Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[Fox1994]

I assumed the reason he said "motherfucker" and "fuck" so much was because he didn't get to in Be Cool... Remember:

"You know I found out you can only say the f-word once in a PG film? You know what I say to that?"
"Ya?"
"Fuck that."

---

I enjoyed the movie. Not because it was stupendous or even particularly good, but I felt it had its moments. Like the Pulp Fiction homage with the "Royale with Cheese" (Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure it's actually "Le Fromage Royale". Even though that was all of a few seconds.

In any case, while it wasn't particularly well made, I thought it was funny how Travolta's character - crazy as he was - seemed to have some inclination as to what he was doing - whereas the other cat was lost in the shuffle.

The finale really wasn't that good.

Were I to review it, I'd say it's a terrible movie for the plot, but not too bad as action films go.

 

[Houston]

I thought it was funny how Travolta's character - crazy as he was - seemed to have some inclination as to what he was doing - whereas the other cat was lost in the shuffle.

That's the problem, I like "the other cat" was also lost.

He may not have been the main character but this movie revolved around Travolta's character, and the whole time he was hiding stuff.
I felt like it was basically useless for me to think or try and figure out stuff on my own cause the movie didn't give you any clues or hints. You just had to sit in the dark and wait for Travolta to reveal his plan that's been going on for the last 20 mins.

The action was way over the top in this movie and sucked IMO. The best part was the Pulp Fiction reference...

 

[Fox1994]

That's the problem, I like "the other cat" was also lost.

He may not have been the main character but this movie revolved around Travolta's character, and the whole time he was hiding stuff.
I felt like it was basically useless for me to think or try and figure out stuff on my own cause the movie didn't give you any clues or hints. You just had to sit in the dark and wait for Travolta to reveal his plan that's been going on for the last 20 mins.

The action was way over the top in this movie and sucked IMO. The best part was the Pulp Fiction reference...

What did you expect? I thought it was actually better than the trailers portrayed it to be. Maybe we had different expectations.

 

[dell71]

Diary of a Wimpy Kid
<strong>Directed by Thor Freudenthal.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG, 94 minutes.
Cast:
Zachary Gordon
Robert Capron
Rachael Harris
Steve Zahn
Devon Bostick
Chloë Grace Moretz
Karan Brar
Grayson Russell</em>​

Greg (Gordon) is just starting middle school. He also begins his quest to become one of the school’s favorites, and in fact already ranks himself 19th out of 200. His less mature best friend Rowley (Capron) seems to be holding him back. Meanwhile, his big brother Rodrick (Bostick) and other neighborhood “big kids” threaten to kill him on a daily basis.

Watching our hero repeatedly try and fail to raise his popularity quotient is fairly entertaining. It captures the transition from elementary to middle school rather nicely. For us adults, those days when our best laid social plans went astray may come flooding back to us. For kid, most can relate but won’t admit it. Who wants to be the kid that only wants to be liked?

It help that there are some genuinely funny moments. Like the best of this movie, they’re slightly over the top but somehow still universal. For instance, there is a scene where Rodrick chases Greg, causing Greg to lock himself in his own room. Greg’s lengthy hideout is the universal part. It’s not unlike what plays out in houses all over the country. The conclusion to this segmen just ices the cake.

Even better, the filmmakers have the confidence and trust in their audience to make Greg unlikeable for much of the movie. His self-centeredness both compels and repels us. When his inevitable redemption comes about, and I don’t think I’m spoiling anything, it’s about his relationship with his best friend. That is something we can relate to.

There are a few stretches of flatness. During those times, the jokes get a bit repetitive and don’t work as well. Chloë Grace Moretz, who stole the show as Hit-Girl in Kick-Ass mostly just take up space, here. Her character should’ve been much more important or absent all together. Like most family movies the adults are only there to show that they do exist in this universe of little heroes and villains. It’s not the greatest kiddie flick you’ll ever see but it’s enjoyable.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2010/03/19/as_a_movie_diary_of_a_wimpy_kid_leaves_out_the_anarchy/”>Ty Burr, Boston Globe</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1196141/”>6.1/10 on imdb.com</a> (8/24/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/diary_of_a_wimpy_kid/”>53% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://apps.metacritic.com/video/titles/diaryofawimpykid”>56/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
<strong>Directed by Niels Arden Oplev.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 152 minutes.
Cast:
Noomi Rapace
Michael Nyqvist
Sven-Bertil Taube
Peter Haber
Lena Endre
Ingvar Hirdwall
Peter Andersson
Tomas Köhler</em>​

<strong>Plot:</strong> Journalist/corporate watchdog Mikael Blomkvist (Nyqvist) is hired by ultra wealthy Henrik Vanger (Taube) to investigate the 40 year old murder of Vanger’s then 16 year old niece. Along the way, Blomkvist enlists the help of Lisbeth (Rapace) a hacker who had been hired to investigate him. Based on the novel by Stieg Larsson.

<strong>The Good:</strong> With any <em>Cold Case</em> style murder mystery, the twists and turns have to be interesting and here, they’re very much so. Trying to guess “whodunit” is a task you’re likely to fail. On top of that, our title character is infinitely mysterious and intriguing in her own right. As our heroine, Noomi Rapace gives a fantastic performance of an amazingly written role. She exudes attitude and a tough exterior but we can tell it hides deep scars and vulnerability even before we’re shown this. This is key because without it, she’d be totally unlikeable. We might even think she deserves some of the things that happen to her. Instead, we root for her even though we really don’t know her. She, and the movie itself through Oplev’s excellent direction, puts up a tough front but only reveals the soft core very late in the proceedings.

<strong>The Bad:</strong> The story surrounding Mikael’s problems outside of this investigation could’ve been much more interesting. It’s there at the beginning and mentioned a coupled times in the middle and resolved at the end, but fails to grab us. As a whole, the movie runs a bit long. The actual length isn’t the problem. I’ve watched plenty of great movies longer than this. The problem is it’s ending could’ve been more concise instead of lingering the way it does. Finally, there’s the question of Lisbeth’s love life. In the end, we’re not sure whether she’s in a love triangle or not. This is a minor detail in the grand scheme. However, since this is the first of a proposed trilogy, it’s something I’d like to see addressed.

<strong>The Ugly:</strong> Everything involving Lisbeth’s new probation officer.

<strong>Recommendation:</strong> If mystery is your thing run, don’t walk, to get your hands on this movie. It’s got all the key ingredients: murder, suspense, sex and violence somehow mixed in to a pretty unique dish. Oh yeah, subtitleophobes beware: we’re speaking Swedish.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/movies/19girl.html?ref=movies”">Manohla Dargis, The New York Times</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1132620/”">7.7/10 on imdb.com</a> (8/25/10), <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/girl_with_the_dragon_tattoo/”">86% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://apps.metacritic.com/video/titles/girlwiththedragontattoo”">76/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 9/10</strong>​

 

[dMerch]

your giving those movies better ratings that from paris with love? WHAT THE FUCK?

 

[Fox1994]

I think he's joking, Houston.

 

[dell71]

^I hope.

 

[dell71]

Sticks and Stones
<strong>Directed by George Mihalka.</strong>
<em>2008. Not Rated, 92 minutes.
Cast:
Alexander de Jordy
David Sutcliffe
Daniel Magder
John Robinson
Richard Fitzpatrick
Debra McCabe
Cary Lawrence
Lori Hallier
Scott Beaudin
Mark Camacho</em>​

A few days after America’s “Shock and Awe” campaign, which officially began “The War on Terrorism”, a youth hockey team from Brockton, Massachusetts travels to Canada for a tournament and is treated very rudely as anti-American sentiments run high. Feeling bad about the situation and going through some problems of his own, Jordan (de Jordy) one of the Canadian players wants to make it up to the kids from the U.S. He decides to try and organize a “friendship tournament” and invite the scorned team back to his country to show them that all Canadians aren’t jerks.

That’s pretty much all I got. It’s a feel-good made-for-TV movie so you should know how this goes down. Coincidentally, I had no idea this was a TV flick until the first long fade to black where there was obviously a commercial during its airing. The back of the DVD cover doesn’t tell you this. Not surprisingly, it’s all rather bland. There are a few tense moments when the Brockton team makes their first trip across the northern border, but that’s about it. The rest of the movie is Jordan trying to convince people his tournament is a good idea. So yeah, it tries to warm your heart whether you want it to, or not, and never lets up.

The two subplots are only vaguely interesting. One is about our hero’s parents seemingly in the early stages of a divorce. From the looks of things, they may have just bored each other to an unbearable degree. The other involves the Canadian team’s star player, Kyle (Beaudin). He’s only twelve but is already diligently working toward a career in the NHL. Of course, he’s also a jerk, making him and his even more of a jerk dad (Camacho), pseudo-villains. This latter storyline should’ve been much more intriguing. It possesses the potential for all sorts of social commentary. Alas, just like with the bigger issue at hand, the tournament, it lets us skate by unscathed rather than checking us into the boards.

When the credits finally roll, we’ve been inundated with all the warm and fuzzy clichés and breezed through all the conventional plot twists that seem to happen on cue. Early and pre-teen kids will probably like it a good deal, even the life-lessons about how to treat others. It’s cute, even enjoyable if you can take all the schmaltz, but we’ve seen it before. A lot.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Clash of the Titans
<strong>Directed by Louis Leterrier.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Sam Worthington
Liam Neeson
Ralph Fiennes
Gemma Arterton
Jason Flemyng
Alexa Davalos
Mads Mikkelson
Izabella Miko
Luke Evan</em>​

In Ancient Greece, mankind and the gods are pissed off at each other. The Gods think we’re a bunch of ingrates that need to be taught a lesson. We’re behaving…well…like a bunch ingrates that need to be taught a lesson. Of course, there is that thing about Zeuz (Neeson) coming down from Olympus and sleeping with some dude’s wife. Why would a god, the most powerful of the gods, stoop so low? Because he can, silly. Anyhoo, Zeus’ little rendezvous begets our hero, Percy Jackson…er…Perseus (Worthington).

Perseus has got his own issues. He’s all moody because Zeus is a deadbeat dad and the first time he meets his old man, pops asks him to move in like nothing ever happened. The nerve. So, feeling more than a little rebellious, Perseus joins us mere mortals and discovers he might be the only one who can stay out past curfew, I mean kill the Kraken. For ancient Greeks, the Kraken is kind of like the boogie man, only it’s about the size of Delaware with countless arms and teeth plus a very nasty disposition.

The special fx make it gorgeous to look at. I’ve heard all sorts of bad things about how the tacked on 3D effects ruined it in the theater. I saw it in plain old 2D on the very nearly obsolete DVD format and it looked great. The one letdown being the cartoon character they tried to pass off as Medusa (Natalia Vodianova).

Story-wise, it’s dull. Even if you’re not familiar with Greek mythology there’s still no mystery. We find out very early all we need to know. And I hate to come back to this, but if you’ve seen <em>Percy Jackson</em> or the 1981 original <em>CotT</em> or bothered looking at the movie poster or DVD cover then you either already know or figure out very quickly how our hero is going to be heroic.

Sadly, that hero doesn’t have the charisma to negate such a problem with the story. Maybe it’s just me, but Sam Worthington seems to have become the go-to-guy for action movies requiring bland leading men (he starred in <em>Avatar</em> and <em>Terminator Salvation</em>). His look is reminiscent of a young Russell Crowe. Unlike Crowe, Worthington never compels you to watch him. He’s simply there, dutifully blending in with all the techno-wizardry on display.

When it’s all said and done, the remake lacks the campiness and silly fun of the original. However, it amps up the special fx and is still an entertaining watch. There’s just a lot lacking between the action. It’s better than the present day set, unofficial remake <em>Percy J</em>, but that’s not saying much.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href=”http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1977333,00.html”>Richard Corliss, Time</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800320/”>6.0/10 on imdb.com</a> (8/26/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/clash_of_the_titans_2010/”>29% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href=”http://www.metacritic.com/movie/clash-of-the-titans/critic-reviews”>39/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>

 

[NAHSTE]

Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is incredible. Loved the way the clues were presented to the viewer. And I agree that her character is written incredibly.

On the other hand, I saw the second one in a theater the other week and was a bit disappointed. From what I read, the last two installments were originally shot as two separate 6-episode television mini-series. Once the book series and the first film began to take off in the States, they decided to re-cut the sequels into features. It explains why some of the narrative is rushed or disjointed.

I'm hoping to catch the third one soon, but from what I hear it's on par with #2. The Girl Who Played With Fire wasn't bad or anything, but it failed to slap me in the face and make me say "wow that was an incredible movie" like Dragon Tattoo did.

 

[dell71]

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman
<strong>Directed by Curt Geda and Tim Maltby.</strong>
<em>2003. Rated PG, 75 minutes.
Cast:
Kevin Conroy
Kimberly Brooks
Kelly Ripa
Eli Marienthal
Elisa Gabrielli
David Ogden Stiers
Kyra Sedgwick
Kevin Michael Richardson</em>​

Carlton Duquesne (Richardson) is having gangster issues. The Penguin (Stiers) is employing him to supply the muscle that will ensure that a dirty deal gets done. At every turn, Duquesne’s henchmen take a beating at the hands of new Gotham hero, the mysterious Batwoman. Not even the Dark Knight himself knows who she is, where she came from or what she’s up to. With room enough for only one vigilante in town, one and a half if your count Robin (Marienthal), Batman sets out to discover her identity.

Duquesne is also having daughter issues. He and his all grown up little girl just can’t see eye to eye on anything. She also resents the fact that because of his problems in the underworld he insists on sending a couple of goons with her everywhere she goes. Nevertheless, she manages to break loose long enough to start up a romance with Bruce Wayne.

Visually, we get the classic blocky style we’ve come to expect from <em>Batman: The Animated Series.</em> This is no more or less in terms of quality.

The story seems to be moseying along in an easily predictable manner. Thankfully, we get a great twist near the end that really spices things up. It really elevates what was a decent but ho-hum affair to a very nice experience.

<strong>MY SCORE: 7/10</strong>

Batman: Under the Red Hood
<strong>Directed by Brandon Vietti.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 75 minutes.
Cast:
Bruce Greenwood
Jensen Ackles
John Di Maggio
Neil Patrick Harris
Kelly Hu
Jason Isaacs
Gary Cole
Vincent Martella
Jim Piddock</em>​

Using one of the Joker’s old aliases, the Red Hood (Ackles), an apparently new masked baddie is extorting all of Gotham’s crime bosses. After dispatching a number of their henchmen, he claims to offer protection not only from the police, but from Batman (Greenwood), as well.

This time around we find a guilt ridden Batman, beating himself up over the death of Robin (Alexander and Vincent Martella) at the hands of the Joker (Di Maggio). It doesn’t help that the original Robin, now known as Nightwing (Harris) keeps popping up to help out, a morbid reminder of what could’ve been. Like the best of Batman, the psychological aspects of the story are as much a part of the story as the action. At the heart of the matter, we come to learn, is Batman’s self-imposed code of ethics. Many Batman fans have often said to themselves if they were the hero, (place name of villain, here) would be dead. Someone here thinks the same. Out loud. To Batman’s face.

The action is well-done. Continuing a recent trend in the franchise, it’s also fairly brutal. Unlike the old Adam West TV series or any of the Batman animated shows from my childhood (the 70s and 80s), people die. At the risk of advocating murder I’ll say it fits the mythology of Gotham City, given the people depicted. Our hero is up against bad people who do bad things, not the vaudevillian mischievous characters they were once made out to be.

For me, the one real drawback was the voice-work of a couple of main players. It wasn’t necessarily bad, just not the voices I wanted to hear. Greenwood as Batman is adequate, but he’s no Kevin Conroy. Conroy perfected the Batman voice. His is always the one I hear when I think of the character. The same goes for Di Maggio as the Joker. He’s actually a little less than adequate making Mark Hamill’s work in the role stand out that much more.

Those minor drawbacks aside, this is a true delight for Batman fans. The story is intriguing and flows nicely into the action. It is one of the better entries into the canon.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> N/A

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href=”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1569923/”>7.9/10 on imdb.com</a> (8/28/10), <a href=”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_under_the_red_hood/”>100% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, N/A on metacritic.com

<strong>MY SCORE: 8/10</strong>​

 

[Fox1994]

I need to download/buy those.

 

[Lumpkin]

Under the red hood was great. I agree with what you said about the voice acting. Greenwood was good enough. Di Maggio grew on me as the movie went along (the last couple scenes really turned my opinon for the better). I guess since were so used to hearing Conroy and Hamil the new voices take some getting used too

 

[Palooza]

Clash of Titans was pure shite. Sam Worthington is so boring.

 

[NAHSTE]

Clash of Titans was pure shite. Sam Worthington is so boring.

Should've cast Adrian Grenier.

 

[Palooza]

Should've cast Adrian Grenier.

he's too busy making documentaries that will change the world.

 

[dell71]

Brothers
<strong>Directed by Jim Sheridan.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 105 minutes.
Cast:
Tobey Maguire
Natalie Portman
Jake Gyllenhall
Sam Shepherd
Bailee Madison
Taylor Geare
Mare Winningham
Patrick John Fleuger
Clifton Collins Jr.
Carey Mulligan</em>​

Sam (Maguire) is a lieutenant in the United States Marine Corp and everything his father hoped he’d be. His brother Tommy (Gyllenhall) is quite the opposite. In fact, Tommy is fresh out of jail and hoping to piece his life together. To make matters worse, Dad (Shepherd) isn’t the least bit shy about sharing his disdain for Tommy, all the while comparing him to Sam.

A couple other wrinkles pop up in our tale. First, Sam is sent off to Afghanistan, leaving behind his wife Grace (Portman) and their two daughters. Shortly thereafter comes the second. Sam is presumed dead after a helicopter accident. After this, Tommy decides to clean up and help out his sister-in-law best he can. Of cours, the two take a shine to one another. I’ll stop there so I won’t spoil the rest.

It’s not as tawdry as it sounds and not anywhere near what the trailers make it out to be. In fact, it’s a thoughtful look at a set of serious and delicated issues. It feels like something that may have played out a time or two across this country over the last few years. The writing is pretty spot on, as are the performances by Portman, Gyllenhall and especially Shepherd.

However, I did have a problem with Tobey Maguire. He isn’t egregiously bad. Some might even say he’s quite good, here. I just never felt the right vibe from him. He seems not to have an adequate enough dark side to pull from. Then again, it could be me. He’s become so synonymous with Spider-Man, I spent half the movie kind of expecting him to don the mask and tights and bust out of the P.O.W. camp he spends a large chunk of time in. And it might not be me. I spent the other half of the movie wondering why Edward Norton isn’t playing this role. The last time I saw him, he looked young enough in appearance for the part and it’s the type of character he excels at playing. While not possessing quite the boy scout charm of Maguire, which is appropriate early on, when the character changes Norton’s persona is more suited to the role. He is simply the scarier man.

Still, it’s an excellent watch that offers food for thought. It also offers relevance, something many movies cannot.

<strong>The Opposite View:</strong> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-12-01/film/brothers-aims-for-tragedy-hits-ptsd-melodrama/”">Melissa Anderson, Village Voice</a>

<strong>What the Internet Says:</strong> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765010/”">7.3/10 on imdb.com</a>, <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1213999-brothers/">59% on rottentomatoes.com</a>, <a href="http://www.blogger.com/”http://www.metacritic.com/movie/brothers/critic-reviews”">58/100 on metacritic.com</a>

<strong>MY SCORE: 7.5/10</strong>​

 

[SOS4Prez]

Agreed on almost all points. I thought it was far an away Maguire's best performance, but then again I've only seen Spiderman once and that was a long time ago. I definitely got vibes from him, but most of them weren't vocal. The look on his face was telling for me, especially in the awkward dinner scene and overall I thought his physical acting was very impressive.

You definitely hit the nail on the head about it not being what the trailer presented. It really wasn't about two brothers and their relationship at all. I was ready to proclaim it one of the best of 09 until they forced the issue near the very end with a couple of "you're my brother!" lines.

 

[nflman2033]

if you haven't seen this:

then check it out