| Movie | Rating | Review | Date | Your Rating | Match | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up in the Air - R |
So I'm getting over my illness, and finally have the strength to get out of the house and see a movie, and it ended up being Up In The Air. Not disappointing. Very well done. Up In The Air is a dialogue heavy film that worked on every level. The movie was written with the specific actors in mind, or at least that's what the writer/director Jason Reitman said, and it worked well. George Clooney is a very good actor, and is specifically good with this type of character. A cocky, confident man who has it all figured out. So much so that Ryan (Clooney's character) gives lectures on minimizing one's life. Everyone else does a fantastic job, from the uniquely beautiful Vera Farmiga, to the young Anna Kendrick. And of course Jason Bateman. Jason Reitman is a writer/director who I am starting to follow. Juno, Thank You For Smoking, and now Up In The Air. Fantastic directorial start. Reitman began writing Up In The Air in 2002, and took 6 years to complete it for various reasons. I'm not complaining. I just wouldn't expect a movie that takes so long to write, and re-write to turn out so good. There really isn't a down period to Up In The Air, it just kept moving at a nice pace, and kept me interested. I loved the end, even though it's easy to see coming. It's not your standard happy ending, it's more a punch in the gut and a shove back into life with your beliefs reinforced. I love the way it was done. Is it the movie of the year? I wouldn't vote for it, but I definitely couldn't argue against it. It's very good. |
January 2, 2010 | N/A | |||
| The Princess and the Frog - G |
$105 million dollars to make a non-CGI, hand drawn movie? Wow. Disney stated that after Home on the Range (2006) they were done with this style of movie. They made nice with Pixar, and the director decided to open it back up. The result? OK. If I compared it to Home on the Range, it's a much better movie. But my thought is they're trying to get back to the older ones. Bambi, Sleeping Beauty. And The Princess And The Frog doesn't touch those. You can tell it's still Disney. It's entertaining, moves along well, the musical numbers weren't mind numbing, and it ALMOST gives me that feeling I get when I still watch those older cartoons. The voices and characters are fun, and the story kept me entertained. It was an empty theater, so I can't judge the childrens response around me. The Voices were good. Recognizable voices were Terrence Howard, John Goodman, and Oprah Winfrey. There are plenty of others who do voices, but no one would really know. The writers have done Aladdin amongst some OK others. I can't put my finger on what made it not-so-special. What kept The Princess And The Frog from being as great as those others. It had that Disney feel, just lacked the charm, I guess. I think kids would like The Princess And The Frog, and adults hopefully will enjoy this fun and funny little movie. I would have loved to see it in CGI though. |
December 21, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Everybody's Fine - PG-13 |
Everybody's Fine is everything but. It's a remake of an Italian film Stanno Tutti Bene ("They're All Fine" in Italian), a film which I've never seen. There is a huge cast of very good actors in Everybody's Fine. None contribute enough to make it a good movie. It doesn't really let you in to get emotionally attached to the characters. Or even just the main character. I couldn't get attached to them, even DeNiro's. I couldn't make out what they wanted him to be. Nice old guy traveling around to see his family? Bad dad trying to forget about the death of his wife? Make amends? You end up figuring out what he's doing, but they don't make it a clear part of the movie. The supporting actors looked like they were given a small fee at the last minute to be there, and their acting showed it. I know that sometimes you don't want to tell a whole truth for some reason or another, but this movie just makes it silly. I can't believe a movie with DeNiro and Rockwell together didn't rate higher in my book. They're both great, and Sam Rockwell released a movie this year called Moon, that is one of my favorites of the year. Kate Beckinsale is just beautiful. She's a decent actress, but doesn't get to show it enough because of most of the films she chooses. Whiteout? I don't know how in the world a director can go from doing such good movies as Waking Ned Divine and Nanny McPhee to this. Honestly. The other ones had heart and offered likable characters. Everybody's Fine didn't touch those other two. I'd say it's rentable, but I wouldn't say this is something to get dressed to go see. There is a movie with Jack Nicholson called About Schmidt (2002) that I would strongly recommend. Same basic idea, but MUCH better. |
December 12, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Armored (Armoured) - PG-13 |
Armored isn't a film that's going to be mentioned with the other Oscar nom's this year, it just is what it is. A simple, well directed, well cast flim that will keep your attention during its 1:25 running time. There is plenty of action mixed with good story, which was a rarity this year during the bludgeoning we got from the mediocre summer blockbusters that were thrown at us. There is character development, and you won't be on the edge of your seat rooting for anyone, but you will like and dislike characters. Although slightly flawed, Armored is well written and well directed, and kept me interested all the way through. I was unknowingly in the beginning stages of having the flu while I watched Armored Saturday, and I have to really like it to sit through a movie sick. Nothing unique or great is done here, just a solid flick to kick up your feet and chew some popcorn to. Casting was great. A couple of new faces, but most people in this movie are recognizable. Matt Dillon gets his chance to be in blockbusters every five years or so, and does small, usually good stuff in between. I'm a fan of his, so I'm glad he's doing another round of big films. First time screen writer James Simpson did a very good job for a rookie, and I expect to see him do more, and better, movies in the future. He showed some talent. If you liked the previews, you'll like the movie. If they looked cheesy or lame to you, it may still be worth checking out down the road as a rental. |
December 9, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Brothers - R |
Brothers is a powerful movie with great acting all the way through. It allows us to watch what a soldier is going through before he comes home, although a little exaggerated, and what he becomes once he does get home. Two of the starring actors I've considered great for a while. Gyllenhaal has plenty of very good movies under his belt already, and I think he's the best under 30 actor we have. He doesn't always choose the best movies, but he does well in whatever he's in. This was a great selection for him. Natalie Portman has shown her acting chops time and again, and with this movie is again under appreciated and over criticized. I can't forget about Tobey Maguire either. He's done some magnificent movies, and he's SPIDERMAN. They all do such a fantastic jobs in this movie, and the little girls, and rest of the supporting cast were well chosen. This movie couldn't have three better leading actors. Everything from script, to directing, to acting, I could go on and on, were fantastic. Brothers is really thorough in getting through the movie with intent and depth. The transition from resource material to script was phenomenal. It's tricky, and has been done as perfectly in few other movies. In The Valley of Elah has a guy give a speech that is bone chilling, and there is a two minute clip in The Hurt Locker that puts the punch in the movie. Although a little "drama'ed up," Brothers had some very deliberately done scenes that gave it some punch. Brothers is a fantastic movie that I think everyone but the big explosion, summer blockbuster loving zombies, should see. There is a movie called The Messenger out right now. If you want to see one "back home fallout after the war" movie, see Brothers. |
December 9, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Messenger - R |
The Messenger is a limited release movie that covers a potentially difficult subject. What becomes a good movie about the two characters starts out a cheesed up, run of the mill film that seems to try distancing itself from the audience with standard "soldier scenes." They throw in one cliche after the next that takes any potential for uniqueness, and even greatness, from The Messenger. The actors are the best thing about The Messenger. Easily.Woody Harrelson, Ben Foster, Samantha Moon; all wonderfully cast, and playing their parts very well. The director is Oren Moverman, who is also co-writer. He does a fair job, but with this cast, I doubt he had to work too hard. The chemistry between Ben Foster/Smantha Morton and Ben Foster/Woody Harrelson were both fantastic. The movie had a good transition from senior ranking soldier/enlisted to guys who don't like each other, to good friends who share the bond of being screwed up from similar instances. If they did consult veterans for information, they didn't do a very good job transitioning it to film. The emotion was there, but they weren't able to get the audience fully involved. That's a pretty big thing with a movie like The Messenger. It's just OK. For serious movie watchers, I'd say rent it. By all means. If you're not into watching a movie just to see good acting, you don't have to bother with The Messenger. |
December 2, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Planet 51 - PG |
Planet 51. Is the name based on the mysterious Area 51? It's alieny. Would make sense. Nope. Planet 1-50 have been trademarked. That's it. And it's only the beginning to Planet 51's unoriginality. You have a good idea like this, then take a squat on it? Everything is references. A reference to this movie, a reference to that movie. People, space probes, rovers, area's. How about a reference to an original movie. During the previews it said "from the creators of Shrek." Really? It has to be good then. Then it continued to say "and Ice Age and Ice Age 2." Nope. No good. The name you hear tagged to this movie is Dwayne Johnson. Well, his character starts out impeding the movie. Lame. Justin Long is the only actor I'd say did a good job, the rest had little to work with, so saying they did a bad job would be unfair to them. I'm a big fan of Long, and it's easy to recognize his voice. He's done at least two movies a year since his third year of acting, and in 2009 is creditied with TEN MOVIES!!! I'm not complaining. The guy's funny. Reference Accepted (2006) if you have any doubts. There are so many writers and executives, and even directors, that Planet 51 didn't stand a chance from the get-go. The children in the theater were entertained, but I couldn't get into it, and my wife thought it was lame as well. And we're cartoon lovers. AT THE MOST I'd say rent it for the kids. But don't subject yourself to Planet 51. |
December 1, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Ninja Assassin - R |
I'm going to rate the movie the way it deserves: as a movie called Ninja Assassin. I had fun. Although there are quite a few things that make this not as good as the older martial arts movies, it was good enough to get by with me. And a huge leap forward in animated blood. Acting was near non-existent as they didn't put too much effort into it. The director, same guy who did V for Vendetta, did what he could, and the outcome is as good as you'd expect. I'd still give him a chance at another film, because he did a fair job with what he was given to work with. It was gory, violent, and had something to do with "family," and it's exactly what you'd expect from a ninja/martial arts movie. They put in some of the classic requirements, but still managed to fall short as the action went from good/interesting to dark/what the hells going on, back to good in the end. It started out good enough that I would have loved to consider it a guilty pleasure hiding it at the bottom of my movie collection right between You Don't Mess With The Zohan and Flyboys, but again, went downhill just a little ways into the movie. It had a mixed good and bad ending. While one neat thing was happening, another, more ridiculous ending, was working itself out. The movie was initially written by the same guy who brought us the classic(ly stupid) 10,000 BC. The Wachowski Brothers didn't like it so much, so they gave it to the fellow who wrote The Changeling, and gave him 6 weeks to rewrite the script. What you could imagine Ninja Assassin would turn out like having gone through that is exactly what you get. The Waachowski Brothers only have two real good movies to their names: The Matrix and V for Vendetta. The rest of their collection ranges from mediocre to OK. For some reason, though, when their name is pasted on something, people are going to flock to see it. Don't be that guy with Ninja Assassin unless you just want a gory fight movie. How good the movie is, is in the name. |
December 1, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Old Dogs - PG |
Old Dogs is a lame movie that took a while to film, sat on the shelf for quite some time, and wasn't very good. Wild Hogs didn't do very well with the critics (14% on Rottentomatoes.com), but was a huge success. And I've seen it over 5 times. Old Dogs currently sits at 7% on Rottentomatoes, and for good reason. I like the actors. Travolta and Williams are entertaining, even in the worst of movies, and the rest of the supporting cast is good also. They didn't have near enough Justin Long. He was funny in his character, and was only around for a short time. Director Walt Becker hasn't made movie that has been successful with the critics, and has only made one (again, Wild Hogs) that did well at the box office. That success led him to get the go ahead to make Old Dogs. And this time the movie is exactly as bad as the critics say. It has no heart. Its poor writing, directing and editing is made so that Old Dogs just doesn't let you become involved with the characters, and there is too much junk to allow for emotional attachment. There is so much pointless, not very funny "humor" that it quickly becomes irritating, and it hammered me with silly slapstick that is funny in clips, but not when it's done so frequently. I can only laugh at someone taking it in the nuts so much. And on top of it all; the music. There was no way to keep from knowing it was there, and wasn't well done at all. Not many things irritate me more. And when it makes a bad movie WORSE..... I wanted to put more butter on my popcorn in hopes of having a stroke or heart attack so I could get out of the theater. Besides the funny parts in the previews, there isn't anything to really see. Don't waste your time or money. |
November 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire - R |
Precious is an almost great film that has glaring problems. All are overshadowed by fantastic acting and a near perfectly cast group of actors (I'll get to that shortly). It's a movie I found that was a later addition to a few theaters in Phoenix. Not to sell it short, but when Precious is mentally escaping from something, they go to a ridiculous fantasy land that does nothing but harm what could be a near perfect movie. Toward the end, she is sitting by a young girl who is getting verbally beat down by her mother, and gives the girl a red scarf. Things like this made it so much more touching. Endearing. Like she gets to be the guardian angel of herself. Not to be. I hate getting on a soapbox about it, but it would make Precious a MUCH better movie (and I'll step down). Gabourey Sidibe plays Clareece "Precious" Jones, and I wouldn't have guessed that she had absolutely no acting experience before getting picked to lead this movie. Fantastic job. Lenny Kravitz has his onscreen debut as Nurse John, and does a good job in front of the camera. Hopefully he does more. Other actors, Paula Patton, Sherri Shepherd, amongst others give a strong performance. WHAT THE HELL IS MARIAH CAREY DOING IN THIS MOVIE? I know they wanted to put people in place to portray strong black women, but Mariah Carey? So many people could have done a better job. She just looked lost, and does not need to be acting. Pinkett-Smith? Halle Berry? No one else? Really? Ouch. GIVE MO'NIQUE THE OSCAR NOW!!! Powerful performance. Seeing this, you'd forget she's ever cracked a joke, let alone the fact that she is a very funny comedian. I don't care what movie is coming out between now and the new year, or who's acting in them. No one is going to give a performance this year as strong as Mo'nique. I can't say enough about how much she does to make this movie better than it would have been had she not been cast. I'd even argue that she gives the strongest performance since Hillary Swank in Million Dollar Baby. She gives an absolutely amazing performance as Mary, Precious' mother. The director, Lee Daniels, has an unbelievable list of movies he's produced, and with what he does with Precious, I'd say he will get better along the way, and hopefully we can see movies that he directs on par with what he's produced. Good story, and great performances, Precious is a movie worth searching out. |
November 23, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Blind Side - PG-13 |
The Blind Side is based on a true story about Michael Oher. I became interested in this movie since they first started showing previews, because I'd heard about him before the '08 draft, and had read about him. The movie is a little off when compared to the real story, but it's all small things that I'm sure were changed to "Hollywood" the movie up. It was a very good movie that I'm guessing will earn Bullock an Oscar nomination. Although she's the bright piece to this movie, she's not the only thing good about it. It's a very positive movie that shows the progression of Oher at the most critical point in his life. Although Bullock is the best actor in The Blind Side, there are some other good actors here. Get used to the name Jae Head. He plays the younger Touhy, SJ, and is the kid from Hancock. He was funny. Lily Collins, playing the daughter named Collins, is Phil Collins daughter, and didn't get much to work with, but didn't do anything to harm the movie. Tim McGraw is an entertaining actor, and I think he's pretty good. Quinton Aaron's only body of work besides playing Michael is a charming little movie called Be Kind Rewind, where if he had any speaking parts, they are few. When it came time to actually act in The Blind Side, he did a fair job. It's not a deep, Oscar caliber movie like I thought it was going to be, and that's a shame, because they had one of the most interesting real life stories I've heard to work with. I probably had my hopes up too high, but it was still a good movie. I just wish they had more time, or found a better writing team and director. If you're an NFL fan, and go see The Blind Side, I assure you that the next Ravens game you watch, you'll be locked onto number 74 for at least a few plays, and like the movie, you won't be disappointed. |
November 23, 2009 | N/A | |||
| A Serious Man - R |
I don't know what happened. I wanted to like A Serious Man. The previews were good, and it's the Coen brothers, for Christ sake. A Serious Man is a flat out..... well..... flat movie. The Coen brothers have had such success making movies that aren't overly flashy, or flashy at all, come to think of it, and it usually works. Not here. My wife fell asleep, and I didn't bother trying to wake her up. With the pace of this film, she would have fallen right back to sleep. The fantastic characters that are the norm for the Coen's to create were stymied by the script. The few really funny scenes were drowned by the many lame, disinteresting one's. There are some things to like about A Serious Man. There were some funny scenes. The Coen's do a great job at creating an awkward tension that can be seen in this movie as well. Casting was great. Simon Helberg is in it (Howard Wolowitz from Big Bang Theory). He's a funny guy. Everyone made the most of their opportunities. The movie had a point, as they like to put in their movies. And the sudden stop to the movie ending is in place. I've always liked them. Cinematography was very good. This is, by far, my least favorite movie from these two. The Big Lebowski is, by far, my favorite. If you can't sleep, I'd strongly recommend A Serious Man. Otherwise I wouldn't tell anyone they need to see it. |
November 19, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day - R |
If you liked Boondock Saints, you'll like the sequel. If you don't, or you've never heard of Boondock Saints, don't waste your time. The second one is just like the first. Stylish, lots of profanity, and overall not very good. The story was about as good as a Saw movie's. They sacrificed story to bring you something cool. Slick, pointless dialogue flows through Boondock Saints 2 without much thought as to where the movie is going. Nothing special happens, and it's just as bland as the first. Even the action sequences are poorly done. There are a few moments when it's fun listening to the brothers have some back and forth, and their new sidekick is especially entertaining. None of it really has to do with the plot though. They incorporate a few recognizable faces to push this thing along, but no one really big. Sean Patrick Flanery and Norman Reedus are small time actors who have done a few movies. Clifton Collins Jr., Billy Connolly and Judd Nelson are some of the more familiar faces who's names you're probably not too familiar with (Save Judd Nelson). Clifton Collins Jr. is a good actor, and although you've never heard his name, chances are you've seen a movie he's been in. Julie Benz (Rita Morgan, Dexter's wife on Dexter) is sexy, sexy, sexy. She's an entertaining actress, but doesn't contribute much to this film. Her character is forced into the tiring dialogue, and I don't know any actress who could do a better job with what she was given to work with. Luckily the director, Troy Duffy is limited to Boondock Saints 1 and 2. And for good reason. He's also the writer. We really don't need more of this. If you want a real cool movie with great dialogue, Way Of The Gun has a strong story and fantastic actors. You'd also be better served digging into the Guy Ritchie collection of British gangster films. Boondock Saints 2 is nothing to really waste your time on. |
November 16, 2009 | N/A | |||
| 2012 - PG-13 |
2012 is based on the end of the Mayan calendar, where they build on a group of people that think that since the calendar ends in 2012, it means the end of the world is on that day (Dec 21). The movie is about as basic as the rational for thinking the world is going to end. It's a Hollywood big budget ($200 million), big effects, big name movie. The effects make it bearable, where the poor story makes you want more effects. At the same time, it's another example of how moviemakers think we can just watch big things happen and be happy. I, for one, am not. The cast is superb. John Cusack is a fun actor (although his sister isn't in the movie), Woody Harrelson is great, and Amanda Peet is beautiful. She's a good actress also. There are plenty of other names in here, but they do a standard job as supporting cast. The director wants to go big, and somehow managed to muster up the budget for a 2:40 movie without much to say. The movie could have scaled back on the big stuff, and given us more time to learn the characters, but instead they just wanted to punch us in the face with more catastrophe. Everything is dramatic, last minute stuff, with irritating standard "we'll tell you what emotion to have" music. There is nothing original in 2012. The simple story does keep the movie going, but ultimately wore on me. I would say that if you INSIST on seeing it, do so in the theaters. The effects are great, and it will be lost on TV. Don't be in a rush though. You can wait for the theaters to clear out a bit, which I think will do so relatively quickly. |
November 15, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Pirate Radio (The Boat That Rocked) - R | Pirate Radio is a movie that was released in the UK, bombed, was shortened, and was released in the US with the title Pirate Radio. I don't know if the original 3 hour version had more story, but the shorter one definitely doesn't. The cast is amazing. So many of my favorite British, and one of my favorite American actors, all in one film. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is terrific in everything he does, and Pirate Radio is no different. Nick Frost is so funny, and he's a big part of why Shawn of the Dead is one of my favorites. Bill Nighy, Rhys Ifans and a cast of many other familiar faces do such a fantastic job. The only person missing is Simon Pegg. Even Emma Thompson shows up for a couple of minutes. The movie doesn't have much of a story, but the little it does have is simple. A group of guys on a boat are having a blast, and we've been invited to watch. And they're playing great music. The story takes place over a year while a politician is trying to shut down their station to spare their citizens from having to listen to that dreadful rock and roll. The problem I had is that you've got to catch on that the movie is taking place over a year. That part is sloppy, and doesn't seem like they want to make it a big part of the film. A couple of sub-stories were taken out, obviously as they cut over an hour off the movie, and I think in the initial movie this wasn't supposed to be a major part. That makes it pretty weak when the bigger story is on the cutting room floor. Although I thought it was great because of the actors, and the way they progress what little story there is, I wouldn't say people should run out and see it, but Pirate Radio is at least worth renting down the road. | November 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Box - PG-13 | The Box is a movie that questions morality. It is a very creative movie that seems to have taken many things into consideration. It starts out moving right along, setting up the rest of the film, and getting us more familiar with the characters. The Box is based on a Twilight Zone episode (that can be seen on YouTube in two parts) based on a short story, both of which are called Button Button. I like that name. The difference is that Button Button was a short story, and a 20 minute Twilight Zone episode. The Box is going to have to be longer. Lots of extra stuff needs to be added. They chose to put in a FREAKY explanation as to whom Mr. Steward is, but this is the greatest, and a blaring, fault to the movie. It gets real crazy for a while, and this almost makes this a dud. Diaz and Marsden work well together, and Langella plays a great villain. It has a hit and miss director in Richard Kelly. Normally I would ask what a director could do to fix a writers shortcomings, but in this case Kelly served as both. The music was incredible. From the get-go I was in love with it. It's a '70's horrorish type music, and is in the right place at the right time. I've rarely been taken aback by a soundtrack in a positive light. This is one of a handful. The Box gets real weird, and gets too strange at times, but overall I would have to say I liked it. The beginning, end, and some stuff in the middle are very good. It works its way through, and has a good ending. Push it or don't. What would you do? What would the outcome be? Do you just get the money and move on with your life, or are there repercussions? What happens if you don't push the button? | November 12, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Disney's A Christmas Carol - PG |
This movie has to have been redone over 10 times. There is a musical, a version with dogs, a current day version (Scrooged). Disney's A Christmas Carol in 3-D was good. It's another shot at the classic novel, and like most of them, it's very entertaining. Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, amongst others, lend their voices in an audio-visual sensation. It starts out a little slow paced, but it's great for letting you get the feel for the magnificent sounds that were added, and some 3-D work that is some of the best I've seen (I think Coraline is still the best) since they brought 3-D back into popularity. There is some humor added that is really effective. The thing that I didn't like so much is once it picked up, it was very fast paced. I didn't get time to feel for Ebineser, and no breaks were taken to let it sink in. A Christmas Carol just sort of pounded everything in. This is one of the few movies I think should have been longer. It's not kid friendly. The children around us were restless and wouldn't sit still or even speak about what was happening on screen. They were just bored. If you want to watch it with your children, I beg of you to watch it at home, or when the theater clears out a little. A theater full of screaming kids isn't ideal for others who go to see it without their kids. It's a good movie that is worth seeing, and I would have loved to see A Christmas Carol closer toward Christmas. I know I'm going to end up watching some poorly done Christmas comedy that will suck the Christmas spirit from me, while this one is already out of theaters. |
November 11, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Fourth Kind - PG-13 |
The Fourth Kind was a really bad movie. I knew it was a fictional "true events" or "fact based" movie that is based off of fabricated events with these people really pushing to make us believe it's real. Either way it is one messy movie. It doesn't even begin to compare to Blair Witch or Paranormal Activity. Those two movies promoted themselves with realistic camera shooting, and unknown actors, but they weren't true. Most people knew it, and some still had to ask whether or not it's based on a true story. This film has seemingly tried to build up excitement about itself by really trying to be based off of true events. One thing they try is to inject "real" footage into the movie, and it would be cool, but they sometimes go as far as putting them on a splitscreen between "reenactment" and "real footage," sometimes they go back and forth between the two. It's disastrous for the movie and quite irritating. The story is lame and boring. What is supposed to be the grabber is bad to the point that it is what made me lose interest from the get-go. I hoped it would get even a little better, but no such luck. I don't even get how this made it to theaters. It's ridiculous all the way through. The actors are all pretty good, but there is nothing to do in this movie but collect a paycheck. Milla Jovovich was always a substandard to OK actress, who's progressively gotten better through the years. She did a not so popular movie earlier this year called The Perfect Getaway that was pretty good, and she did a good job. Unfortunately she keeps getting roles like this even though she's improved. Elias Koteas, Will Patton and Corey Johnson are all actors that are familiar when you see them, and always turn in a good performance. But again, it's in this movie. The director, Olatunde Osunsanmi has done one other movie, Smokin' Aces, which is another jumbled up, lame movie. The Fourth Kind is actually so bad that it makes Smokin' Aces seem like a classic. He needs to get better or stop altogether. This piece of junk isn't even good enough on a movie channel. I give some movies credit for uniqueness, or effort at least, but this one..... |
November 11, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Men Who Stare at Goats - R |
The Men Who Stare At Goats is a funny movie with a great cast. McGregor isn't in near enough movies as far as I'm concerned, and Jeff Bridges is fantastic. As always. Kevin Spacey had his moment, and is still able to help move a movie along in an entertaining fashion. Clooney gives his standard oddball performance that would have worked if the movie hadn't fizzled. Men sets a pace that is quite enjoyable and quirky. It doesn't seem like it would be too much to keep up for a couple of hours, but is for this movie. There is a very flat part in the movie toward the end that makes the ending a little harder to get right. You can't do a goofball movie like this and have a more serious part like Men does. You just can't. The funny parts are funny. There is some pretty smart stuff under there, and it has a style of humor that I really appreciate. Just off the wall. Clooney does a great job of being someone who is completely crazy, but confident in what he (thinks he) can do. McGregor plays off of Clooney very well. I've absolutely loved Jeff Bridges since The Big Lebowski, and he's entertaining as always here. Grant Heslov, the director, has some really great movies to his credit. I don't know what happened here. His latest movie besides this is Leatherheads, and if that were his only movie, I'd understand. But there is a much greater list above that. I'd think he could make Men work all the way through. The actors make the movie better than it is, and the movie isn't anywhere near as good as the previews suggest. It's worth watching, but not worth going out of your way to see. |
November 8, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Amelia - PG |
Ahh. If only a movie about Amelia Earhart could be half as exciting as her life seemed to be. Amelia was just boring. Sometimes flashing back and forth is good, sometimes not so much. Amelia is the later. Flat. The movie, even with this spectacular cast, doesn't allow for attachment to the characters. Not even actors like Swank, Gere and McGregor can make the audience any more attached to the characters when a movie is edited this poorly. There are a couple of minutes where the director allows us in, but for only a moment. Then it's back to the grind of watching this scene and then the next. Mira Nair, the director of this..... thing, doesn't really have any great films in her library, and don't think she would have been my choice for something that they had so much to work with. This isn't a movie I'm going to sit through again, and if you're expecting an Oscar caliber film, keep searching. This isn't one. |
November 5, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Astro Boy (AstroBoy) - PG |
CGI cartoons have too quickly become standardized. When it became popular, every one that came out was magnificent, or at least the effort could be observed. AstroBoy is more like a TV cartoon that was drawn out. There is no grand sense of story. Events were just placed to be there to keep the story going. It didn't have me intently watching to see where it went. It was more just passing time. If I had to go to the bathrrom I would not have hesitated. The voices were good, but they were given to a lame movie. There were lots of recognizable voices. How the director could go from Flushed Away to this, I'll never know. Nothing creative or unique was done from the story to the action to the animation. It's not an offensive, upsetting, or poor movie. It's just nothing that was going to keep my attention. It was lame. The kids were entertained. The few who were in there weren't yelling or didn't seem to get restless. It was a morning show, so there weren't too many people. If your kids were wanting to see it, maybe you could rent it, but it's not going to be anything you'll be interested in watching. |
November 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant - PG-13 |
The Vampires Assistant is a modestly budgeted movie that was very well done. Most wouldn't even notice it's done on a meager $40 million budget. I'm thinking they didn't give it much money in case it didn't do so well. It's the first movie based off of three books. Assistant had some flaws, but starts with a quick pace that slowly dies down. It remains interesting none-the-less. If the rest of them are this good, I'll look forward to each and every one. I didn't think it would be very good going in, but the characters and story and visuals sucked me right in and kept my attention. The one problem I had was the casting. The lead actor is a newer one, and didn't do such a spectacular job. A couple of the villains could also have been better picked. John C. Reilly is entertaining, and Josh Hutcherson was so good in Bridge To Terabithia, that I am a fan and liked seeing him, even though he was also a little miscast. I'm always up for staring at Salma Hayek though, whether the movie is good or not. I enjoy the movies that are based on books. Maybe it's Harry Potter that got me into them. I do look forward to the next Cirque du Freak, and think this movie is worth watching. |
October 29, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Saw VI - R |
Watching Saw 6 is like eating through a foot of poop to get to the lasagna. It's not very good, but there is some corn and peanuts, but you have to really think whether it's worth it or not (I LOVE lasagna). There are just a couple good scenes, nothing that has to do with the story itself, and there is a really good ending. But seeing all of the Saw movies, I know they're not going to build on it in the next one, and are probably going to screw it up. They killed off Jigsaw, and don't seem like they knew the series was going to last this long, because they're constantly struggling to keep him in the films. In this one, it's hard to tell initially whether he's a ghost, or it's a flashback. That's bad form. The actors they decide to make long lasting are really poor. Casting just plain sucks. That's nothing new for these films though. Story is just bad. Just a couple of scenes into the movie my wife leaned over and said "this is going to suuuuuuuck." They've never really had good story, but I'd like to see that get better eventually. It's actually gotten continuously worse since Saw 2. The killin' isn't as shocking or spectacular as it was. Creativity has gone straight down the drink. The scenes I actually thought were good were a couple of slayings. If you're starting to get tired of the Saw movies (and I can't blame you) don't bother with 6. It's not going to offer anything new or creative. If you just want to see it because you've seen the other ones, don't expect much. |
October 25, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Stepfather - PG-13 |
The Stepfather is a pretty lame movie. I don't know if anyone put everything they had into making a quality movie here, but if that person did, the end result is pretty sad. It's a standard, nothing special, nothing unique, nothing suspenseful, nothing scary movie. Nothing. I'm thinking that after watching the finished movie, they called the young woman back and had her bob around in a bikini to put something worth watching in it. Still wasn't enough. Sela Ward is beautiful, and still does nothing for the movie. The rest of the supporting cast also offered nothing special. You know the guy's a villain. You know everything that's going to happen. Nothing more than the previews. They gave everything away with the previews, and offered nothing but space between the clips. It's nothing more than an average made for TV movie beefed up and put on the big screen. If you go, do so not expecting anything. |
October 21, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Law Abiding Citizen - R |
Standard movie that does nothing special, but does give you that little tease that it was something better at one point. No movie can improve with so many rewrites; you can only damage what you have and strip it of any uniqueness or writer creativity. Gerard Butler and Jamie Foxx are usually fun to watch, and Butler is still really good in Citizen. Unfortunately for these two, Foxx isn't getting the movies he's good at doing, and Butler is on a run of not so great movies. The rest of the actors aren't very spectacular either. No amount of acting could have made it any better, and it's not for a lack of effort on anyones part. Throw in a hit and miss director with all of these rewrites, and this is what you get. Simple ending, standard cheesy dialogue, the ending you'd expect. Walla. Law Abiding Citizen. Fox and Butler were supposed to play the other one's role, but I highly doubt it would have made a difference. At the last minute Butler wanted to switch, and Foxx obviously agreed. If it's on a movie channel one day, I'd say see it, because you could change the channel if it gets too painful. There is no way I would recommend anyone throw money on the table to watch Law Abiding Citizen. |
October 20, 2009 | N/A |
185 ratings
185 reviews
