling as the main attraction does his usual somewhat less impactful performance, but still manages to cement himself as one of the best actors working today. The true standout here comes in the form of the young interim played by Evan Rachel Wood. She out acts everybody and captures the audience’s emotions in a small amount of time. You begin to care for her, which is important because her character is vital to the moral struggle at the root of the film. When you think of the cast all together, it is really impressive that Wood stands on top.

If you’re into a carefully structured thriller with a consistent level of tension, The Ides of March should be right up your ally. It’s not the runaway hit it was supposed to be, but it still ends up being a very solid flick with good intentions that don’t impress as much as we all would’ve liked. The worst thing I can say about the film is that it’s only solid.

Overall Score: 7.5/10

 

[Houston]

My Week With Marilyn (2011)

regardless of your opinion of how much you enjoyed it, you will enjoy it nonetheless.

So I have no choice but to subconsciously enjoy it?



I meant to ask awhile ago but forgot, have you ever seen a Monroe movie before?
I know all of her characters are the same, but I have no clue how she acted in real life. Wouldn't be able to compare her and Michelle Williams.

 

[Buzzman]

So I have no choice but to subconsciously enjoy it?



I've meant to ask awhile ago but forgot, have you ever seen a Monroe movie before?
I know all of her characters are the same, but I have no clue how she acted in real life. Wouldn't be able to compare her and Michelle Williams.

What I should have said better was that I can almost guarantee you will enjoy it, but I don't know how much you will whether you just like it or end up loving it. Regardless of where it lands on your list, it will be on the top half of your list. The thing people will dislike about the film is the cliched vibe you may get from it.

Ironically the only Monroe film I have watched in full was The Prince and the Showgirl, which just so happens to be the film they are working on in My Week With Marilyn. So outside of that piece and a few youtube clips and bits of her comedies, I don't have much of a vision of the film, but I feel like Williams did such a great job that I cant imagine Monroe being anything different then what i saw of Williams.

 

[Buzzman]

The Thing (2011)

Paleontologist Kate Lloyd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) has traveled to the desolate region for the expedition of her lifetime. Joining a Norwegian scientific team that has stumbled across an extraterrestrial ship buried in the ice, she discovers an organism that seems to have died in the crash eons ago. But it is about to wake up. When a simple experiment frees the alien from its frozen prison, Kate must join the crew's pilot, Carter (Joel Edgerton), to keep it from killing them off one at a time. And in this vast, intense land, a parasite that can mimic anything it touches will pit human against human as it tries to survive and flourish.

Regardless of what is said about this 2011 adaption of The Thing, it is definitely a remake. Sure the storyline takes place before the original and it leads right up into the original, but it practically goes through the exact same motions and feels completely underwhelming. Especially if you’ve seen the original before. It’s a shame too because this film isn’t all that bad but it never tries to be something different so it makes you wonder why the hell they needed to revisit this film again.

A group of scientists and experts find something in the ice and the ship it came to earth on. Somewhere along the way the thing gets out, starts trying to escape into a populated area, and in doing so takes the forms of the people in the group it has killed. Sound familiar at all? The best parts of the film is the constant paranoia of who’s human and who isn’t. The tension here is very dull. You can practically decide in the first few minutes who will last and when exactly they will die. It’s predictable, boring, and at times, albeit very, very little, can be entertaining.

The group of people this time around don’t have that same level of awesomeness as the original. As much as Mary Elizabeth Winstead tries to pull off Kurt Russell, she can’t hold a candle to him. If you try and wipe away that comparison, she actually doesn’t seem that bad. She makes all the right choices to survive, never looks stupid and comes off as a smart character. It’s just that comparison will always be there. It may seem unfair, but that’s what happens when you try and remake a classic.

One of the only enjoyable parts of this film since technically it’s a prequel was watching the film set up its pieces to fit into the original. From the helicopter chasing the dog, to the two faced monster, and even the axe in the wall, it all aligns itself to fit neatly into one LONG film. The bottom line is that the original is the one worth seeing and only after you’ve seen that should you even bother trying to watch this. The original is a classic horror film, while this comes across as a cheesy monster mess.

Overall Score: 4.5/10

 

[DSpydr84]

Surprised you were that generous with Straw Dogs. There wasn't one scene I didn't reflect on and go "wtf?"

 

[Buzzman]

Surprised you were that generous with Straw Dogs. There wasn't one scene I didn't reflect on and go "wtf?"

True, looking back at the film and its just pure crap.

 

[Buzzman]

Paranormal Activity 3 (2011)

In 1988, young sisters Katie and Kristi befriend an invisible entity who resides in their home.

Another year, another installment in the ghostly “realistic” franchise. It’s strange because unlike a lot of folks, I thought the first was terrible and the second was awesome. There was something about the second installments audio that scared the shit out of me; so when the third entry leaned more towards the second than the first, I was somewhat excited to see what kind of scares they had in store for its audience this time around.

They went into prequel territory again, but this one feels a little too much for the audience to believe in. The entire setup of getting the camera involved is came about in a very absurd way and really hampers any type of thought that this is reality, but it’s a necessary component because it’s the key selling point for the franchise. If you can get past that, you get a much more complex plot, filled with twists, annoying characters, and daresay witchcraft. This idea to bring in witchcraft helps prolong the franchise, but for me personally, I immediately get turned off with this type of shit. I bet others are in the same boat as me. Then to make matters worse, these choices the parents of these children make are downright awful to the point that you want to go through the screen and give them a nice slap in the back of the head.

As far as the scares come, the film does a few things right. The audio is fantastic once again that only a theater or a great home theater system can provide. The vibrations cause more scares then what’s on the screen itself. It’s about the only improvement each film has made. The on-screen material is very creative and relies less on CGI this time around, but a lot of the characters reactions quickly cause you to react much differently. You may have a decent time with Paranormal Activity 3, but it’s not very good. It’s probably the worst entry and makes the franchises original appeal feel stale and repetitive now. Unless something drastically changes for the next one, the upcoming sequels can be in real trouble. If you’re in the mood for a few jumps and a pretty quick watch, give the third installment a go.

Overall Score: 3/10

 

[Buzzman]

Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings (2011)

Friends on a winter break snowmobiling excursion make a wrong turn during a snowstorm and get lost in a nightmare. Seeking shelter in a presumably abandoned sanatorium, they awaken the horrific residents, including former patients and cannibals.

When you get to the fourth film in a horror series that has only gotten progressively worse with each film, you know you’re in for a real treat. You can expect to see plenty of dumbass things, but the entire point of it all is to just sit back and enjoy the film for the B movie that it’s trying to be. Wrong Turn 4 does a really good job with this concept for the first hour or so, but then the film reaches a point to where only the brave and insane dare test their eyes.

To the viewer’s familiar with the franchise, this film reveals the origins of the deformed, people-eating, psycho hillbilly brothers. It’s fairly standard stuff from this genre; mental hospital, escaping and killing everyone, living there for 15 years, you know, standard. Everything is dark and gloomy for them until a bunch of college kids get caught up in a storm and are forced to seek shelter in the now abandoned hospital. Here is when the crazy brothers go to town and they pick them off one by one, and then eat them in front of the camera for your viewing pleasure. It gets disgusting, violent, and terribly acted; in other words, exactly what you wanted. Its fun watching amateur actors taking no these type of shitty roles in hopes that it’s a jumpstart into something bigger. They put themselves in some terrible situations to fail, and they accomplish that goal with flying colors. I’d need more than two hands to keep track of the number of times I got a kick out of something someone did or said. Seeing these brothers again just ripping through these kids is just plain dumb fun.

Then something happens about an hour into the film and it completely raises the stakes in pure awesomeness. In a blatant spoiler, our protagonists have the brothers trapped in a jail cell and right before they go to burn them alive a character suddenly has a change of heart and convinces them not to become like them. SO they leave one person in charge of watching them while they go off and have sex. Then this character in charge of watching falls asleep right next to the cell where the brothers that killed a bunch of his friends now secretly escape and continue onward with their reign of chaos over the hospital. The rest of the film is so god damn bad, you’ll either find yourself looking with disgust or laughing with a smile. This is the type of film you already know if you’d love and if this is the crap that keeps you entertained, have yourself a good laugh. It really makes up for the god awful third one in the series.

Overall Score: 5/10

 

[Sharkweather]

Lol, what? They have made 4 Wrong Turns? One was plenty, haven't even seen any of the other three.

 

[Houston]

Lol, what? They have made 4 Wrong Turns?

Was just about to say the same thing.

 

[Buzzman]

Wrong Turn and its sequels (except 3) are all fun watches.

 

[Houston]

I was skimming through the first one on my DVR the other day, movie still comes on regularly. Hard to go wrong with Emmanuelle Chriqui and Eliza Dushku.

 

[Buzzman]

Like Crazy (2011)

A love story is both a physical and emotional tale, one that can be deeply personal and heartbreaking for an audience to experience. Director Drake Doremus' film Like Crazy beautifully illustrates how your first real love is as thrilling and blissful as it is devastating. When a British college student (Felicity Jones) falls for her American classmate (Anton Yelchin) they embark on a passionate and life-changing journey only to be separated when she violates the terms of her visa. Like Crazy explores how a couple faces the real challenges of being together and of being apart.

Like Crazy is a very raw film. You can detect the films low budget and improvised set pieces simply by watching. It’s one of the more important factors that prove to be a strong technique in its story telling because this isn’t your typical romance movie. It doesn’t try to be flashy and come off as a “typical” teenage romance, but instead aims for a far more realistic perspective through the eyes of two people that want to be together, but always find themselves apart. It’s a compelling watch, which at times, becomes hard to get through.

The relationship of the couple is the films entire story arc and very much like the relationship itself, the interest in watching it does up and down. When the couple is at its happiest, the film is good; when they are at rock bottom, it is fantastic, but when they are middling in-between, it becomes a bit frustrating to watch. You see this is a long-distance relationship that becomes annoyingly repetitive in their goals to keep them apart. Some of the obstacles placed between them make you roll your eyes, become annoyed and just wait for their next plan to fail. This is the aspect of the film that can really flip you from enjoying it. If you can get past this, you can get a unique look into this couple. A lot fo the techniques the director chose to use place these two young adults into interesting scenarios that come to test them. It makes you wonder if they are meant to be, or even if they will end up together. It tries to stray away from predictability and that’s where the appeal comes from. It’s a story that can end in so many different ways, but the only way to see which one it concludes with is to see for yourself.

In the two starring roles as the couple are Anton Yelchin (who has been on the rise for a while) and relative newcomer Felicity Jones. They both are really strong throughout the film, but there best moments come when there characters are truly at their worst. The emotions between them ooze through the screen and even affect the audience. This is the film that will have started it all when you look back at these two stars twenty years from now. Included in the cast in a small but crucial role is Jennifer Lawrence. Despite what the trailers made it seem, she’s a very minor character but steals scenes in them. It helps establish the notion in my head that Winters Bone wasn’t a one hit wonder for her. It’s a small but wonderful cast the gels together to establish an all-around good film.

If you’re in the mood for a thoughtful, sometimes messy, romance film in the same veins of Blue Valentine, this is exactly what you’re looking for. It’s a great detour from all that flashy predictable shit Hollywood tries to sell you. It can be a tough watch but seems worth it for a movie where the young protagonists don’t come off as dumb twats in needing of a slap to the back of the head. Try not to let this indie fly past you, you may regret it.

Overall Score: 7.5/10

 

[Houston]

So so dumb. Besides the silly obstacles keeping them apart, the most frustrating thing about the movie was the time warp. For instance when the guy says goodbye to the girl and goes back home, and then the movie immediately jumps months ahead to the time that he returns. So they're practically back together again in a matter of seconds.

It's hard to get the right feel for this "long distance" relationship, when it seems like they're together for 80% of the movie.

:smh:




P.S.-no way I'd leave Jennifer Lawrence for that girl.