Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[dell71]

The Book of Eli
Directed by the Hughes Brothers.
2010. Rated R, 118 minutes.
Cast:
Denzel Washington
Gary Oldman
Mila Kunis
Jennifer Beals
Ray Stevenson
Michael Gambon
Evan Jones
Joe Pingue​

After “The Flash” much of the world’s population has been killed. The lucky survivors have restarted life anew amidst desolate conditions. It’s a world where alcohol wipes are an extremely valuable commodity since soap is apparently non-existent. He who possesses water also possesses immense power. Of course, many of those in power are evil. Carnegie (Oldman) is one of these men. Yes, he is evil.

Carnegie is also a collector of another rare commodity, books. He seeks one particular book which he feels will give him unlimited power over what he calls “the weak and desperate”. That book is none other than The Holy Bible. You see, shortly after “The Flash” they were all sought out and destroyed. However, we learn that one copy of the good book survives. It is in the hands, rather backpack of Eli (Washington). He’s on a mission to deliver it somewhere out “west” and he’s not letting anyone else get their grubby paws on it. Remember, there’s no soap so we’re talking literally grubby paws, I digress. I wouldn’t suggest getting in Eli’s path or threatening him in any way. People tend to end up dead that way.

From this, we get a parable that’s divisive, much like religion itself. The naysayers will quickly point out the ridiculousness of all Eli accomplishes given a certain fact about him which I won’t spoil. Supporters will note that it’s a metaphor, not meant to be taken literally. Count me among the supporters. I find it a brilliant portrayal of a biblical saying I’ve heard numerous times, even during this movie. Honestly speaking, if taken at face value it’s an easy-to-dismiss movie. Think a little deeper and it makes perfect sense. It has the conviction to follow through to a difficult conclusion. For directors, Albert and Allen Hughes this is their best film since the similarly perplexing Dead Presidents.

If the religious angle doesn’t move you in the slightest way, but you’re an action fan then still give it a look for the sizable amount of swift and brutal violence. Gary Oldman is also great, as usual. He gives us a villain that knows he’s the bad guy. However, he desperately wants to appear good so that he can be worse. You might have to see it for that to make sense. That stuff is fun to watch as the movie unfolds. Still, it’s all that deep stuff that sticks with me.

The Opposite View: Kim Newman, Empire

What the Internet Says: 6.9/10 on imdb.com (7/11/10), 47% on rottentomatoes.com, 53/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 8/10​

 

[dell71]

Surrogates
Directed by Jonathan Mostow.
2009. Rated PG-13, 89 minutes.
Cast:
Bruce Willis
James Cromwell
Rosamund Pike
Ving Rhames
Boris Kodjoe
Radha Mitchell
Jack Noseworthy
James Francis Ginty​

Someone has developed a weapon that not only kills surrogates but also simultaneously murders their human operators. Surrogates are robots that people purchase to literally do their living for them. Human beings simply sit in a “stem chair”, remini$cent of what Neo and company used to plug into the Matrix. However, instead of controlling what is essentially a digitized version of who you want to be, you control of robotic one. You think it, it does it. This goes for speech, work, play and even facial expressions. And your surrogate doesn’t have to look like you or even be of the same sex. If you’re familiar with the game “The Sims”, just imagine that taken through its logical technological evolution. Surrogates are apparently extremely affordable because nearly every person has one. Therefore, almost nothing but robots roam the streets. Any real human being that dares show his face in public is referred to as a “meat bag.”

When the first murder takes place early on, and we indeed learn it is the first homicide in quite some time, Det. Tom Greer (Willis) is on the case. When his surrogate is irreparably damaged he has to <gasp> venture out into the world himself to try and solve the crime. Of course, as is the way in movies we learn that this is much bigger than one killing. Lots of twists and turns follow. If you’re not paying attention it can become confusing. Still, it’s confusing in a good way. The action is solid if mostly unremarkable, save for one particular chase scene in which we see what surrogates are capable of. They can’t quite fly, but let’s just say they make LeBron James swooping in for a monster dunk look like he barely got off the ground.

The premise and the quest to figure out who’s who are more intriguing than the action and rightfully dominate the picture. Though the battle between those for and agains surrogacy is on full display, other potentially tougher issues are vaguely hinted at but never explored in any meaningful way. Chief among them being what will happen to the world’s population. Does it start to dwindle? Or do people manage to unplug often enough to procreate? How about physically? Are people going to generally become the weakened blobs we saw in Wall-E? We never venture down those paths.

It’s an interesting movie that puts a twist on the oft-used sci fi theme of technology taking over the world. Instead of robots or computers forcefully seizing power, humans have willfully given it away. As a “movie night” popcorn flick, it works but it also gives a little more to think about than most. However, if you find yourself confused early on you might check out and think both this film and I are crazy.

The Opposite View: David Hiltbrand, Philadelphia Inquirer

What the Internet Says: 6.3/10 on imdb.com (7/12/10), 39% on rottentomatoes.com, 45/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 6/10​

 

[dell71]

The Spy Next Door
Directed by Brian Levant.
2010. Rated PG, 95 minutes.
Cast:
Jackie Chan
Amber Valletta
Madeline Carroll
Will Shadley
Magus Scheving
Billy Ray Cyrus
George Lopez​

Bob Ho (Chan) is a spy on loan to the US from China. Given the climate of America’s current relations with China, let that marinate a bit. Okay, let’s move on. Bog has fallen in love with Gillian (Valletta), a single mom of three. One small problem: her kids hate him. He decides to retire, it seems largely because he’s tired to lying to her about his job. When she has to go out of town he leaps at the chance to babysit, hoping for a chance to bond with the kids and change their opinion of him. Of course, the bad guy he busted at the beginning of the movie has escaped and is trying to take over the world…or something. Kung fu hijinks and spy shenanigans ensue.

With only a little more info about the children, you could start penning the script and without having seen it but remembering it’s a Disney movie, you’ll probably end up with something fairly close to what actually plays out on screen. If you doubt me, I’ll give you the tools you need to test my theory. The oldest daughter needs a serious attitude adjustment. The boy is a pathological teller of harmless lies and a wide-eyed geek who’s probably seen a Jackie Chan movie or twelve. The youngest girl constantly says and does annoying things that are supposed to be cute. Go.

Okay, so you don’t want to spend the 20 minutes it would take to actually write it down but you get the picture. The one thing you won’t be able to get near are the acrobatic and frenetic action scenes that are Jackie Chan’s signature and the saving grace of this movie. Admittedly, these aren’t top-notch, seeming to defy the laws of physics Chan scenes but they’re still fun and funnier than any of the so-called jokes in the script.

Between fight scenes, all sorts of cornball stuff wrapped in cheesy dialogue goes on. It’s nothing we haven’t seen a dozen times before. In fact, while watching it I kept wondering “Isn’t it way too soon for a remake of The Pacifier?

The Opposite View: Prairie Miller, NewsBlaze

What the Internet Says: 5.2/10 on imdb.com (7/13/10), 12% on rottentomatoes.com, 27/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 4/10​

 

[dell71]

Shutter Island
Directed by Martin Scorcese.
2009. Rated R, 138 minutes.
Cast:
Leonardo DiCaprio
Mark Ruffalo
Ben Kingsley
Max von Sydow
Jackie Earle Haley
Michelle Williams
Emily Mortimer
Patricia Clarkson
Ted Levine
John Carroll Lynch​

It’s 1954 and federal agent Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio) is sent to Shutter Island to investigate the escape of a patient from the mental institution. Actually, that’s redundant. The entire island basically serves as the mental institution. We learn that it’s where they keep the criminally insane. Though the faculty seems to want the issue resolved, they put up various walls of resistance. Our hero is having a hard time getting results.

Agent Daniels also has ulterior motives. It seems he’s had prior dealings with a mysteriously inconspicuous patient and is quite suspicious of what might really be going on in this remote location. He vows to his partner Chuck (Ruffalo) to get to the bottom of things.

As we follow the proceedings, we’re sucked in and wondering how our hero is going to save the day. We get hints along the way that saving the day may be impossible. We can eventually guess where this is all going. That’s normally a death knell. Here, it’s fine because it does something lesser movies don’t. It defiantly straddles the fence, not choosing either of the two possible outcomes it gives us. Neither is very pleasant. Yet, we still feel the need to decipher what we’ve seen, trying to extract the film’s truth. To be, or not to be really is the question. Supporters of both will have plenty of evidence to support their interpretation.

Once again teaming up with director Martin Scorcese, DiCaprio turns in another great performance. For Scorcese, it’s a departure from the norm. This is no gritty urban crime drama, but his storytelling is as effective as ever.

The drawback is that it runs too long. There is a scene in which the movie climaxes by giving us the two options to decide between. The next two or three minutes flesh out one of them. If the Coen Brothers had directed this, it would’ve ended right there, probably without those few minutes but abruptly stopping right when…I’ll let you see it. Scorcese drags it on too long after that, almost explaining too much.

“SI” is a top notch psychological thriller. It diminishes its own predictability with a heavy dose of ambiguity. It also plays with our heads by using lots of smoke and mirrors, but in a good way. This isn’t your uncle pulling a penny out of your ear, it’s a really slick sleight of hand David Blaine would be proud of.


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

What the Internet Says: 8.0/10 on imdb.com (7/16/10), 67% on rottentomatoes.com, 63/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 8.5/10​

 

[dell71]

And to add a little...

 

[dell71]

The Wolf Man
Directed by George Waggner.
1941. Not Rated 70 minutes.
Cast:
Lon Chaney
Evelyn Ankers
Claude Rains
Ralph Bellamy
Warren Williams
Patrick Knowles
Bela Lugosi
Maria Ouspenskaya​

After his brother’s death, Larry Talbot (Chaney) comes home to help run the family business. While out with the ladies one night, he’s bitten by a wolf that has attacked one of the girls and believes that he has been transformed into a werewolf. This is a movie much less about thrills and chills than about psychological examination. Is he really a werewolf? Or is he just imagining things? The former couldn’t possibly be true, could it? Then again, how possible is the latter?

Lon Chaney is excellent as the bewildered man. It has become his signature role. Surprisingly, Maria Ouspenskaya betters him as an old gypsy woman, giving the movie much of it’s foreboding mood. By today’s standards it’s never visually stimulating enough but unlike the original King Kong which came out almost a decade earlier, it never really tries. Like I said, this is more about a man questioning his own sanity than about the monster terrorizing us.

MY SCORE: 8/10​

The Wolfman
Directed by Joe Johnston.
2010. Rated R, 119 minutes (unrated director’s cut).
Cast:
Benicio del Toro
Anthony Hopkins
Emily Blunt
Art Malik
Geraldine Chaplin
Nicholas Day
Simon Merrells
Michael Cronin​

“Pop, since I’m the bigger man I’m willing to let bygones be bygones so that we can find my brother.” Essentially, this is what Lawrence Talbot (del Toro) says to his father upon his return home. Since this is the late 1800s Lawrence doesn’t have a cell phone or a car. He’s been traveling for days and isn’t quite ready for dad’s response. Basically, dad (Hopkins) says “Oh, didn’t ya hear? We found your brother’s body this morning.” A simple text reading “R.I.P. Simon” (Merrells) might’ve changed things dramatically.

Then again, that might not have changed things at all. You see, big bro decides to pay his respects and discovers what we knew all along, a werewolf has torn him to shreds. Going into a rather tame version of ‘I will avenge my brother’s death’ mode, he still visits all the old haunts where his younger sibling hung out. Despite being rich, little bro apparently was into gypsy chicks so Larry makes a beeline for there spot in the woods. Anyhoo, one thing leads to another and wouldn’t ya know it? Ol’ Lawrence almost gets separated from life by a werewolf, too.

If you’ve seen the 1941 original, then you’ll realize that to this point it is pretty much the same movie. However, there a few drastic difference which change it enough to make it stand, or fall, on its own. First, this one amps up Lawrence’s depression and tries to be real atmospheric. It uses a look and tone that’s far too dreary to come off as anything other than faux angst. I call this “the Twilight factor.” Next, we witness a greater number of transformations and werewolf attacks. Both are in terrifically graphic detail. This was expected but still works very much in its favor. Finally, instead of the self torment that put himself through in the older movie, we get kind of a Vader/Skywalker thing going on. It works okay but not as good as what we had.

Out of all this we get a decent, though not completely unexpected twist. That’s not completely unexpected as in we can see it coming a mile away. Still, it’s well played, dramatically speaking. Aesthetically, it comes off kind of hokey, mostly because of who’s involved. That said, this film is not the bane of society some have claimed it to be. It’s actually not that bad of an update.

Even though I thought it was okay I can’t help but think that it would’ve so much more goofy fun if it were set in the present. I can just imagine his public transformation taking place in Target or Wal-Mart and some teenage girl hiding behind the jewelry counter texting “sum freeks 5 oclock shad gone wild lol!” TTYL.

The Opposite View: Annlee Ellingson, Moving Pictures Magazine

What the Internet Says: 6.1/10 on imdb.com (7/21/10), 33% on rottentomatoes.com, 43/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 6/10​

 

[dell71]

Dark Country
Directed by Thomas Jane.
2009. Rated R, 88 minutes (unrated director’s cut).
Cast:
Thomas Jane
Lauren German
Chris Browning
Ron Perlman​

It starts with a dame (German). At least that’s what our hero (Jane) tells us. You know, Double Indemnity, Body Heat, The Maltese Falcon and even Spiderman all started because of a dame. Those first three movies are classics, Spiderman, not so much but I like it well enough. Sorry, I got distracted.

Anyhoo, our hero met this particular dame in Vegas and married her after a night of drunken passion. Once, back in my younger days I was willing to get married after a night of drunken flirting. No, there was no actual passion. Anyone who’s ever seen me in person knows I stand about as tall as most middle-schoolers. She was an Amazonian 6’4” college volleyball player who must’ve had a fetish for short guys because she showed interest in me, believe it or not. She had a gorgeous face and curves…wait, I can’t tell that story. My wife might be reading this. No worries babe, this happened years before I laid eyes on you.

Oh, the movie. The loving couple decides to take a drive through the desert, at night. Along the way they narrowly miss hitting some guy standing in the middle of the road. The whole setup reminds me of a segment from Creepshow 2. Anyone who’s ever seen it will remember “Hey lady, thanks for the ride!” The finale of Dark Country also reminds me of an episode of The Twilight Zone tv series. Both of those have the good sense to only last about 30 minutes long. I had a problem with the mouse to my desktop. It was taking me 30 minutes to do things that should take about five. Right, you don’t care about that.

Why am I so easily distracted during this review? Honestly, DC isn’t really worthy of my attention, or yours for that matter. For most of an hour and a half these two nit-wits drive along a dark road trying to figure out what to do with the guy in the back seat who is apparently dying but is just too stubborn to complete the pass. That hour and a half seems closer to a day and a half.

Visually, it looks like it was made on a computer. I know, lots of movies are made on computers these days. However, this one looks like it was made on your computer. I’m not talking about the brand new, trillion GB, bazillion K memory thing dipped into your life savings for. I’m talking about the one you pawned off on your grandparents are donated to the Salvation Army, the one that doesn’t work with anything created during this century. You’re still not quite sure it’s even Y2K compatible and think it might explode if someone actually tries to turn it on.

I’ve already mentioned that DC makes me think of The Twilight Zone. In fact, it could be an outstanding episode if you trimmed about an hour. As a full-length feature, it’s just too thin and dull. The big “wow” climax tries to save it, but can’t quite rescue it from the ashes. By the way, this is the directorial debut of the movie’s star Thomas Jane. If I were him, I wouldn’t claim it.

MY SCORE: 3/10​

 

[Fox1994]

lol @ "don't worry babe. This happened years before I ever laid eyes on you."

 

[NAHSTE]

The Book of Eli

Saw this a few weeks back and really liked it. Sure it's kind of rendered implausible by the conclusion, but who cares, it's a fucking movie right?

I really dug it, but I'm a sucker for any half-decent decent Denzel movie.

 

[dell71]

Saw this a few weeks back and really liked it. Sure it's kind of rendered implausible by the conclusion, but who cares, it's a fucking movie right?

I really dug it, but I'm a sucker for any half-decent decent Denzel movie.

In this case, it's supposed to be implausible. It's a metaphor for a religious saying that is uttered a couple times during the movie...

 

Walk by faith, not by sight.

 

[dell71]

Knowing
Directed by Alex Proyas.
2009. Rated PG-13, 121 minutes.
Cast:
Nicolas Cage
Chandler Canterbury
Rose Byrne
Lara Robinson
Nadia Townsend
Alan Hopgood
Alethea McGrath
Ben Mendelsohn​

Way back in 1959, a grade school class does one of those time capsule things. You know, they all put some crap in a tube and bury it and some class in the future will dig it up. One student, a particularly odd little girl, leaves a page full of seemingly random numbers. Fifty years later, the capsule is indeed unearthed and said page winds up in the hands of college professor/single dad John Koestler (Cage). He soon discovers that the numbers actually lay out the exact dates and death tolls of “every major disaster in history.” Somehow, this is all on what appears to be a standard 8 ½ x 11 sheet of paper, maybe an 11 x 14 but, whatever. And the fact that he seems to be a functioning alcoholic who made this amazing discovery during a night of drowning his sorrows in a bottle of wine is never addressed either, but I digress.

The real dilemma is that there a three dates that haven’t happened, yet. According to the new holy scroll, they’re approaching fast. Koestler tries to investigate the origin of the paper and what could happen next. There’s also some jazz about his relationship with his son that we’ll talk a little more about in a moment and his relationship with his own father. That second relationship could’ve easily been cut from the movie and it wouldn’t have skipped a beat.

The relationship between Koestler and his son is all a setup for a meant-to-be tear-jerker ending. It doesn’t do its job. If it jerks your tears then your tears must be very easily jerked. It also works toward two big special fx sequences. They’re both nice, the one involving the train is better, but nothing we haven’t seen before.

It’s equally intriguing and cheesy. Unfortunately, these things seem to counteract one another instead of working in tandem. So just as it seems to be getting interesting, something silly happens, not in a good way. This occurs repeatedly. Fortunately, star Nicolas Cage has all sorts of experience in similar movies and carries us through with his usual flair for going just enough over the top to be fun.

As far as disaster movies go, it puts itself in a bad spot. It never commits to the absolute nihilism of 2012 and its premise is too flimsy to really inspire the type of deep thought it wants to.

The Opposite View: Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

What the Internet Says: 6.4/10 on imdb.com (7/27/10), 33% on rottentomatoes.com, 41/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 5/10​

 

[dell71]

The Men Who Stare at Goats
Directed by Grant Heslov.
2009. Rated R, 94 minutes.
Cast:
George Clooney
Ewan McGregor
Jeff Bridges
Kevin Spacey
Stephen Lang
Robert Patrick
Waleed Zuaiter
Nick Offerman​

Plot: Reporter Bob Wilton (McGregor) follows Lyn Cassady (Clooney) around the Middle East in hopes of writing an exposé about a secret military program to train soldiers with paranormal abilities. As the movie itself tells s, “more of this is true than you would believe.”

The Good: Clooney gives us another of his quirky, paranoid performances. Think O Brother, Where Art Thou? It’s one of the two types of roles he’s perfected, the ultra suave cynic being the other. He knows how to work us with excellent comic timing. Most of the movie’s best moments are his. The rest belong to Jeff Bridges who lets us know what The Dude from The Big Lebowski would be like as a soldier.

The Bad: It wants to be a great oddball comedy. It’s definitely oddball but not consistently funny enough to keep us from noticing just how silly all this is, even though we’re not laughing. Ewan McGregor turns rather bland work. Part of the problem is he shares so much screentime with Clooney he never gets a chance to shine despite the movie being about his character. Finally, Kevin Spacey is underused as our villain if, for no other reason than it’s Kevin Spacey. Forgive me, I’m all about some Spacey.

The Ugly: What’s in the eggs…and the water.

Recommendation: It’s a premise with loads of potential that just doesn’t quite hit the mark. Unfortunately, even if it had it still may have been too strange for some.

The Opposite View: Derek Elley, Variety

What the Internet Says: 6.4/10 on imdb.com (7/30/10), 53% on rottentomatoes.com, 54/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 5.5/10​

 

[dell71]

The Final Destination
Directed by David R. Ellis.
2009. Rated R, 82 minutes.
Cast:
Bobby Campo
Shantel VanSanten
Nick Zano
Mykelti Williamson
Haley Webb
Krista Allen
Andrew Fiscella
Justin Wellborn​

Once again, a lucky teen, but really unlucky, has a premonition about a catstrophic accident that will kill him and all his friends, plus countless others. He gets all frantic and gets himself and said friends kicked out of the event they’re attending. In this case, it’s an auto race. Feeling cheated, Death itself hunts the survivors down one by one int the order in which they would’ve died had things gone according to plan. If you’ve seen any of this movie’s three predecessors then you know this set-up well. It’s exactly the same throughout the franchise. Why this isn’t called Final Destination 4 escapes me.

The problem with this franchise, this movie in particular, is no one has found a way to inject any creativity whatsoever into the storyline since the original. Essentially, we get the same movie once again. What was once, very recently, fresh for the genre has quickly become trite. If you’ve seen one, you’ve almost literally seen them all. The creative forces behind the FD franchise make the people behind the Friday the 13th movies seem Shakespearian by comparison.

Why watch such a movie? There’s really only one reason: the kill scenes. This is the only area in which we see any creativity whatsoever. The early deaths are a disappointment because they’re too cartoonish. That’s because the special fx are pretty weak in this particular version. You can see it straining to be a 3D movie as it was theatrically released. Unfortunately, I saw it in plain old 2D and the result in underwhelming.

However, all is not lost. Even though one of the later deaths mimics one that was done in the original, the kills get better as the movie goes on. The death-by-escalator scene might be among the most amazing murders the DTM genre has ever committed. By the way, thank famed critic Roger Ebert for the term DTM: Dead Teenager Movie.

It’s all pretty simple. If you like FD movies, this is right up your alley. If you don’t, skip it. You’re not missing anything special.

The Opposite View: Derek Elley, Variety

What the Internet Says: 4.9/10 on imdb.com (7/30/10), 27% on rottentomatoes.com, 30/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 4.5/10​

SCORE VS. OTHER FD MOVIES: 6/10​

 

[dell71]

Dick Tracy
Directed by Warren Beatty.
1990. Rated PG, 105 minutes.
Cast:
Warren Beatty
Madonna
Al Pacino
Charlie Korsmo
Glenne Headly
William Forsythe
Dustin Hoffman
Dick Van Dyke
James Caan​

When one of the local gangsters turns up missing, super-sleuth Dick Tracy (Beatty) is on the case. Along the way, he picks up an orphan who calls himself Kid (Korsmo) and tries to maintain his relationship with Tess Trueheart (Headly). Of course the job, the kid and the bad guy’s girlfriend make that really tough.

Unless you’re one of these youngsters who’ve never opened up a real physical newspaper instead of its website, or just living under a rock then the name Dick Tracy should automatically conjure thoughts of the long-time comic strip of the same name. During the week, these strips were in black and white. On Sundays they were drawn in glorious color. It is to the Sunday version of the strip that the movie remains most true. The colors are ultra-bright and nearly every frame looks like it’s been lifted straight from the pages of the nation’s dailies. To this effect, the makeup team shines. Each character is marvelously rendered, many of them with wildly exaggerated appearances. It’s strict adherence to the source material’s look makes this a fairly clear precursor for Sin City. It’s easy to see why this movie won the Oscar for Best Makeup.

The film also has something the comic strip lacked: a serious and dark sense of humor. It keeps its tongue planted firmly in its cheek as it uses a film noir style of dialogue with all sorts of double entendres. This is most notable during Tracy’s scenes with the bad guy’s gal, Breathless Mahoney played by Beatty’s then real life girlfriend, pop superstar Madonna. She is both a strength and a weakness. Shes’s a strength because she absolutely looks the part. This was made in the days when she had just started toning up and in my opinion, the best she’s ever looked. In the days since, she’s trained the curves completely from her frame, but I digress. She also feels the part. Who better to play a singer/sexpot with a knack for trouble than Madonna?

However, the music icon is a weakness because of her acting. Her role requires her to slink around the screen fluidly and effortlessly seduce the men in her path. Considering that’s how she made her living, it is shocking how stiffly she moves, how easily recognizable the choreography of everything she does and says. It’s doubly distracting simply because of who’s playing the part.

Fortunately, the rest of the performances are just plain fun. As our main villain, Big Goy Caprice, Al Pacino seems to be having a blast and was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his work, here. As Tess, Headly grounds the movie emotionally and is perfect. Even Korsmo as Kid is excellent. In just a few brief scenes, Dustin Hoffman steals the show as Mumbles, one of Big Boy’s flunkies. If there is one thing this movie needs more of, it’s Mumbles. Oh, keep an eye out or you’ll miss Kathy Bates and Colm Meaney in bit roles.

When “DT” was released, movies based on comics weren’t the cash cows they are now. In fact, they were difficult to get made because the vast majority were unsuccessful. There was Tim Burton’s Batman the year before and the Superman franchise which started a decade before the Caped Crusader, but that was pretty much it. All the rest were either low-budget, stupid, cheesy or all of the above. Therefore, it was pretty easily one of the better movies the genre had ever produced. I think it’s severely underrated and still might be.

MY SCORE: 8/10​

 

[dell71]

The Midnight Meat Train
Directed by Ryûhei Kitamura.
2008. Rated R, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Bradley Cooper
Leslie Bibb
Vinnie Jones
Brooke Shields
Barbare Eve Harris
Roger Bart
Quinton “Rampage” Jackson​

Leon (Cooper) is an artistic photographer who is struggling with his craft. High-powered art dealer Susan Hoff (Shields) tells him that something is missing. He seems to find it when he goes prowling the streets at night and happens upon a woman being hassled by a group of thugs. After snapping a few pics he manages to get the lady out of harm’s way, for the time being. Soon, he discovers that she is a famous model and has gone missing. Of course, we already know that the psychopath riding a particular subway train and wielding a rather large blunt object literally made a bloody mess of her. Through some serious stalker work, our hero figures out who our psycho is and that he’s slaughtering people every night on this train.

The cat and mouse that develops between these two men is highly intriguing and tense. There’s also the question of Leon’s own sanity sliiping. He seems to be losing his grip on reality. His obsession with his craft and following this guy around is threatening his relationship with Maya (Bibb), as well.

Interspersed with all this are some beautifully grisly murders. Some of the blood splattering is obviously cgi but most other things in those scenes are very well done. There are some terrific images throughout. The point-of-view shot from the viewpoint of a person being decapitated is simply amazing.

When we get to the last act, we jump the shark. At some point all of this madness has to be explained. The explanation we get is among the lamest in cinematic history. To make matters worse, it’s not even fully explained. The basic question of why is unanswered. Of course, this is all to facilitate the stupid twist that ends the movie. What seemed to be an intelligent and unsettling horror film, possibly on the path to becoming one of the greats, instantaneously becomes one of the biggest letdowns in recent memory. I’ve since found out this is based on a Clive Barker story. Had I read the story, I might not be so disappointed. Either that, or I just wouldn’t have watched the movie. This is very much like my experience watching Sunshine. Therefore, I’ll give the same advice: If you love the twist, you’ll love the movie. For me, that twist is unlovable.

The Opposite View: Bill Gibron, PopMatters

What the Internet Says: 6.4/10 on imdb.com (8/1/10), 70% on rottentomatoes.com, 58/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 5.5/10​

 

[red33]

^^^^

I liked the ending to midnight meat train then again i thought sunshine was an amazing movie.

 

[wingsfan77]

I watched Kick-Ass last night and really enjoyed it, I thought it had a nice blend of witty humor/action and the story was halfway decent. Plus it was my first movie on Blu-Ray with my new PS3 and HDMI cables so the picture was incredible

 

[Fox1994]

Didn't like The Men Who Stare at Goats huh? I thought it was pretty cool...

Haven't seen Dick Tracy in forever and a half. That movie's hella cool. Read a few of the comics way back in the day. lol.

Keep it up amigo.

 

[A Tasty Burgerr]

Couldn't agree more with The Men Who Stare at Goats. The premise seemed very unique and promising, but I just flat out didn't find the movie funny baring a couple scenes. I know it's meant to be a bizarre movie, but once the plot started to shape out it seemed more and more nonsensical. Hopefully Ewan McGregor will stay away from comedic roles in the future.

 

[dell71]

Our Family Wedding
Directed by Rick Famuyiwa.
2010. Rated PG-13, 103 minutes.
Cast:
Lance Gross
America Ferrera
Forest Whitaker
Carlos Mencia
Regina King
Diana Maria Riva
Lupe Ontiveros
Charlie Murphy​

Marcus (Gross) and Lucia (Ferrera) are young, in love and getting married. First, they have to tell their respective families who have no idea that they’re even dating, let alone to tie the knot. There’s two other little details: he’s Black, she’s Mexican. Reacially charged hijinks and shenanigans ensue.

There’s nothing here we haven’t seen before. Each side cracks jokes about the other and do the same sorts of things we’ve seen in movies involving couples who are Black and White, White and anything else, Jewish and Catholic, Greek and Anglo, so on and so forth. The details change to fit the cultures being portrayed but everything important is pretty much the same.

Some amusement is derived from the scenes shared by our two fathers, played by Forest Whitaker and Carlos Mencia. Speaking of Mencia, he was okay in the role, but I just couldn’t help but wonder why the more family friendly, and actually Mexican, George Lopez wasn’t playing the part. Was he too busy or too smart?

As for the couple in question, they’re both hopelessly unmemorable. It’s no fault of the actors portraying them, they’re written that way. Gross and Ferrera are both more famous for their TV roles, Gross on “House of Payne” and Ferrera as the title character of “Ugly Betty.” They both did well enough, but they’re essentially supporting players in their own movie. It can be argued that that’s the point. Still, it feels like lazy writing. Why bother making them interesting when we can just have the two dads scream at one another, again.

All in all, it’s not necessarily a “bad” movie. It’s just shamelessly unoriginal. That said, it’s somewhat enjoyable in spite of itself. It’ll probably work “ok” for a movie night gathering when you’re looking for a light-hearted rom-com with just a hint of meanness in its humor.

The Opposite View: Stephanie Zacharek, Salon.com

What the Internet Says: 2.9/10 on imdb.com, 13% on rottentomatoes.com, 38/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 5/10​