Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[Buzzman]

Fox you liked From paris With Love, gtfo.

 

[Palooza]

I also thought The Losers was done better than The Expendables. The Expendables was all hype with no reward.

 

[PNovak]

I saw both, The Losers and The Expendables. I thought The Losers was horrible. Expendables was ten times better. IMO.

 

[Fox1994]

On a tangent, one thing that confuses me about my uncle - who is in all ways awesome - is his movie selecting. On the one hand, he has a good collection of classic Shaw Brothers, some Chow Yun Fat, some Jet Li... He's a fan of QT, Guy Ritchie... Likes movies that make you think...

On the other hand, he genuinely liked The Expendables... But, then, he probably wasn't going into it looking to use his brain. :ionno: Fuck do I know, anyway?

 

[dell71]

Prince of Persia:
The Sands of Time
<strong>Directed by Mike Newell.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 116 minutes.
Cast:
Jake Gyllenhall
Gemma Arterton
Ben Kingsley
Alfred Molina
Steve Toussaint
Ronald Pickup
Richard Coyle
Toby Kebbell</em>​

In ancient Persia, class is everything and usually an unchanging fact of one’s life. Dastan (Gyllenhall) is lucky to be an exception. A parentless ruffian at about 10 years of age, his fortunes change for the better when the king of Persia happens to witness some of his mischief, takes a liking to the boy and adopts him.

King Sharaman (Pickup) already has two biological sons so Dastan can never be king, himself. Still, he fights proudly for his father and his brothers. Under his brother’s orders, while the king is away, Dastan helps invade the holy city of Alumet looking for weapons they are allegedly supplying to enemies of Persia. Naw, that doesn’t reference the War in Iraq, at all. The king is none too pleased, at first, but eventually convinced it was for a just cause. Why are you thinking about Cheney and Bush? Stop it.

A short while later, Dastan discovers he is possession of a very special knife. When the button on its handle is pushed, the person holding it travels back in time about 30 seconds. Of course, whoever framed our hero wants to get their ancient little paws on it.

<em>PoP</em> is simply swash-buckling, good fun. There are lots of chase scenes which include fighting and all sorts of acrobatics. There’s also lots of contentious dialogue, enough of which earns a giggle. Finally, there are some serious plotholes concerning the knife and its use, which I won’t get into, here. However, the positives outweigh the negatives enough for this to just be a fun, popcorn flick. Don’t go looking for great depth, you won’t find it. Though the parallels between the story and our reality are interesting but the opportunity to explore them is wasted. What you will find is a great deal of very nearly brainless entertainment that you can munch snacks to. It’s definitely a “movie night” type of flick to watch with a group.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://knightatthemovies.com/KATMEx_10PrinceofPersia.html”>Richard Knight, Windy City Times</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0473075/”>6.8/10 on imdb.com</a> (9/24/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/prince_of_persia_sands_of_time/”>37% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://apps.metacritic.com/film/titles/princeofpersia”>50/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 6/10</strong>​

 

[wingsfan77]

Watched POP last night, it was decent but I probably wouldn't watch it again.

 

[PNovak]

Saw Wall Street on Friday. Nothing special. Douglas and Brolin were really good but that's about it.

 

[wingsfan77]

Just a heads up the Iron Man 2 link on the first page goes to your Iron Man 1 review. I just watched 2 and thought it was pretty good.

 

[dell71]

Just a heads up the Iron Man 2 link on the first page goes to your Iron Man 1 review. I just watched 2 and thought it was pretty good.

You gotta scroll down, they're in the same post together.

 

[dell71]

Man on Wire
<strong>Directed by James Marsh.</strong>
<em>2008. Rated R, 94 minutes.
Cast:
Philippe Petit
Jean François Heckel
Jean-Louis Blondeau
Annie Allix
David Forman
Barry Greenhouse
Alan Welner
Mark Lewis</em>​

Philippe Petit is crazy. That’s it. No other explanation will reconcile my brain with what I saw, what he did. In my wildest dreams, my most imaginative moments, I’m the richest, most powerful, most famous man in the world capable of athletic feats and romantic endurance only the gods can rival. Even then, what he did is as far from my mind as a speck of dust falling harmlessly to the floor one million light years away. Insanity must be the only portal through which one not only arrives at the idea Philippe did, but to make it a reality.

Apparently, insanity is also contagious. If it isn’t, there is no possible way our here could’ve enlisted seemingly rational people to bring this particular dream to fruition, even if they were full of wreckless abandon and youthful exuberance. Yet, his dream became theirs. They willfully participated in what could easily have been his cause of death.

Oh, I haven’t told you what Philippe did that has given me such cause to pause. He has only done one of the most amazing things any human being can claim as gospel truth. Way back in 1974, long before the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center became the site of a national tragedy and effectively the genesis of a lengthy war, they were a brand spanking new symbol of America’s prosperity. Two buildings, about two hundred feet apart, each standing 110 stories, became one of the signature landmarks of the iconic New York skyline. This fool, for lack of a better description, and his friends miraculously managed to rig a tightrope from one roof to the other which Philippe, timidly at first, then brazenly, walked and danced back and forth across for about 45 minutes. This is a documentary of just how this event came to be.

I call him a fool because it was a foolish act. The fact is, the only way to describe his feat, and this movie, is to resort to a well-worn cliché: it is a triumph of the human spirit. No doubt, Philippe’s quirky, not quite all there personality and obvious zest for life makes the stories of planning and carrying out of his moment at the top of the world into compelling drama. Those same traits were instrumental in convincing people to go along with his cockamamie idea. There is also a love story and similarly flavored friendships that help ground the narration. They keep us from forgetting that this was nothing to be taken lightly, but something that could’ve turned out in a dreadfully different manner.

By the end, we feel as some of the eyewitness and participants feel. The magic of Philippe’s act overwhelms us. We can’t help but feel exhilarated. It is during this part of the film that contains the most poignant moment. We see footage from a local New York newscast the evening following the event. One of the police officers who arrested Philippe (you knew this was illegal, right?) is being interviewed. We can clearly see he’s a man torn between admonishing someone for breaking the law and admiring the same person for providing him with the most incredible sight of his or most anyone else’s life. We hear the tremble in his voice, see the tears welling up. How they don’t come tumbling down his cheeks is an act of willpower that might be worthy of its own film.

The big moment is tainted jus a little, but only very little. All through the movie there is plenty of old footage from Philippe’s home videos mixed with some dramatizations. However, of the walk itself, there are only still shots. They’re still unbelievably amazing, but I was hoping to catch a glance or two of our hero in motion during the apex of his existence.

In the end, it’s just a beautifully done documentary of something most of us couldn’t even fathom trying. It’s also a much more positive light through which we can remember the Twin Towers. Philippe, and the movie, are refreshingly free from politics, sad reminscings or even mentioning the fate of the great buildings. Instead, we watch a man, and the people who helped him, fondly remember the time when he played on the world’s largest jungle gym.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://www.avclub.com/articles/man-on-wire,2850/”>Noel Murray, The Onion (A.V. Club)</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1155592/”>8.0/10 on imdb.com</a> (9/29/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/man_on_wire/”>100% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://www.metacritic.com/movie/man-on-wire/critic-reviews”>89/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 10/10</strong>​

 

[KillaK]

You should watch the movie Run for Your Life. Its a documentary about Fred Lebow, the man who started the New York marathon. It was cool to see how this man with a small dream started something so huge. I run a lot so it was something that got me interested but I think even people who don't run would be interested in it.

 

[Juggernaut]

Definitely gonna check out The Messenger because of your review and Woody Harrelson.

watching it right now with the gf

 

[Survivor]

While we are talking documentaries, I wanna know what you think about The Last Game.

 

[Fox1994]

Fox you liked From paris With Love, gtfo.

Eh... I looked at it as a comedy... But I see your point. Touche. :ionno:

 

[dell71]

While we are talking documentaries, I wanna know what you think about The Last Game.

Unfortunately, nothing. Haven't seen it yet.

 

[dell71]

Saw VI
<strong>Directed by Kevin Greutert.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 92 minutes.
Cast:
Tobin Bell
Costas Mandylor
Betsy Russell
Mark Rolston
Peter Outerbridge
Athena Karkanis
Shawnee Smith
Samantha Lemole</em>​

Yeah!!! The crowning jewel of the torture porn empire gives us installment number six. Just in case you’ve no clue what the series is about, let me help. Jigsaw (Bell) is a twisted soul who borrows much from the philosophy of John Doe of the movie <em>Seven</em>. Jigsaw finds people he feels are evil or take life for granted, kidnaps them and puts them in “games” that are nearly impossible to survive in order to teach them a lesson. Of those that do manage to make it out with their lives are usually maimed for their efforts. He’s also stricken with an undeniably fatal form of cancer and has actually been dead for the last couple movies. However, being the Tupac of cinematic nutjobs, he keeps posthumously releasing previously unused material, commanding others to do his bidding from beyond the grave.

At the risk of spoiling the previous entry, I have to tell you that Detective Hoffman (Mandylor) is now administering the games and carrying out Jig’s pre-death orders. Much to Hoffman’s chagrin, he has to work with Jill (Russell), the old man’s widow. Even worse, his co-workers seem painfully close to figuring this whole thing out.

This time around, the person Jigsaw decides is in need of a lesson is William Easton (Outerbridge). He’s one of the top dogs at a health insurance company. He also takes great pride and joy in denying as many claims as possible. Of course, this acquits both the government and corporate America in the fight over health care to some degree but, let’s move on.

Unlike most franchises that are fortunate, or unfortunate enough to make it to part six, the story is still fascinating. Better yet, it is a definite improvement over part five. Though it strains a bit and relies heavily on the use of flashbacks, the saga is still developing in an interesting manner. True, the flashbacks are a gimmicky way to keep the main character, and a few others involved, and they’ve added the never-really-slick trick of bringing someone back from the dead (not Jigsaw, thankfully). Still, both are done well and add to the proceedings. The prerequisite twist at the end also works and there are actually two of them. The one involving the insurance man is the much better of the two, but the other is solid. The latter is also more important to continuing the franchise. Yes, Saw VII…ahem…Saw 3D will hit theaters, shortly.

Then, there are the games. They are still the inventive, nasty and downright heinous affairs we’ve come to love. For instance, the game that opens the movie takes a quite literal interpretation of sacrificing a pound of flesh. Blood and guts is the calling card of the series and this version does not disappoint. It is certainly not for the squeamish.

<em>Saw VI</em> delivers what a <em>Saw</em> movie is supposed to. Just by doing that, it places the series among the greatest horror franchises of all time. By the time they reached this point, the <em>Friday the 13th</em>, <em>A Nightmare on Elm Street</em> and <em>Child’s Play</em> franchises had become parodies of themselves, comedies built around a string of murders. The <em>Halloween</em> movies were just plain dreadful. And I haven’t even mentioned such dreck as <em>Leprechaun</em> and <em>Police Academy</em>. Wait, what? <em>Police Academy 6: City Under Seige</em> wasn’t a horror flick? Says you.

Anyhoo, each movie in the <em>Saw</em> series is still linked to the one before it, where the movies in those other franchises became stand alone entries that just happen to feature the same villain with the same M.O. It’s still well written, at least for the genre. It still gives us a twist we might not see coming. And believe it, or not, it can still make us cringe at the decisions characters are forced to make in the face of their own mortality as well what happens to them if they make the wrong choice.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/maze-malaise/Content?oid=1498686”>Bob Grimm, Tuscon Weekly</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1233227/”>6.2/10 on imdb.com</a> (10/7/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/saw_VI/”>42% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://www.metacritic.com/movie/saw-vi/critic-reviews”>30/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Teeth
<strong>Directed by Mitchell Lichtenstein.</strong>
<em>2007. Rated R, 94 minutes.
Cast:
Jess Weixler
John Hensley
Hale Appleman
Lenny von Dohlen
Josh Pais
Vivienne Benesch
Ashley Springer</em>​

If you buy the argument that the moral of many horror films, particularly slasher flicks, is that teenage and premarital sex is bad, you are already part of the foundation upon which <em>Teeth</em> is built. As it was explained to us in Wes Craven’s <em>Scream</em>, the characters that have sex die horrible deaths, leaving only the virginal heroine to save the day. This movie not only subscribes to that philosophy, it rubs your nose in it like you were a puppy whose unfortunate error ended up on the carpet.

Dawn (Weixler) is our virginal heroine. In most horror flicks, that would be divulging too much information. Here, not so much. See, she’s also the villain. Dawn is a high school student who fights on the frontline of the war between abstinence and promiscuity. She has taken a sacred vow to save herself for marriage, even forgoing masturbation, and gives lectures to fellow teens and preteens, encouraging them to do the same. Of course, there may be something she’s not even aware of driving her decision to maintain her purity.

Shortly after we meet Dawn, she meets a boy, Toby (Appleman). She likes him so much she begins to reevaluate her ideals. He’s not as strong as she is, having indulged once before. As things really heat up between the two, she remembers her vow and pleads with him to stop. Since he can’t control himself, an attempted rape ensues. This is when she discovers something about herself we’ve suspected since first reading the title, then watching the opening scene. Her vagina is not like other vaginas. Hers contains a very powerful set of teeth. Let’s just say men who dare enter, exit a digit short, a few digits in one case.

After this, we watch Dawn try to understand and come to grips with her own body and finds herself in some odd situations that lead to graphically bloody messes. Yes gore fans, we’re treated to the sight of a few lopped off penises and freshly castrated males gushing blood from the space where the wrong brain used to be. How we arrive at those scenes, I won’t tell. I will say that the last of them is jaw-dropping and even more cringe inducing than its predecessors.

By the time <em>Teeth</em> ends, we have a girl-power movie unlike any other. It’s undeniably feminist because the woman we focus on is absolutely empowered. She dominates men not with brawn like so many female action heroes, but by directly using the one thing all straight men covet against them. It lends credence to the theory women rule the world because almost everything we men do is designed to help us get in their pants.

Since Dawn is absolutely empowered, she falls victim to an old cliché. Eventually, she becomes corrupted, absolutely. How this is handled is key to the movie. She’s likeable and even as she becomes more and more comfortable with her peculiar style of vigilante justice we still see the victim fighting back. We understand her. Besides, what better incentive is there for young men to keep it zipped than the potential for their most valuable possession to be chopped off? The movie keeps from turning us totally off by making the whole thing with a wonderfully twisted sense of humor. In addition to being a horror flick, it’s a very dark comedy. The two genres blend and help the movie work on several levels.

As much as I like <em>Teeth</em>, it is not without its faults. Dawn’s mother has a mysterious illness that’s made a big deal of, but is completely irrelevant. The police are shown, but never really involved though they obviously should be. The men, save for her dad, are all one-note morons hardly worthy of conquering. However, they definitely warrant punishing which drives the movie. All in all, I enjoyed it immensely. Some may dismiss it as silly and disgusting. Some, like myself, will find this to be a low-budget gem. It’s a reminder that horror is as much about what you feel as it is what you see.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://www.filmcritic.com/reviews/2008/teeth/”>Chris Cabin, Filmcritic.com</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780622/”>5.8/10 on imdb.com</a> (10/11/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/teeth/”>82% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://www.metacritic.com/movie/teeth/critic-reviews”>57/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 7.5/10</strong>​

 

[Fox1994]

lol. You just like abstinence murder girl because you have daughters. =P

But really, that's weird. You gave it a comparably high score - 7.5, so I'm kind of interested, but I'm not sure. :ionno:

 

[dell71]

lol. You just like abstinence murder girl because you have daughters. =P

But really, that's weird. You gave it a comparably high score - 7.5, so I'm kind of interested, but I'm not sure. :ionno:

A hard movie to judge...make note of the disparity between rottentomatoes score & metacritic score.

Point noted about daughters.

 

[Leftwich]

The Haunting in Connecticut
2009. Rated PG-13, 102 minutes.
Director: Peter Cornwell.
Starring Virginia Madsen, Kyle Gallner, Elias Koteas, Martin Donovan.

Plot: When Sara's (Madsen) teenage son Matt (Gallner) is stricken with cancer, the only treatment facility for him is hours away. She moves the family closer, into a house going for cheap because "it has a bit of a history." Strange happenings ensue. Based on "the" true story, we're told. Uh-huh.

The Good: It's just an old-fashioned haunted house tale. Lots of things go bump in the night. Cabinet doors click and clack, dishes move by themselves and things besides reflections show up in the mirrors. Back in horror for the first time since her Candyman days, I think, Virginia Madsen turns in a solid performance as our courageous matriarch. The story also moves along at a brisk pace which helps maintain its spookiness.

The Bad: It's just an old-fasioned haunted house tale. Though its said to be based on "the" true story, there is even a documentary that inspired it (A Haunting in Connecticut), it feels overly derivative of The Amityville Horror and through its use of a random reverend, Poltergeist. In fact, said religious-guy is only there as a replacement of the people that were used in the documentary, the folks that initially investigated the happenings in Amityville. I guess my main point here is that it seems only so much can be done with the genre, plot-wise, so the directors of these films are left to try and out-spook the last popular haunted house flick in terms of visuals without much substance. Finally, the way our resident evil spirit is suddenly able to jump around doesn't seem to match what we've been told up to that point.

The Ugly: Scissors, meet eyelids.

Recommendation: This is an OK, if unexceptional entry into the haunted house genre that works better, the fewer of these types of movies you've seen. Still, if you're going to watch it, it works best when watched at home, at night, with the lights off, then trying to go to sleep immediately after its over.

The Opposite View: Marc Savlov, Austin Chronicle

What the Internet Says: 5.8/10 on imdb.com (10/21/09), 18% on rottentomatoes.com, 33/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 6/10

Just watched it last night... wasn't a very good movie in my opinion. A couple times i jumped but nothing that really scared me in the movie. The entire time I was watching it I was thinking this is like a dumber version of Amityville.