Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[dell71]

Star Trek: The Motion Picture
1979. Rated PG, 136 minutes.
Director: Robert Wise.
Starring William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Stephen Collins.
Cpt. Kirk (Shatner), actually now an Admiral, reassumes control of the USS Enterprise in order to stop a mysterious enormous and extremely powerful cloud from destroying Earth. Honestly, Trek has never been so boring. However, to give it a few points in its favor you have to understand the circumstances under which this movie was made. Of course, common knowledge is that ST was a late 1960s television series that was far more successful in syndication than its original run. So it was know that the show had a loyal following but not if that was enough to guarantee the movie would be a hit. Two other things were working against it. First, it had been roughly a decade since the show last aired an original episode; remember "The Next Generation" and all of the other ST spinoffs hadn't happened, yet. Not only was no one sure if the public really wanted new ST material, but how do you introduce it to new fans? Second, no one was remaking old TV shows aas movies at the time. Conventional wisdom said that TV shows and stars didn't translate well to theaters. All of this equals a movie meant to bring in new fans while appeasing hardcore Trekkies. To accomplish this we get a plot that would be right at home on the TV series but feels stretched thin here and the actors who played our heroes in the show reprising their roles despite having gone up a uniform size or two. We also get lots of iconic moments, themes and lines rehashed for the big screen including dramatic grand entrances for several of the most famous characters. And way too many lingering, loving shots of the Enterprise doing nothing. All of this makes the movie move sooooo s l o w. Its 136 minute runtime feels more like 136 hours. For those new fans there's lots of special fx which look like a laser light show at best and by 2009 have aged poorly. In fact, the fx of the first two Star Wars movies, released in 1977 & 1980, respectively, have held up far better. All of this might be forgiven if it had just been more fun. Its the same trap that befell Superman Returns a few years ago. It's so reverential of its subject that strait-jackets itself into just giving praise to ST without ever becoming a good ST experience.
MY SCORE: 4.5/10

Star Trek
2009. Rated PG-13, 127 minutes.
Director: J.J. Abrams.
Starring Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Leonard Nimoy.

Plot: A young James T. Kirk (Pine) and all your favorites from the original series party, go to school and embark on their maiden voyage aboard the Enterprise. Kinda, sorta but not really a prequel.

The Good: Everything go boom. In what appears to be a conscious effort to draw in younger fans, the action is amped up considerably in comparison to most of the Trek canon. This injects some welcome fun into a franchise often thought to be overly cerebral and somewhat inaccessible to those who aren't devoted Trekkies. Fortunately for the faithful, the story comfortably fits the final frontier with its use of time warps and angry Romulans, led by Nero (a barely recognizable Eric Bana). This generation's Kirk, Chris Pine, is nearly as cock-sure as the original but without the over the top histrionics of the iconic William Shatner. More than any other element his work as Kirk and Quinto's as Spock determine whether the movie sinks or swims simply due to the magnitude of the character's they're playing. Both do an admirable job portraying the contentious beginnings of their friendship.

The Bad: Everything go boom. Though multiplying the explosion count of most ST outings exponentially works for us normal folks, I'm sure many Trekkies will rue the day thier beloved franchise churned out a simple popcorn flick. Another change that's somewhat problematic is the character Uhura (Saldana). Despite being a relatively minor character, she became a very popular crew member and sex symbol, eclipsed in fame by only the big three (Kirk, Spock and Bones) and perhaps Scottie even though she rarely moved from her seat on deck. This movie strains to expand her role. Saldana does a fine job with what she's given but her storyline feels forced. One other actor, does a horrendous job. Anton Yelchin plays Chekov and his Russian accent is nothing short of cringe-worthy. Its so bad, ex-football player Tony Siragusa who naturally speaks with a heavy Jersey/Italian accent does a better Russian accent in Spike Lee's 25th Hour.

The Ugly: Yes! They worked in Kirk's liason with a green chick, early! So what if its of absolutely no consequence, here.

Recommendation: If you're a Trekkie, you have to see it and form your own opinion. Period. If you're not, its a fun sci-fi romp with lots of explosions, characters you happen to be somewhat familiar with yelling at one another and exchanging meaningful glares. In other words, its a solid intergalacic shoot 'em up.

The Opposite View: Adam Lippe, Examiner.com

What the Internet Says: 8.2/10 on imdb.com (#136 all time, 12/6/09), 95% on rottentomatoes.com, 83/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 7/10

 

[nflman2033]

uh, i should -rep you for showing a picture from The Wrath of Khan in your review of the Motion Picture

 

[nflman2033]

El Mariachi
1992. Rated R, 81 minutes.
Director: Robert Rodriguez.
Starring Carlos Gallard, Consuelo Gomez, Jaime de Hoyos, Peter Marquardt.
A poor, traveling musician is mistaken by rival bad guys for a drug dealer who not only just escaped from prison but is very busy settling the score with them. Shootouts ensue. Director Robert Rodriguez's debut has become a cult classic of sorts. That's more a testament to his skills as a story-teller than anything else. The acting is substandard and its nonexistant budget is evident, throughout. Reportedly, the whole thing was filmed for about $7,000. Yet, the plot is imaginative as is the action. And there's plenty of action. The movie also has its tongue firmly in cheek as there are lots of little jokes thrown in that make it more of a dark comedy. This has become a trademark of the director. It's sequel, the bigger budgeted (with the aid of his then new buddy, Quentin Tarantino) Desperado is a more fully realized and glossier project with better production values and a much better cast (Antonio Banderas, Salma Hayek, Steve Buscemi, Cheech Marin and QT himself among others, not to mention the addition of Johnny Depp for the franchise's third film). However, the charm here is hard to deny as Rodriguez proves more than up to the task of captivating his audience even when handicapped by extremely limited funds.
MY SCORE: 7.5/10

i thought it was a more like a 8.5 or 9/10

 

[dell71]

uh, i should -rep you for showing a picture from The Wrath of Khan in your review of the Motion Picture

fixed...i think.

 

[Vinsane]

Kinda rough on the Star-Trek remake, at least give it an 8! Then again my generation leans more towards "Next Generation" then the original Star Trek. So I could see where it might be a sore towards those who grew up with the Shat.

 

[Buzzman]

the deleted scenes for Star Trek are sweet. They def should;ve included them and changed the way Kirk meets the old Spock to there original plan.

 

[dell71]

Kinda rough on the Star-Trek remake, at least give it an 8! Then again my generation leans more towards "Next Generation" then the original Star Trek. So I could see where it might be a sore towards those who grew up with the Shat.

Don't think so. I did grow up with "The Shat" but I'm not one of those so blinded by his awesomeness I love everything Trek that he was involved in. Hell, just look at the review for ST:TMP, in which I was far harsher.

the deleted scenes for Star Trek are sweet. They def should;ve included them and changed the way Kirk meets the old Spock to there original plan.

Didn't watch them. If I ever buy it, or somehow wind up with it in my possession otherwise, I'll have to check them out.

 

[dell71]

Dell's Classics Presents:

<!-- google_ad_section_start -->

The Virgin Spring AKA Jungfrukällan
1960. Not Rated, 89 minutes.
Director: Ingmar Bergman.
Starring Max von Sydow, Birgitta Pettersson, Gunnel Lindblom, Birgitta Valberg.
In medieval Sweden, a family sends their teenage daughter to deliver candles to the church since they must be delivered by a virgin. Along the way, she meets up with a trio of vagrant brothers who have other plans for the afternoon. It's a revenge tale different than most in that it does more than pay lip service to the possible religious ramifications. It seriously examines where the act of vengeance fits into the spiritual scheme of things. In fact, it deals with faith in general but in a way that's demonstrative, not overly preachy. This sets up the final scene and gives it far more resonance than most of the films it inspired. Not only does this include the two versions of The Last House on the Left, which basically rip it framework and replace the guts with more contemporary and goofier parts, but any number of revenge flicks made since. In most of those movies, revenge is completely gleeful activity. Here, it is something very different and more genuine with regards to how most people would probably react to themselves as opposed to how we'd like to think we'd carry ourselves. That said, modern audiences may find it a bit slow, the dialogue a bit unnatural in places and the choreography of our two action scenes a bit too, well, choreographed. If you like either or both of "The Last House" films I suggest taking a look at this, if for no other reason than seeing where the story originated and gauging how it was updated, first for the 1970s and then again in 2009. If you haven't seen either of those but plan to, I say start here for the same reason. The latter two might be more exciting in the visceral sense but this actually leaves you something to ponder. Subtitleophobes beware, we're speaking Swedish.
MY SCORE: 10/10


PS: Thanx to nflman for this one.

 

[dell71]

Push
2009. Rated PG-13, 111 minutes.
Director: Paul McGuigan.
Starring Chris Evans, Dakota Fanning, Djimon Hounsou, Camilla Belle.

Plot: A top secret government agency hunts down people with special abilities in an effort to create super-soldiers.

The Good: Its a visually entertaining movie. Stuff is constantly whizzing across the screen. That includes bodies as what we have here is basically a chase movie involving telekinetics and psychics. As our lead, Chris Evans is solid and has a nice chemistry with Dakota Fanning. Fanning gives her usual blank stare laced performance but for some reason is less creepy to me than normal, landing her in the "good" section.

The Bad: In an effort to be complex things get a bit convoluted. Not terribly so, but that means lots of strands are introduced and not all of them are resolved. More of a problem is that it comes like another attempt to make X-Men more of a real world story. It lacks the intriguing characters, dynamic villain (though Hounsou is cool, as usual), and social commentary that makes X-Men tick, relying on action and lots of twists that often don't go anywhere.

The Ugly: Me, just wishing I had the power to "push" people.

Recommendation: If you're just looking for an action flick, it has enough excitement to likely do the trick. Use 2008's Jumper as a guide. They're fairly similar in plot but this, while not great, is far better.

The Opposite View: Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald

What the Internet Says: 6.0/10 on imdb.com (12/7/09), 23% on rottentomatoes.com, 36/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 6/10

 

[dell71]

Miss March
2009. Rated R, 90 minutes (unrated DVD version).
Director: Zach Cregger.
Starring Zach Cregger, Trevor Moore, Raquel Alessi, Craig Robinson.

Plot: Eugene (Cregger) wakes from a coma after four years to discover that his high school sweetheart, Cindi (Alessi), has become a Playboy playmate. He and his bestest bud Tucker (Moore) set out on a cross-country journey to the Playboy mansion in an effort to reunite with his old flame.

The Good: Every once in a while, one of the many sight gags and prat falls tickles you in just the right spot. Fans of the Apatow group of comedies (I Love You, Man, Knocked Up, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, etc) might get some enjoyment out of Craig Robinson who gives us essentially the same persona here as he does in those films. His character's name is actually funny, Horsedick.mpeg (that last part actually pronounced "dot em peg"), and they get good mileage from that.

The Bad: Everything else. There is an art to making a juvenile comedy about getting laid (I forgot to mention our hero's a virgin) which includes lots of gratuitous nudity and/or gross humor. It's been done, see Animal House, Porky's, American Pie or even the overrated Superbad. These guys, and by "these guys" I mean our two heroes who not only play the lead roles but co-wrote the screenplay while Cregger directs...these guys include the nudity and plenty of gross but its largely artless. Its an excercise in pushing the envelope of good taste. I'm okay with that but you have to make me laugh while pushing. This doesn't, it just routinely mistakes disgusting and/or stupid for funny. Think back to There's Something About Mary. It gave us one of the most hilarious scenes of all time and it involved sperm. What happens with it and why are what's funny. This movie obviously thinks the sperm all by itself is just hysterical. Its as if a 14 year old boy who watches all of those National Lampoon's straight-to-DVD releases were given free reign to make his own movie. However, that's fitting since I can actually see this being popular with teenage males.

The Ugly: Three words: Involuntary bowel movement.

Recommendation: This is basically a ripoff of the Tom Green vehicle Road Trip, only not as funny. While certainly no masterpiece, RT is far superior to this bucket of scuz. Skip this and watch RT again. If you just have to see it, understand that if the mere sight of breasts onscreen doesn't make you giggle and blush, you're probably too mature to enjoy it.

The Opposite View: Ken McIntyre, Total Film

What the Internet Says: 4.9/10 on imdb.com (12/9/09), 4% on rottentomatoes.com, 7/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 1/10


Sidenote: This movie has caused me to lose what I thought was an unshakeable faith in this man:

The Hef plays himself in Miss March. That alone, isn't what causes the loss of faith. What does it is this: Robert Wagner originally played Hef. When the rough cut was shown to the man himself to gain his approval, he found it so damned hilarious he insisted on playing himself in the movie. Really, Hef? In the words of the fellas on ESPN's Monday Night Countdown, "C'mon, man!"

If you don't believe me, take his word for it...

[youtube]R8tRo8iA_yk[/youtube]

Either senility has kicked in or Viagra has fried his brain.

 

[red33]

hahaha i cant believe you watched this. this is the worst movie ever for me. i tuned this trash off 20-30 mins or so into it.

 

[dell71]

I was kinda hopin' for so bad its awesome, I just got really fucking bad.

 

[Ralnakor]

I was kinda hopin' for so bad its awesome, I just got really fucking bad.

If it's any consolation (and I doubt it will be), I agree with the overrated-ness of Superbad....

 

[Epidemik]

If it's any consolation (and I doubt it will be), I agree with the overrated-ness of Superbad....

McLOVIN!!!!

 

[Pitty]

Black Dynamite
2009. Rated R, 90 minutes.
Director: Scott Sanders.
Starring Michael Jai White, Salli Richardson, Kevin Chapman, Tommy Davidson.

Plot: When he finds out that his brother's been murdered, Black Dynamite (White) set out to find the jive turkey responsible and make him pay. Can you dig it?

The Good: It painstakingly recreates the look and feel of a real blaxploitation flick. This includes lots of the flubs the genre is known for. The funniest of these being the editing "mistakes" is which something causes star Michael Jai White to seemingly come out of character for a moment, often talking or gesturing directly to the audience before an abrupt cut. It works everytime. Speaking of White, he gets double kudos here. I've never been a big fan of his actual acting but he gives what's easily the best performance of his career, he's simply note-perfect. He's also co-writer of the screenplay. I didn't know he had it in him. As a welcome addition, blaxploitation isn't the only targe. Seventies standard and one of my all time faves, Enter the Dragon also gets a healthy skewering. Overall, a large number of movies are referenced here but don't overwhelm the film like they do in the Scary Movie, Date Movie, etc franchise. Instead, they're nicely incorporated into the movie as part of its own narrative which even manages to get in some apt social commentary.

The Bad: A couple of gags are overused. In particular, the one where someone instantly starts crying when speaking about a loved one who's "in trouble" gets old fast. The first time or two Kym Whitley does it, its funny. The next thirty times when everyone else in the movie does it, its tedious. Also, there's too much Tommy Davidson for my taste. Somehow, in a movie purposely overdone to spoof genre full of movies known for being over the top, he still overdoes. I'd have much rather seen he and Arsenio Hall, who has a bit part, switch roles.

The Ugly: The very brief appearance of Abraham Lincoln...yes Abraham Lincoln...is a symbolic stroke of satiric genius.

Recommendation: Here's the part where you question my judgment. If you know me, you might know that I count I'm Gonna Git You Sucka among the very best spoofs ever made. Made by the Wayans family way back when they were actually funny, its a brilliant send-up of the blaxploitation genre. I feel very comfortable saying BD is at least as good and far better than the other popular movie of its kind, Undercover Brother. I'm sure the fact that I've seen and enjoyed dozens of blaxploitation flicks and watched Enter the Dragon dozens of times has something to do with it. Enjoying spoofs requires knowledge of the source material to use as a reference point and the ability to see the ridiculousness in that material. For this movie I have a huge point of reference and there's no denying the genre's ridiculousness. Knowing this, if you watch it and tell me its the dumbest thing you ever laid eyes on I'll understand. I'll just be thinking the opposite.

The Opposite View: A.O. Scott, New York Times

What the Internet Says: 7.7/10 on imdb.com (11/20/09), 84% on rottentomatoes.com, 65/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 10/10

"16 year old Jimmy tell your 18 year old brother Black Dynamite where you got the smack!"

 

[j.hen]

lol @ giving Stark Trek a 7/10 and then giving Push a 6/10

 

[dell71]

You seen "The Paper"? Saw it today for the first time, would like to know what you thought about it.

Haven't seen it.

lol @ giving Stark Trek a 7/10 and then giving Push a 6/10

meh...I thought ST was good, not great - a solid popcorn flick. I understand everyone else is falling all over themselves praising it but while it entertained me, it didn't knock my socks off. I sorta like Push, even though most people seem to hate it. I give all movies I "sorta like" a 6.

 

[dell71]

The Janky Promoters
2009. Rated R, 85 minutes.
Director: Marcus Raboy.
Starring Ice Cube, Mike Epps, Young Jeezy, Little JJ.

Plot: Two scheisty local promoters try to pull off a Young Jeezy (playing himself) concert despite not really having the funds necessary to do so.

The Good: What if Craig and Day-Day from the Friday franchise became incompetent club promoters? That's about how it feels since its pretty much just Cube and Epps doing their thing while misleading rapper Young Jeezy. For some, that'll be enough to make it a winner. Young comedian Little JJ, who plays Cube's son and wannabe rapper Young ... shows some promise as a comedic actor as well.

The Bad: Its a paint-by-numbers job that tries to expand what has been a subplot in other, better movies into a full-length feature. Even worse, way too many of the jokes are either predictable, flat or both. Only the abilities of its main stars keep it from being totally unwatchable. Neither should be preparing an acceptance speech for their work but they're personas we're familiar with and have enjoyed before. Still, it never fully draws us in nor gives us a sense of closure as we get a disingenuously happy ending (not really a spoiler, you just know everything's gonna be okay from the start).

The Ugly: How Cube's fiance helps him blow up a couple balloons. Nice.

Recommendation: If you're a big fan of either Cube or Epps, or you just have to see Young Jeezy play himself then have at it. Otherwise skip it, you're not missing any riveting cinema.

The Opposite View: Joe Leydon, Variety

What the Internet Says: 4.2/10 on imdb.com (12/11/09), 25% on rottentomatoes.com (only 4 reviews), NA on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 4.5/10

 

[j.hen]

new Star Trek = 10/10

 

[dell71]

Orphan
2009. Rated R, 123 minutes.
Director: Jaume Collet-Serra.
Starring Vera Farmiga, Isabelle Fuhrman, Peter Sarsgaard, Aryana Engineer.

Plot: After the pregancy of what would've been their third child ends in miscarriage, the Coleman family decides to adopt. They settle on nine year old Esther (Fuhrman) and get a lot more than they bargained for.

The Good: It does a great job creating atmosphere. The whole thing has a dark, brooding temperament. As our adoptive mom Kate, Vera Farmiga is perfectly fragile while hubby John (Sarsgaard) is perfectly oblivious. We can see the two effectively being played against one another by the evil Esther. Speaking of Esther, the movie pulls no punches when it comes to her dastardly deeds and creepiness. At first, the coming and going of her Russian accent bothers you but trust me, there's reason for that. Its all part of a great setup for a wonderfully silly twist that might make you shake your head but works well, regardless, given what happens to that point and enables the movie to give us a really creepy scene involving a lot of makeup towards the end.

The Bad: There are a few plotholes to be found and liberties taken with the legal process (Social Services should've intervened several times). More bothersome is how quickly John is ready to put his wife out, given the circumstances, and also how much of a wuss their son is. If he had manned up like we thought he would this might've been a very different and much shorter movie. For us folks over thirty, the whole thing is very reminiscent of The Good Son which starred Macauley Culkin in the evil kid role.

The Ugly: There's a disclaimer at the start of the movie basically begging us to adopt. Of course in the movie that follows, the orphan lies, steals, commits murder and all out terrorizes the family that adopts her.

Recommendation: Its a fun, over the top thriller that builds nicely until we get a twist you can't see coming. It absolutely works within the context of the film. Some may find it a bit silly. Those people will insist its a terrible movie and compare it to the worst of M. Night Shyamalan. For the rest of us, its an exciting ride that will keep us far away from the orphanage.

The Opposite View: Cliff Doerkson, Chicago Reader

What the Internet Says: 7.2/10 on imdb.com (12/11/09), 55% on rottentomatoes.com, 42/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 7/10