Friday, December 23, 2011

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Directed by: David Fincher
Written by: Steven Zaillian

Plot:
Journalist Mikael Blomkvist is aided in his search for a woman who has been missing for forty years by Lisbeth Salander, a young computer hacker.

Review:
I declare The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo the best film of the year. David Fincher has done it again, created pure gold. It was hard to imagine this book being made into a movie, again, after the success of the previously adapted film series but Fincher knew what he was doing and it all started with the casting of the main character Lisbeth Salander, Rooney Mara.

Lisbeth is a socially awkward, computer hacking, rape victim that brings a powerful punch whenever she is on the screen. If you have read the books then you know to expect some graphic scenes with Lisbeth and Fincher was not afraid to show these scenes. In fact, these scenes locked Rooney Mara for an best actress nomination, maybe even a win. Daniel Craig was great as well, but was on the back burner compared to Mara.

The film stayed very to the books storyline and was a close adaptation. It being a lengthy book, it was a long movie at 157 minutes and got to include everything, including the long ending. It all leads into the second novel but it was a 20 minute ending that could have been wrapped up quicker.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a thriller at its best. With a terrific mystery to solve, heart pumping suspense and great chemistry and acting from Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara, it is not a film to miss. I really hope and would not be surprised if this is a hit, which could mean we can get the other two installments. If this happens, Fincher must direct it otherwise I would prefer no movie. As great as Mara was and her power to control the movie, nobody would be able to keep the same tone and direction Fincher just created.

Rating: 9.5/10

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn

The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn
Directed by: Steven Spielberg
Written by: Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright, and Joe Cornish

Plot:
Tintin and Captain Haddock set off on a treasure hunt for a sunken ship commanded by Haddock's ancestor. But someone else is in search of the ship.

Review:
I wasn’t really sure what to expect going into this film. The trailers looked just okay and I had never read a Tintin comic before. But it did not matter, as the amazing motion capture animation, the spectacular camera movements, and clever editing sucked me right into the adventure of the film right from the opening credit sequence, which set the tone for the entire movie.

Spielberg really was the right choice to helm this project. He completely understands how an adventure story works and has even stated that Tintin was a huge influence on the Indiana Jones films. His choice to use motion capture was his best idea though. It would not have worked as live action with the dog and he wouldn’t have had the camera movement range if it was all CGI, and the camera movement made the movie. With one of the best scenes being a motorcycle chase done with no cuts through a village.

So I was trying to figure out whether Tintin was a kid or an adult. He looks like a kid and everybody calls him kid but sounds like an adult, carries a gun, lives in his own apartment. I hear the comics also keep his age ambiguous but this bothered me a little bit as did his annoying catchphrases. It shouldn't bother me because it is staying true to the comic, but I have never read it so it bother me.

If you have read the comics then you will surely fall in love with this film. I did the research and it stays true and accurate to the comics which is always nice to hear. It was a fun film that took you on a wild ride with some laughs along the way. I will not be surprised if a sequel is made, but I would have to dissaprove if Spielberg was not apart of it, since it was very obvious his mind was behind the heart of the film.

Rating: 7.5/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (129 min)
Directed by: Guy Ritchie
Written by: Muchele Mulroney and Kieran Mulroney

Plot:
Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Dr. Watson join forces to outwit and bring down their fiercest adversary, Professor Moriarty.

Review:
I am not going to lie, when the first Sherlock Holmes film came out, I was not that big of a fan. I mean the film was entertaining but it was just okay and I thought something was missing. Well, this time around Guy Ritchie must have found that something, and put that something into A Game of Shadows, because this film rocked. It was well paced, witty, funny, smart, great action and one of the most untraditional, traditional Hollywood endings, if you follow my logic.

Well, I hope you can follow that logic because if you can’t, your in trouble because my only quarrel with Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is that it can be hard to follow at times. There is so much going on and Sherlock is such an intelligent character that when he battles wits against Professor James Moriarty, you now have two characters that are super geniuses working against one other. Although this film really demands your full attention, it is fun to be inside the minds of both of these characters.

What makes this franchise so great is the bromance between Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law. I think the chemistry between the two of them is one of the strongest duos on the big screen. Downey Jr. gives a manic on the verge of psychotic performance and he makes a heroic and comedic action hero. The action scenes were fantastic, as Ritchie takes Sherlock’s logic and slows down the action again. This time around, he used this trick more often, which I thought was great. If you have scene the trailer, then get ready for the great slow motion action through the woods, because it is a wild ride.

I am happy to say this is a sequel that was better than the first, as this rarely happens. If you want to go see a fun, smart movie around the holidays then Sherlock Holmes is for you. 

Rating: 8.5/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Anonymous

Anonymous
Directed by: Roland Emmerich
Written by: John Orloff

Plot:
A political thriller advancing the theory that it was in fact Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford who penned Shakespeare's plays; set against the backdrop of the succession of Queen Elizabeth I, and the Essex Rebellion against her.

Review:
What a poorly structured snore-fest. In a world that questions whether Shakespeare was a fraud, Roland Emmerich, takes an interesting concept and hacks at it with a machete. Not only structurally but historically. Emmerich and John Orloff (the writer) claimed that this film was “unbelievably historically accurate” and “obviously a lot more people do think Shakespeare wrote the plays. Obviously, in my movie, he didn’t, so a lot of people will say that’s not historically accurate and they are totally welcome to that opinion. But, the world within the movie, that that story takes place in, is incredibly accurate, like the Essex Rebellion and the ages of the characters.” So he pretty much just said that this movie is accurate based on the fake world I created. Also facts on the Essex Rebellion and the characters are not completely accurate. It’s worth the research.

Anyway, right from the first 25 minutes, I had already given up on this film. They start you out in modern times at a theater, then flash you back to the time of Shakespeare, then flash you back 5 years earlier, and then flash you back even further another bunch of years that is not specified. I couldn’t believe how sloppy it started out and the film never got back on its feet. 

The film was also full of crappy costumes and horrific acting. The only actor that held his own was Rhys Ifans, the only star of the film. The films lack of star power hurt this film because this film was full of stand still scenes of just conversation. I couldn’t take a lot of the conversations seriously because of the “traditional” outfits they were all wearing. I think it was a little over the top and it only made be think the acting was worse. 

I apologize if you have already seen it, because everyone that has deserves their money back. I do not recommend this film.

Rating: 2/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Friday, December 9, 2011

The Sitter

The Sitter
Directed by: David Gordon Green
Written by: Brian Gatewood and Alessandro Tanaka


Plot:
A comedy about a college student on suspension who is coaxed into babysitting the kids next door, though he is fully unprepared for the wild night ahead of him.

Review:
I am surprised how much I liked The Sitter. If you liked Pineapple Express and Your Highness than this movie is for you. David Gordon Green has become the go to director for the action comedy. What should have been a quiet night of babysitting blows up in Jonah Hill’s face and everything goes wrong. From coke dealers to gangsters, from kick boxers to bat mitzvahs, this film takes you everywhere and gets you laughing along the wild ride.

The Sitter is a film that really tries to push the line of what is comedy. In one sense it is your classic Jonah Hill comedy and you tell his humor is written all over it but then you get some over the top scenes, like Sam Rockwell being a coke dealer surrounded by a bunch of gay weight lifters and believe it or not it kinda works. But along the way, I think there were some lines crossed with Jonah Hill’s character, Noah, dealing with the kids. If you have a twisted mind like me, you will find it funny, but I am at least aware that it was kinda fucked up. 

The real reason you should go see this film is for the three child actors in this film. Each with a very distinct characteristic that makes them hilarious. Especially the little girl, played by Landry Bender. The first twenty minutes of this film when everything and everybody was being introduced was just non stop laughter. From that point on it was still hilarious and gave me belly laughs but their were some slow parts where Jonah Hill just sat down and talked about how his life is shit and he needs to change, which made the film drag a little. For a 75 minute film this shouldn’t happen.

Either way I recommend checking this movie out as it is a comedy that can not be missed. Plus this is the last film fat Jonah Hill will appear in, so you don’t want to miss that. It will be interesting if audiences will still find him funny now that he is in better shape. 

Rating: 8/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad!

Monday, December 5, 2011

Take Shelter

Take Shelter
Directed by: Jeff Nichols
Written by: Jeff Nichols

Plot:
Plagued by a series of apocalyptic visions, young husband and father questions whether to shelter his family from a coming storm, or from himself.

Review:
I don’t know if you have checked out the trailer for Take Shelter but it is an enthralling experience. I mean the trailer hooks you in and makes you want to see more, but this trailer’s intensity is misleading, since the film’s intensity was just the opposite. In this 120 minute feature about a man who is losing his mind and trying to figure out why, it just dragged on and on. I looked at my phone to check the time 45 minutes into the film and every 15 minutes after that. It’s a shame that the Boardwalk Empire boys (Michael Shannon and Shea Whigham) wasted such great performances on such a slow, unsatisfying film.

The film follows Michael Shannon’s character, who is hard working small town man just trying to get by with the money that he and his wife (Jessica Chastain) makes. On top of money issues they have a daughter that has lost her hearing. When Shannon’s character starts having hallucinations and delusions about a storm coming he starts building a storm shelter to protect his family, even though they are short on money. Only thing, his family and everybody else in town thinks he is crazy for doing this. 

Michael Shannon is a fantastic actor. If you have not gotten chance to see Boardwalk Empire, you should. Not only because it is a great show, but because Shannon puts on some phenomenal performances. He continues his good work here in Take Shelter. Shannon straddles the line of sanity as he also tries to be a husband and father. His emotions all bubble under the skin until one day he snaps in front of the community in what made for the most powerful scene in the film. 

I think this film would have been a lot better if say 30 minutes were cut out. By the time the ending came, I didn’t have very much interest. But I think of what could have made it a better ending. Shannon was a Noah figure and nobody would believe him that everybody should build an Ark (storm shelter).

Only check this film out if you want to see the performance of a possible best actor nod but otherwise miss this one, since you won’t get a fulfilling story and will most likely be let down

Rating: 3/10
Please support my reviews by clicking on an ad

Friday, December 2, 2011

Hugo

Hugo
Directed by: Martin Scorsese
Written by: John Logan

Plot:
Set in 1930s Paris, an orphan who lives in the walls of a train station is wrapped up in a mystery involving his late father and an automaton.

Review:
Martin Scorsese is a genius behind the camera. Hugo is unlike any other film Scorsese has ever made, but might be the closest film to his life. I mean it must have been so great for him to make a film about one of the fathers of narrative cinema. Scorsese’s Hugo is a homage to the silent cinema, specifically the films Georges Melies created and the overall backstory and the main points made about Georges Melies’ life are accurate. I am currently taking a Silent Cinema class and Hugo was relevant to what I am learning, which made it that much more enjoyable.

I think what will surprise many people is that Hugo is not a kids movie. It is family friendly, but the film gave something a lot deeper then a family friendly children's movie. Not only is the film heart warming, but the visuals are spectacular. Right from the very opening sequence I was entranced. The way he dissolved clockwork into the city of Paris was unbelievable. 

As much as this was a film about a young orphan who lives in a train station, it is very much about Melies and his early cinema which was lost. Scorsese uses vintage clips of Melies cinema and re-imagines his work, doing recreations. He also used 3D to show them in a way that Melies could never do or dream of, but I am sure if Melies was still alive he would be simply amazed. Ben Kingsley played Melies and put on a spectacular performance.

As for the young ones in this film, Asa Butterfield (what a name) and Chloe Moretz were both fantastic. At some points I couldn’t believe that the two of them were just children because they were making such powerful performances. Asa Butterfield was just cast as the lead in the upcoming Enders Game project and I can’t wait to see him in it. As for Chloe Moretz, I love everything she has been in up to date, Kick Ass, 500 Days of Summer, her cameo in 30 Rock, and now Hugo can be added to this list. Both of these actors have great futures ahead of them.

This film really hits a soft spot, and pulls at the heart cords, but Sasha Baron Cohen was an added pleasure in this film. Always coming in at the right moment to give you that comic relief. 

There is not too much to say about what was wrong with this film. The only thing that felt off was that Hugo’s father’s death affected his life so greatly and the resolution of the film did not seem fitting to his life altering experiences. Either way it was barely noticeable and did not bother me. This was a wonderful film to watch and hopefully will spark a love for film into the younger audience, to join the ranks of cinema lovers like me and so many others. 

Rating: 9/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Friday, November 25, 2011

Melancholia

Melancholia
Directed by: Lars von Trier
Written by: Lars von Trier

Plot:
Two sisters find their already strained relationship challenged as a mysterious new planet threatens to collide into the Earth.

Review:
Holy moly, what a depressing and eye opening film. Right from the very beginning, Lars von Trier set the tone of the film shooting slow motion visual spectacles that lasted for at least the first 5 minutes of the film. This opening reminded me a lot of Tree of Life (http://bigbobbosreviews.blogspot.com/2011/07/tree-of-life.html) , but Melancholia turned out to have more of a concrete narrative.

The film was broken up into two parts. The first half following Justine (Kristen Dunst) at her wedding reception with her husband Michael (Alexander Skarsgard). This might have been one of the strangest wedding receptions I have have watched but it gave so much character development that was needed for the second half of the film. The second half turned the focus onto Justine’s sister, Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and her astronomer husband John (Kiefer Sutherland). John studies the planet Melancholia and seems very sure of himself that it will not pose a threat. It was very effective having the film split into two sections each focusing more closely on a certain sister because it gave us very different perspectives of each character. 

Even with a narrative structure, there is a lot of room open for interpretation when the film concludes. I thought that there was very religious or spiritual subtext with Kristen Dunst’s character as the movie progressed.

Kristen Dunst gave her best performance to date. She is definitely past her Spiderman days and gave a moving performance. Lars von Trier uses a lot of close ups and Kristen Dunst always has the perfect expression on to convey what she is feeling. Charlotte Gainsbourg also gave a fantastic performance as the sister. She went from the sane one to the hysterical one trying to keep everything together and her son safe. Honestly, everyone gave a fantastic performance. It was nice to see Kiefer Sutherland not being Jack Bauer. Alex Skarsgard got to show his acting talents outside of True Blood and every other character in between had their own little characteristic that made the film special.

With spectacular visuals that will blow you away, this slow paced piece of art should really make you think. Besides a couple little plot holes, like why Kristen Dunst’s family have british accents when she doesn't, this film is great. Melancholia really moved me and you walk away from the film thinking that you need to enjoy life while it lasts or it’s not worth living at all. I hope it moves you like it as moved me and you take something away from it, whether it’s the same message I took or another.

Rating: 8/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

The Muppets

The Muppets
Directed by: James Bobin
Written by: Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller

Plot
With the help of three fans, the Muppets must reunite to save their old theater from a greedy oil tycoon.

Review
I was a little surprised to see that The Muppets was rated 97% on rotten tomatoes before I left for the theater but now I can see why. The Muppets was a crowd pleaser for sure. It is wild and witty and the musical numbers are extremely catchy. The Muppets are definitely aimed for kids though, and even though Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller (Forgetting Sarah Marshall) wrote this film, they keep true to who The Muppets are and don’t add crude or obnoxious jokes that are unfit for theThe Muppets personalities. 

The movie follows a new Muppet into the Muppet universe. His name is Walter and he played the Muppet brother of Jason Segel’s character, Gary. The two of them grew up as huge fans of the Muppets and when Gary was bringing his girlfriend Mary, Amy Adams, to LA for their anniversary, Walter came along to see Muppet Studios. This is where the problems begin when Walter overhears a rich oil tycoon (Chris Cooper) who wants to shut down the studio and drill for oil. The Muppets must reunite to save their theater. Yes, the story narrative and story telling isn’t very complex, but it is for children and it doesn’t need to be. The movie was pure fun and it carried the movie along with its all star cast.

Jason Segel, Amy Adams, Chris Cooper, Rashida Jones, and Jack Black were the front stars in this film but there were a ton of cameos. Neil Patrick Harris, Selena Gomez, Ken Jeong, Jim Parsons (may have been my favorite cameo), Sarah Silverman, Zach Galifianakis, Donald Glover, and many more all made small appearances and provided tons of laughs. Jason Segel was the lead in this film, which I thought was a problem. Jason Segel should not have been the lead in a Muppet movie. He felt too dominant and I get it, he wrote it and did a ton of work on it but he should have cut down his role a little bit to give more screen time to the Muppets. All the Muppets did get screen time and they left nobody out but some of the Muppets only appeared once in the fore front. Kermit and Walter had a ton of time, Miss Piggy and Fozzie Bear had a decent amount of time but everybody else felt like they were left on the back burner to let Jason Segel have more screen time.

The musical numbers were the best parts of this film with nifty dance numbers to accompany them. The best one by far is “Man or Muppet” when we get to see a Muppet version of Jason Segel and a Human version of Walter, played by Jim Parsons. The Muppets is a celebration of what Jim Henson created and should bring back many fond memories. 

Rating: 8/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Martha Marcy May Marlene
Directed by: Sean Durkin
Written by: Sean Durkin

Plot
Haunted by painful memories and increasing paranoia, a damaged woman struggles to re-assimilate with her family after fleeing an abusive cult.

Review:
Oh Martha Marcy May Marlene, how you will keep me awake at night. With a powerful and emotional tale about a woman who is taken in by a cult and when she escapes them, she can’t seem to forget them. The film cuts back and forth between Martha with her family and Marcy May (her new identity) during her time in the cult. It is so elegant the way they move from scene to scene as an action or dialogue that happens in one time zone is actually going on in the other. For a first time director and feature length writer it is really impressive, heck it’s really impressive either way.

As the story jumps back and forth you learn more about our heroine’s past and the experiences she had to face at the farm in the Catskills where the cult made camp. The cult family is set up beautifully with Patrick (John Hawkes) playing the father figure of the  group, but even as he is this father figure to everyone by making everyone feel comfortable, safe, at home, he casts a great shadow over everyone. He comes across as a great evil that they learn to accept. Even after he rapes Martha, this is their initiation into the cult, he then sings a hauntingly beautiful song, featured in the trailer, where he serenades her by saying, “She’s just a picture, that’s all”. They focus in on her and Martha is framed as a picture for his connivence. 

Martha was played by none other than Elizabeth Olsen. Who is this, you ask? She is the younger sister of the famous twins Mary Kate and Ashley. Well I would not be surprised if 22 year old Elizabeth became more famous that those twins in the very near future. She gives a tragically beautiful performance as a broken down girl who was brainwashed by the wrong people. When her and John Hawkes were on screen together it was just pure brilliance as they both were masterful in their respective roles. 

With multiple unnerving scenes that send shivers down your spines the cult actions go from things that unnerve you because they are in a cult to actions that overstep the bounds of normal society. This all overlaps to when Martha has escaped the cult and is spending time with her family and all of these situations come into play making her sister’s life very difficult.

Martha Marcy May Marlene is a movie that I will have to see again because a lot went on and I feel I will understand the movie better during a second watch through. It had a very ambiguous ending which I liked but it would have been nice to have some sort of concreteness to it. It was very abrupt, and I have my speculations and theories but I will not share them as it will ruin the movie. Enjoy the film, enjoy having your specualtions and theories and enjoy the fantastic performances from John Hawkes and Elizabeth Olsen. 

Rating: 8.5/10

Please support my review by clicking on an ad!

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1
Directed by: Bill Condon
Written by: Melissa Rosenberg

Plot:
A bunch of stupid vampires and werewolves care about some teenage girl who gets pregnant for some stupid reason.

Review:
I am now dead inside. To just make this clear, here and now, I have not read any of the books nor watched any of the previous films. I saw this film to purely rip on it. If you don’t like that stop reading and find the nearest bridge and jump because you like Twilight. My only enjoyment during the watching of this film was the fact that I ruined the experience of a theater full of tweens as I laughed constantly at the dialogue and story.

This movie was so bad I watched Adam Sandler’s Jack and Jill to make me feel better.
This movie was so bad even Hitler thought it was torture.
This movie was so bad after Joe Paterno saw the film he called the cops.

The only thing worse than this film is the fact that they split it into two movies. It is a shame to think that each of these films are going to make an estimated $500 million. I mean nothing happened in this film. Let me give you a run through. The first forty minutes were spent at a wedding where crappy jokes were made, minute long kiss scenes took place, and Kristen Stewart was nervous about having sex. The next forty minutes were spent on their honeymoon which was pretty much a forty minute montage.  First a montage of them in a beautiful area of the world, then a montage of Kristen Stewart preparing to have sex, then a montage of Robert Pattinson not wanting to having sex with her anymore and then we find out she is pregnant. The first hour and a half of this film literally nothing happened. 

The last twenty minutes were spent with Kristen Stewart looking like shit and a bunch of vampires and werewolves surrounding her like she is the one person to save them all. She dies giving birth but sadly is turned into a vampire so their has to be another movie. Ending ruined, sorry. There are books so get over it. 

It’s a shame  Kristen Stewart and Robert Patinson are attached to this movie, as they are talented actors. Check out Water for Elephants if you want to go see a good performance from Robert Pattinson. Kristen Stewart was great in Adventureland and Welcome to the Rileys and I’m looking forward to her next role in Snow White and the Huntsman

Taylor Lautner on the other hand gives another one of his traditional no emotion, I might as well be a dead corpse performances where he has to have his shirt off in at least one scene. He is the worst. I rip on him more in my Abduction review, which is really a taylor Lautner bashing (http://bigbobbosreviews.blogspot.com/2011/09/abduction.html). 

I just don’t see the appeal in these movies. There are just so many points in this movie that pissed me off and are so out of place. In the first scene, Robert Pattinson tells Kristen Stewart that he hasn’t told her everything about himself. It’s the fourth fucking movie and they are about to get married and now all of a sudden their is more information. Then this information leads to nowhere and has no narrative meaning. The whole movie felt like a music video, with montage after montage with cheesy music. The CGI and green screen use was either terrible or obvious. Are werewolves suppose to be Samoan? Every actor that was a werewolf looks Samoan, I just don’t get it. And when the werewolves talk in their werewolf form I completely lost it. I laughed so hard and got so many dirty looks, it was the most glorious moment of my life. Other things out of place were the vampires watching college football for some reason and they googled hybrid human/vampire babies and all the information in the world was there including detailed pictures. Also why can these vampires walk around in the sunlight. That is the exact opposite of what a vampire should be. 

Horrific acting, terrible dialogue, frightful storytelling, horrid science fiction series, abominable twilight fans. These are the things that are wrong with the Twilight franchise. Thankfully in six months time it will all be over with and these tweens can stop admiring this Bella Swan character, who is just a terrible terrible person. I hate you Twilight and all of your fans. Until Part 2 when I can copy and paste this review.

Rating: ---0/10 (Triple negative zero because a double negative is actually positive).
Please support my review my clicking on an ad!

Sunday, November 13, 2011

J. Edgar

J. Edgar
Directed by: Clint Eastwood
Written by: Dustin Lance Black

Plot:
As the face of law enforcement in America for almost 50 years, J. Edgar Hoover was feared and admired, reviled and revered. But behind closed doors, he held secrets that would have destroyed his image, his career and his life.

Review:
J. Edgar is one of the most powerful movies I have seen this year. It dove into the personal life of J. Edgar Hoover, during his career as the FBI director. It gave us an understanding of who is was as a person, how he was a man who lusted for power and the film strongly dealt with the acquisitions that J. Edgar Hoover was a closeted homosexual, which I learned tonight. I’m not going to lie, it threw me off when the film started dealing with these issues. Just because this was a powerful movie doesn’t make it an amazing film, don’t get me wrong it was great, but there was still a lot that went wrong in this film.

The story was told through the eyes of an older Hoover as he was retelling his life story. He was retelling his life story for his memoir that for some reason was being typed up by other FBI agents, that would rotate on this duty. I bet they didn’t have something more important to do, like stop a crime. Anyway the story would jump from present to past and it was a little confusing to pick up at first, but eventually started to make more sense.

The big story of this film is DiCaprio’s performance which of course is fantastic. He really brought Hoover to life and he is lock for a best actor nomination. Leonardo DiCaprio gave an incredibly believable performance of a man in self denial about his sexuality. Even though, Hoover’s sexuality was only speculated, J. Edgar portrayed Hoover as 100% a homosexual and this kind of inner turmoil of a closeted gay man has never been so dramatized in such detail on the big screen. 

Hoover’s lover goes by the name of Clyde Tolson, which was played by Armie Hammer and he gave a spectacular performance as well. I thought he started off slow but once he was in some intimate scenes with DiCaprio, Hammer’s talents really showed. The one thing that bothered me about his character was his make up as an older man. It was absolutely horrendous and was not believable at all. You would think they would have put a little more effort into since DiCaprio’s old man suit was great.

The big reason this film was not amazing and just great was the script. It wasn’t consistent with the character, dialogue, and story structure. I have already mentioned that the story structure was a little confusing as it jumped from present to past throughout the film, and it should be noted that some of the same shots were shown twice, for what seemed like no real narrative driving reason. But the character traits and their dialogue should feel consistent in a high profile film like this one. Leonardo DiCaprio had a great accent and would sound very old fashioned but then he would say something more modern a second later.

I know I did a lot of ranting on flaws in the film but really this film is enjoyable. At a 140 minuted long it does not feel like it drags even though it is a very slow paced film. Clint Eastwood gives you a beautiful looking (besides Armie Hammer’s makeup) film that really delves into the dark secrets that Hoover hides about himself and the country. Check it out, a likely best picture nomination and a definite best actor performance.

Rating: 7.5/10
Please support my review by clicking on an ad.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Immortals

Immortals
Directed by: Tarseem Singh
Written by: Charley Parlapanides and Vlas Parlapanides

Plot:
Theseus is a mortal man chosen by Zeus to lead the fight against the ruthless King Hyperion, who is on a rampage across Greece to obtain a weapon that can destroy humanity.

Review:
Immortals is a movie that you get exactly what you expect going in. Lots of action and no story. No amount of action could make up for the lack of story in this one. The script was a mess that jumped all over the place, adding in random characters just to get Theseus from one battle to the next. You don’t get attached to any of the characters, including the lead character Theseus, played by Henry Cavill. He just goes from one scene to the next killing people to avenge his mother. Even the lead actress, Frieda Pinto, was just put into the script to add a sex scene (great side boob shot) into the film and once Theseus had planted his seed, she completely disappears from the film with forty five minutes left to go. The action was great but the fact that I couldn’t get attached to any of the characters really hurt the film.

The action was spectacular to watch once it got going, which took forever. They were trying to set up a backstory that was completely boring, very inaccurate and very slow paced, but eventually they got to the fighting. Obviously these were the best scenes and are the reason you go to the theater to see a movie like Immortals. The scenes with Theseus were great but whenever the gods got involved, the fighting was taken to a whole other level. Heads turning to dust, killing five people before they can even move, blood spurting out in all directions. It all put a big grin on my face. 

The thing that surprised me the most coming out of this film was how psychotic and insane Mickey Rourke’s character King Hyperion was in this film. This might be one of the evilest characters in the film. The film focused on his demonic ways even more heavily than the fighting scenes in this film and were horrific to watch. It was surprising how graphic they got and how much focus was put on these images. 

As Greek Mythology goes, I don’t think the writers are experts on it. The entire script is completely inaccurate to Theseus’s adventures and it would have been nice for them to put a little effort into making it a accurate film. For those of you who don’t know a lot about Greek Mythology I would recommend reading up a little bit about it before going to the film because you will not get very much information about Theseus’s backstory in this film.

Even though there was no character identification or development I thought the casting for this film was well done. Henry Cavill plays a great hero and I am excited to seem him next in Superman. Mickey Rourke played a great villain, which might have been the best character in the film. Henry Cavill’s and Mickey Rourke had a great final fight scene towards the end. Luke Evans, was casted as Zeus, which he pulled off really well. He got some badass fight scenes too. I think Luke Evans is very talented, he was last seen in The Three Musketeers and will be seen in The Hobbit as well. 

Immortals is a very ridiculous movie. Don’t expect great characters, don’t expect a accurate mythology, don’t expect a clear cut story because there are a ton of plot holes in this film. Go into this film knowing that action is worth seeing and Mickey Rourke will give you one fucked up show.

Rating: 5/10
Please support my reviews by clicking on an ad.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Tower Heist

Tower Heist
Directed by: Brett Ratner
Written by: Ted Griffin and Jeff Nathanson

Plot:
When a group of hard working guys find out they've fallen victim to a wealthy business man's Ponzi scheme, they conspire to rob his high-rise residence.

Review:
Tower Heist was a fun film that exceeded my expectations. I thought this film was going to be a lost cause with former A-listers, Ben Stiller and Eddie Murphy taking the leads and Brett Ratner behind the camera (I just can’t trust him anymore after his performance working in the X-Men franchise). But surprisingly it all works and had a great mix of a good comedy and a good heist film. It is very reminiscent of the Oceans movies, which is not surprising since one of the writers, Ted Griffin, worked on the Oceans 11 screenplay.

This is also the second film I have seen in the past week relating to our countries economic state. The other being In Time (http://bigbobbosreviews.blogspot.com/2011/11/in-time.html). In Tower Heist we get a Bernie Madoff type character, played by Alan Alda, who cleans out the pockets of the middle and lower classes, the everyday man. 

In Tower Heist the everyday man strikes back. With a great ensemble of likable, everyday men, misfits that come together to take down the titan that is Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda). Ben Stiller plays the leader of this group and the hero of the film. Ben Stiller was the Manager of the building they tried to rob. It was traditional Ben Stiller humor but he mostly played the straight character in this film and did not bring too many laughs. 

His supporting cast though made this film very funny. They include Eddie Murphy, Matthew Broderick, Michael Pena, and Casey Affleck. Eddie Murphy went back to his roots in this film. He went on rants, made great faces, and brought many laughs. I hope to see more of him in the future as long as he stays with his roots. He stole a bunch of scenes in this film. The character that brought the most laughs besides Eddie Murphy was Matthew Broderick. He played a Wall Street Whiz who was down on his luck. Pena and Affleck were both fine int heir respective roles. Pena played a elevator operator turned heist technician and Affleck played Stiller’s brother in law. 

One thing I really liked about this film was the script. It all flowed well and all of the character’s decisions and actions made sense. The reasons and planning of the robbery was logical. All relative to the world of the movie, of course. The film also did not have a cheesy romantic story or a cliche ending. I really thought I would hate the ending going into this film, but yet again i’ll say this film exceeded my expectations. 

Tower Heist was a very entertaining film and a movie that is hard to hate on. It is a great mix of comedy and heist and hopefully Brett Ratner will get some mojo back since this was probably his best work since Rush hour 2. If you want a fun film, go check out the not so washed up Still, Murphy, and Broderick in Tower Heist.

Rating: 7.5/10
Please support my reviews by clicking on the ads.

Friday, November 4, 2011

A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas

A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas
Directed by: Todd Strauss-Schulson
Written by: Jon Hurwitz and  Hayden Schlossberg

Plot:
Six years after their Guantanamo Bay adventure, stoner buds Harold Lee and Kumar Patel cause a holiday fracas by inadvertently burning down Harold's father-in-law's prize Christmas tree.

Review:
Harold and Kumar have done it again. They have turned a moderate problem into a complete shit storm and found hilarious new situations for you to laugh at. In a film which you get everything that you would expect plus more, they also bring you a 3D movie worth seeing. This is hands down the best usage of 3D I have seen. The director really makes sure there are many different objects and bodily functions flying close to your eye balls. Lovely, I know. The script even adds a couple 3D jokes.

Gun fights, Mob Bosses, horny teens, naked nuns, drug addicted children and so much more make up this ridiculous film. Oh, and how could I forget the amazing Neil Patrick Harris or NPH for short. Like the other two Harold and Kumar flicks they are not afraid to make jokes about anything. You can go into this film expecting nothing but pure fun and the joy of knowing there will be lines crossed. 

What I find really amazing is how Kal Penn gets away with making a movie like this. He quit acting to join the Obama administration as an Associate Director in the White House Office of Public Engagement and then resigned to make this film (and a couple episodes of How I Met your Mother) and once shooting was over he took back his post at the White House. He must be really smart to keep a job in the White House after making a movie like this one. Anyway, Kal Penn and John Cho are both funny in their Harold and Kumar way. They don’t miss a beat and pick it right back where they left off in Guantanamo Bay. Harold and Kumar are heroes to the stoner community and it is hard not to root for them. I can’t think of a more likable pair in a stoner comedy. Neil Patrick Harris though was the star of this film. Even though he only had about 10 to 15 minutes of screen time he stole the show. Once he entered the film I could not stop laughing. 

A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas is very much your typical Harold and Kumar film. It will follow the general rules of their universe and some of the charm was taken away since it is the third film, but it still manages to make you laugh. With a slow beginning, it quickly picks up speed and laughs keep coming. I can only hope they don’t make a fourth one.

Rating: 7/10
Please support my review by clicking on the ads. 

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

In Time

In Time
Directed By: Andrew Niccol
Written By: Andrew Niccol


Plot:
In a future where people stop aging at 25, but are engineered to live only one more year, having the means to buy your way out of the situation is a shot at immortal youth. Here, Will Salas finds himself accused of murder and on the run with a hostage - a connection that becomes an important part of the way against the system.

Review:
I am not gonna lie, I am a Sci-Fi sucker. And there was no better way to treat myself on my birthday than this solid Sci-Fi Flick. In Time has a great premise which takes the old saying “time is money” and makes it a reality. It is set in a future world that is not so different than ours. The economy is in the dump, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Yup, sounds familiar.
As great as the premise was, the pacing of the film was a little off. It jumped from fast paced to slow paced too often to gain enough momentum to make it a more exciting film. I would have loved to have seen a couple more fast paced scenes because when the film was rolling it got my heart pumping, especially the last half hour of the film. I liked the way they dealt with the transferring of time. You would hold on to the other person’s arm and can control it with your mind. With that being said, it does seem a little easy to get your time stolen.

In Time was also an enjoyable movie because with a premise of nobody ages past the age of 25, there are a lot of beautiful people in this film, including Olivia Wilde (who was pushing 50) and Amanda Seyfried. Olivia Wilde plays Justin Timberlake’s mother and Amanda Seyfried is the love interest. Both giving solid performances, even Wilde who had very limited screen time. 

Justin Timberlake may be becoming a star. I mean I guess he already is a star, but he could be an A-list actor sometime in the near future. Besides a scene where he cried, which he just was not very good at, he was spot on in this role. He has now proved that he can carry a film in its leading role after being a supporting actor in previous films. He must be doing something right because rumors have it that the Coen brothers are trying to attach him to their next project (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/31/justin-timberlake-llewyn-davis/)

I have to mention quickly that I loved seeing Johnny Galecki (The Big Bang Theory) in this film. I think he is great and he had some great cameos in Entourage as well. Anyway, In Time is a entertaining and a solid Sci-Fi movie that is worth going to see. 

Rating: 7/10
Please support my reviews by clicking on an Ad. Thanks

Sunday, October 30, 2011

The Rum Diary

The Rum Diary
Directed by: Bruce Robinson
Written by: Bruce Robinson

Plot:
American journalist Paul Kemp takes on a freelance job in Puerto Rico for a local newspaper during the 1950s and struggles to find a balance between island culture and the expatriates who live there.

Review:
The Rum Diary might be one of the most unsatisfying movies of the year. First off the trailer was very misleading since I thought the film was going to a psychological journey through the mind of this writer. Instead we got a lot of filler scenes. I felt like I was waiting for something to happen the entire movie and then it ended. 

The beginning of the story all felt forced with each line of dialogue being way to obvious about setting up what was going on. With ridiculously cheesy moments between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard that goes along with their unexplainable love connection I felt like I was being cheated of a real story. 

This film is based off a novel, which I have not read, but I don’t see how they thought the book could be adapted. There was too much irrelevant scenes and dialogue that took place to make me care about the main character or even get invested into the story.

Johnny Depp is always the man with a believable performance as a drunk but his supporting cast really hurt his performance. Michael Rispoli played one of his roommates and he just got on my nerves and played no part in driving the story. Someone that bothered me even more was Giovanni Ribisi who played a way to over the top alcoholic. Every word that came out of his mouth pissed me off and he contributed even less to the story.

The two people I wish were int he film more often are Amber Heard and Aaron Eckhart. They both gave great performances. It felt like the movie was going to revolve around the two of them and Depp but then abruptly they were both out of the picture. The abruptness of their departures from the film did not make sense or fit into the story.

The main purpose of this film was to show Depp’s character find his voice as a journalist during his experience in Puerto Rico but I think the filmed did a terrible job at portraying this. At no moment did I feel that he was lost as a writer besides the one line of dialogue which he said he was lost and there was no moment where I felt he gained his voice. Sorry Johnny better luck next time.

Rating: 4/10
Please click on the ads to show your support of my reviews. Thanks!

Friday, October 21, 2011

The Three Musketeers

The Three Musketeers 
Directed by: Paul W.S. Anderson
Written by: Alex Litvak, Andrew Davies

Plot:
The hot-headed young D'Artagnan along with three former legendary but now down on their luck Musketeers must unite and defeat a beautiful double agent and her villainous employer from seizing the French throne and engulfing Europe in war.

Review:
It does not please me to say this but I was very dissapointed with The Three Musketeers. I mean first off they should have called the movie The Fourth Musketeer as the film focused mainly on D’Artagnan’s character rather than the musketeers themselves. On top of the forced D’Artagnan love story, it was full of cheesy moments, and atrocious dialogue. The editing was all over the place and the film could not decide what tone and message it wanted to send. In a film that could have been something they really screwed the pooch on this one.

The part that bothered me the most was the editing of this film. It was choppy and made me feel disoriented during simple conversations. It would be one thing if it was terrible during the action sequences but the action sequences were done rather well. But they couldn’t edit a simple conversation. A character would be in one spot during a conversation and then all of a sudden were at the opposite side of the room. It was extremely frustrating to watch while this nonsense was going on. 

A refreshing part of the film was seeing Orlando Bloom playing a villain. It is a change of pace for him and I think he pulled it off. It will be cool to see him play the villain character again in the sequel (pending this movie rakes in the dough). All of the casting in the film is spot on though and their acting jobs were okay int heir respected roles. I really liked Luke Evans as Aramis, who looks a little bit too much like Orlando Bloom. It did confuse me a little at the beginning of the film. The other notable performance was by Logan Lerman who I am sure will have another big blockbuster under his belt soon enough.

Luckily the action in the film was pretty good, as farfetched as it all was for the classic Three Musketeer story. It was all entertaining and exciting. One action scene bothered me though, when they tried to copy 300 with slowing and speeding up the action at certain points. Not gonna lie, it works a lot better when Gerald Butler is a giant Spartan then Athos (Matthew Macfayden) in funny tights. 

I wish this film could have been better. I wish there was a little more effort put into the movie because you can tell there was not a 100% effort put forth. The dialogue was awful and all of the side characters, especially the King, were unbearable. Yes, the film ends with the promise of a sequel. I think the way they make you believe there is going to be a sequel was just as bad as the rest of the film. 

Rating: 4/10
If you could please support my movie reviews by clicking on a link. Thank You

Friday, October 14, 2011

Footloose

Footloose
Directed by: Craig Brewer
Written by: Dean Pitchford, and Craig Brewer


Plot:
City kid Ren MacCormack moves to a small town where rock 'n' roll and dancing have been banned, and his rebellious spirit shakes up the populace.


Review:
Who thought that remaking Footloose was a good idea? Seriously who? I guess for a dance movie it is better than a movie like Step Up, but who can realistically believe a town getting so enraged over an incident where they decide to make dancing illegal. This is completely outdated and on top of that it had no sense of era to it. All of the characters were still written like they were from the eighties but apparently it took place in present day Bomont since the main character, Ren McCormick (Kenny Wormald)  listened to an ipod half the movie. 


Some bright spots in this film include the stunning Julianna Hough. She might not be the best actress, but she sure rocks a pair of short shorts. The other bright spot was Ren’s best friend Willard played by Miles Teller. This guy was hilarious. He was the only character that made me laugh when I was suppose to laugh. Yes, the theater did burst into laughter at many cheesy moments throughout the film. I hope this kid gets some comedic roles as he has great comedy chops.


As funny as Miles and as stunning as Julianna Hough were in this film they both couldn't save this from being a flop. The dialogue was cheesy and I could not take the serious scenes seriously. There were multiple times where unexplainable things happened and Kenny Wormald is no Kevin Bacon. 


Back to the realism issue. The movie portrayed the adults as old farts compared to these hip youngsters but if this movie is set in the present then these old farts grew up in the rock and roll era. They would have known what it was all about and been a lot more understanding rather than being so close minded. I really didn’t expect much but I did expect better story structure since this is a remake.


Rating: 4/10
Please support my reviews by clicking on an AD! thank you.

Friday, October 7, 2011

The Ides of March

The Ides of March
Directed by: George Clooney
Written by: George Cloony, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon

Plot:
An idealistic staffer for a newbie presidential candidate gets a crash course on dirty politics during his stint on the campaign trail.

Review:
The title comes from Ancient Rome. The term is most famously known as the date Julius Caesar was killed. His death was planned by a group of conspirators in the roman government. George Clooney did a great job by taking the basic concept and turning this concept into a  well constructed, thought provoking modern drama. We get an intense inside look at how dirty politics can be.

The acting and writing in this movie were superb. All of the dialogue was fast paced and extremely witty. Ryan Gosling had some great one on one scenes with the female lead, Evan Rachel Wood. It’s amazing that Ryan Gosling has been in two great movies this past month. He has really hit it big and only bigger things are to come. He plays a character who is the media mastermind behind a governor running for president (the Julius Caesar character played by George Clooney.) His character in the beginning is a very kind, charming, and moral man but as the movie progresses we see some intense character development. 

Ryan Gosling’s character isn’t the only role that had some major character development. Every main character had 180 switches in their mannerisms and personalities. This is what made the acting in this film great. Other great performances come from George Clooney, Paul Giamatti, and my favorite performance, besides Goslings, Phillip Seymour Hoffman. 

The Ides of March is what’s called a good movie. Not great, but very good. It keeps you on the edge of your seat wondering what twist and turn that’s coming next, but since Gosling’s character has such a big character change it is hard to identify with him in the end. I kind of like this but I think others might find it unsettling. 

I would really like the believe that our government isn’t actually as corrupt as this movie portrays, but I guess who am I kidding. 

Rating: 7.5/10
Please show your support by clicking on an ad. Thank You.

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Killer Elite

Killer Elite
Directed by: Greg McKendry
Written by: Matt Sherring


Plot:
When his mentor is taken captive, a retired member of Britain's Elite Special Air Service is forced into action. His mission: kill three assassins dispatched by their cunning leader.


Review:
I would have to say that this movie was subpar and the fact that I went in thinking this didn’t help. I am kinda bias to films that claim they are based on a true story when the actions in the film are just absurd. Although I did like the film The Devils Double (http://bigbobbosreviews.blogspot.com/2011/08/devils-double.html) which was based on a book about real events. Killer Elite is based on the book The Feather Man written by ex-SAS officer Ranulph Fiennes and who the hell knows what he wrote is in any means true. The opening titles even said, (I can’t remember the exact words but went something like...) The actions in this film are based of events during this time period but a lot of information is confidential by the British Government. It was obviously a lot more concise and smooth than what I just wrote but you get the gist.


Either way the trailers gave us all a misrepresentation of what the plot was about. The trailers made it seem like Clive Owen was a bad guy and Jason Statham was going to kill him. This was not the movie. The plot was a lot more complex then this storyline and this was not a good thing. Since there was so much going on the structure of the story was all over the place leading you in all different directions which made it confusing to follow. And if you are looking for your normal Jason Statham skull bashing flick this is not it. 


I did like the acting in the film. It is Jason Statham at his finest since the film Snatch. Maybe after this film he could land a role besides the role he plays in almost every other movie. Clive Owen is great as always. I think he is a great actor and he played a good support man in this film. His mustache was menacing. Robert De Niro has been in a lot of bad films recently and I guess he can add this to his list but he still knows how to act. He did not have a large role in the film but he had some good hand to hand fight scenes. 


I have not read The Feather Man, but I hear Killer Elite was very faithful to the book. I like it when I hear things like that but this film still didn’t cut it for me because they plastered the words, “Based on a True Story” before the film began. Once I see that I can’t help but to judge the film.


Rating: 5.5/10


Please show your support by clicking on one of the ads. This is how I earn money to go see more movies. Thank you for reading.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

50/50

50/50
Directed by: Jonathan Levine
Written by: Will Reiser


Plot:
A Dramedy centered on a 27-year-old guy who learns of his cancer diagnosis, and his subsequent struggle to beat the disease.


Review:
It’s hard to imagine a cancer comedy working well in a non-offensive way, but surprisingly 50/50 beat those odds. It was a film that made you laugh but then made you want to cry. It made you think about your life. It made you think how lucky those of us that do not have cancer are. I think the majority of people in this world know somebody that has battled cancer or is battling cancer and the fact that 50/50 is a film that dealt with this subject, successfully, is really something.


Joseph Gordon-Levitt was the lead in this film. He played the 27 year old Adam, who is quiet and easy going. This film takes us right into the mind of this character and his journey dealing with his cancer. We see him with a good attitude and a brave face but then see how he struggles in his everyday life. It’s hard to imagine any other actor pulling this role off. He brought so much emotion to this role but his emotion a lot of the time was cut short by none other then his supporting actor...


...Seth Rogen. Seth was extremely funny in this film. I thought it was one of his better roles in a while. He plays Adam’s best friend in the film, who is always supportive and establishes a pity-free relationship with him and make shim feel comfortable. As funny as Seth Rogen was I think he was too funny. I didn’t think this film should have been as funny as it was. I thought the humor in the film took a little away from the emotion and the intensity of the film. 


There was one thing that really bothered me about this film and that is the love interest of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, played by Anna Kendrick. Anna Kendrick is a very talented actress who plays his therapist as well as his love interest but the fact that the love interest is his therapist is a little ridiculous. Half of their interactions in the film go against the therapist/patient code of ethics. It felt very forced and would have worked better if the love interest came from somewhere else or their was no love interest. Does a cancer story really need to be held up with a love arc? Anyway I would have loved to see more intense therapy sessions to get deeper into the mind of Levitt’s character.


Overall a very solid movie. Great performances all around and I do commend the director and writer on doing such a great job at keeping the film tasteful. I wish the best to all of you that have or know somebody that is currently fighting cancer.


Rating: 7.5/10
If you can please click on an ad and support me in my effort to get this blog running. Thank You

Friday, September 23, 2011

Moneyball

Moneyball
Directed by: Bennett Miller
Written by: Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian


Plot:
The story of Oakland A's general manager Billy Beane's successful attempt to put together a baseball club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to draft his players.

Review:
Aaron Sorkin is a master wordsmith. He seems to make topics that could be extremely uninteresting into something worth watching. I don’t even like baseball, in fact I HATE baseball and I enjoyed this film. Maybe it’s because I saw Abduction(http://bigbobbosreviews.blogspot.com/2011/09/abduction.html) this morning and that movie was so terrible that it made Moneyball stand out. That might be the case a little, but Moneyball, all on its own, impressed me. 


There was a perfect mix of comedy and drama and it helped that a great cast pulled it all together. Forget Brad Pitt, we all know he is awesome. He is great in everything he is in and Moneyball was no exception. What I found extremely interesting was the fact that they casted two comedians to be in this movie, Jonah Hill and Chris Pratt. Jonah Hill I am sure you all know is a great actor. Obviously he is very funny and his humor really brought the film together. Besides him being a funny man he does have acting chops. If you have seen him in Cyrus, which is technically a comedy, you know this. Chris Pratt, which you all should get to know, was another funny man in this drama. Chris Pratt plays a dimwitted character on the show Parks and Recreations and he pulled off a drama very well. I really did not expect much from him but he really brought something to the screen that evoked emotion. 


A problem I had with the film besides the fact that it was a little bit too long was the climax. I really do not feel like I am giving away any spoilers because this is all general baseball knowledge that is all over the internet. It is not like the facts of the A’s wins and loses are based on a true story, it is in fact, a fact. So if you do not want to read further do not but I think this is important to say. The whole point of this system was to change the game of baseball forever. That this system can bring a team to the playoffs or further. Billy Beane wanted to make the playoffs. Now the main baseball scene in this film focused on their record setting win streak of 20 games. They made this game seem like the most significant moment of the film. Yes, this streak is impressive but the streak is not what the film was about, and they made the streak the main climax. They completely overlooked the fact that they won the division, which in my opinion should have been the main point of the film. The fact that this system brought a team to the playoffs. Then they just showed their exit from the playoffs like it was nothing. 


If you have read this far, I apologize for “giving that all away” and I do not think that this information ruins the movie at all. Moneyball was extremely well done and the performances from Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill are worth paying money to see. I’ll say it again, I HATE baseball, and this baseball film got me hooked.


Rating: 8/10


Please show your support my clicking on one of the ads. This is how I pay to watch more movies. Thank you for reading.

Abduction

Abduction
Directed by: John Singleton
Written by: Shawn Christensen


Plot:
A thriller centered on a young man who sets out to uncover the truth about his life after finding his baby photo on a missing persons website.

Review:
If the Oscars had a category for worst film of the year, Abduction would take home the cake. It took way to long to get into the story, the dialogue was laughable (but that might be because they were coming out of Taylor Lautner’s mouth), and I thought its saving grace might have been the action/fight scenes but they were boring and scarce. 


I know you al probably know this, and sorry Twilight fans, but Taylor Lautner sucks at acting. I couldn’t tell if he was happy, scared, surprised, or any other emotion for that matter because in every scene he gave the same fucking look to the camera. He played a high schooler who finds out that the people he thought were his parents were actually CIA agents protecting him from danger. He gets chased around the northeast, escaping the clutches and beating up highly trained special agents of the CIA. Even while evading killers on a train, he finds time to have a makeout session with his extremely attractive co-star, Lily Collins. She might have been the only bright spot in this film. Her looks I mean. Because her acting wasn’t anything special either. 


I knew this film was going to be awful going into because Taylor Lautner sucks a big one but I thought at least the action would be decent. But I was proved wrong. When you think the final fight scene will partake at the Pirates game, it ends and you realize that there wasn’t actually a fight. Taylor Lautner was chased around. Not only were his acrobatics unrealistic, but the movie portrayed the Pirates winning a baseball game which might be even more laughable. 


Watching this film was like having sand rubbed in your eyes for an hour and forty minutes, unpleasant. I really hope this movie does not bring in big money because that will only encourage studios to hire Taylor Lautner again. Apparently he is the only profitable actor under the age of 20. Taylor Lautner needs to be destroyed and we should all boycott his movies. Sorry Abduction, but you sucked!


Rating: 1/10 


Please show your support by clicking on an ad. This is how I make a profit. Thank you for reading!

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Lion King 3D

Lion King 3D

So is Lion King allowed to be nominated for Best Picture? If so, I feel bad for all other movies this year because you don’t have a shot. It was so great being able to see one the most beloved Disney films of all time on the big screen in 3D. I wasn’t sure how well the 3D would work because 3D movies now a days are made for 3D so cool things happen and made the 3D worth going to see. Lion King came out in 1994 and weren’t thinking about that, but it worked really well. 


Since this is not an official review, I just wanted to comment on a few things about going to see this film. First, my friends and I were the only people in the theater over 20 that did not have kids. Where is the support from my generation? Second, I think it is incredible that this might be the first time some kids have ever seen Lion King before in their lives. It was quite incredible hearing all of the kids reactions to certain parts of the film. Their laughs and gasps both filled the theater and it made me realize that I must have been the same way at their age. And finally third, it was very cool to see how far animation has come since 1994. I mean the animation is by no means bad but the trailer for Pixar’s new original Brave played before the movie started. Comparing those images to the images in Lion King you can tell a distinct difference of clarity in the picture. It’s incredible. 


Show Lion King 3D some love. It is only out for one more week so go see it while you still have a chance. It was a great experience and I can’t wait until Disney decides to format another Disney movie in 3D. I’m crossing my fingers for Aladdin. 

Please show your support of my reviews my clicking the ads on my site. Thank You

Friday, September 16, 2011

Drive

Drive
Directed by: Nicolas Winding Refn
Written by: Hossein Amini


Plot:
A Hollywood stunt performer who moonlights as a wheelman discovers that a contract has been put on him after a heist gone wrong.


Review:
Drive was a piece of art. Yes, you read it, a piece of art. It was one of the most beautifully constructed movies of this era which included spectacular shots of LA in a gritty way. There was not a lot of dialogue and it left the viewer to analyze the shots in their own interpretation to understand deeper meaning in the story It is a homage to noir style films of the 1950s and Drive brings ultra-violence into the mix.


That being said, Drive was not a perfect film. I think Nicolas Winding Refn meant very well with his artsy form to the film but I think he tried a little too hard. He let certain shots last too long and scenes between Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan towards the beginning of the film were almost painful to watch. The story was not very well constructed and the actions of Ryan Gosling’s nameless character, The Driver, seemed irrational and out of character since we know nothing of his past. He wears a jacket with a scorpion on the back throughout the film and we have to assume that this symbol relates with his past. I’m okay with not knowing anything about his past but when a quiet, polite, well mannered young man all of a sudden goes hammer to somebody’s skull it felt out of place.


Besides the awkward scenes between Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan and some shots that felt way to long, this film was extremely entertaining. The opening sequence really set a tone for the rest of the film. With the great soundtrack that matched up very well with the slow pace of the film. When the violence came along it put shivers down my spine through my limbs. It was beautifully violent. 


Now who the hell thought that Ryan Gosling could pull a character like this off. It’s hard to imagine him not playing in a romantic drama role but he pulls off the cool guy action star vibe extremely well. With these long shots he had pull off some menacing blood covered faces for long period of times. This was a gutsy role for him and this might be his breakout role for so much more to come. 


Other notable acting performances came from Bryan Cranston who plays a fast talking, mechanic, who is hoping to make some money off of the driver. Its amazing to think where he came from, Malcolm in the Middle, to where he is now. The other great performance came from Albert Brooks who played the main villain in the film. It seems like odd casting but it strangely works. He even gets to shed some blood in the film.


Drive really was a great film and I appreciate it greatly for its master craftsmanship. I can’t wait to watch it a second time to analyze the images more to find more hidden meanings. I think it had its flaws but the positives greatly outweighed these flaws. I love this time of year when all of the oscar worthy movies keep coming out. Keep them coming.


Rating: 8/10


Please show your support of my reviews my clicking the ads on my site. Thank You.