Movie review: ‘Be Kind Rewind’
By admin | February 23, 2008
Be Kind Rewind
Directed by Michel Gondry
Partizan
Rating: 4
Michel Gondry’s newest work, Be Kind Rewind, is a shamelessly feel-good film encased within the witty dialogue and whimsical camera work that defines Gondry’s style.
The movie’s heart and soul is the Be Kind Rewind video store, owned by Mr. Fletcher (Morgan Freeman). When the store starts to lose money to the corporate DVD rental place down the block, Freeman decides to research other video stores and leaves Mike (Mos Def) in charge of the video store. When Mike’s best friend Jerry (Jack Black) attempts to sabotage a nearby power plant (he thinks it’s controlling his brain) all the store’s VHS videotapes are erased. In a panic, Mike and Jerry decide to remake the erased movies themselves, half-heartedly hoping customers won’t notice. It’s a brilliant concept for a movie and allows Gondry to cleverly (and hilariously) reinterpret classics like Ghostbusters and Robocop through his characters’ handheld video cameras.
As with Gondry’s previous efforts (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, The Science of Sleep) the movie requires us to suspend our disbelief in quite a few ways. When customers start returning Mike and Jerry’s 
homemade remakes with rave reviews, it’s hard to believe. I wanted to think that the movie’s characters actually liked seeing Jack Black attack an old lady in a Ghostbusters remake - but, in truth, it’s probably wishful thinking. Moreover, Mike and Jerry are best friends. Viewers are never quite sure why they like each other - Jerry is racist and narcissistic, while Mike is adorably innocent and sincere.
Fans of Gondry’s previous efforts may be disappointed by the films strict adherence to standard Hollywood structure, as the plot is predictable and weak. Be Kind Rewind employs every Disney-movie cliché I’ve seen - from cheesy conflict resolutions to feel-good montages and one-dimensional antagonists. Fortunately, Jack Black and Mos Def engage one another well enough that viewers will find themselves caught up in Mike and Jerry’s amusing antics rather than the film’s predictable story.
There’s an amazing amount of precision employed in Be Kind Rewind. All of the movie remakes are witty and entertaining while still managing to appear improvised and spontaneous. Gondry’s cinematography is spot-on yet again, as the movie-making sequences jump skillfully between documenting Mike and Jerry creating their homemade movies and the movies themselves.
As a testament to the film’s finer details, careful viewers will notice that Jerry’s character is modeled after the Shakespearean fool - someone who consistently trips over their words and misuses vocabulary in an entertaining way. Gondry even throws in a Shakespeare allusion as Jerry subsequently argues that The Lion King is based upon a Shakespearean sense of tragedy. Traditionally, a literary fool functions as a subtle teacher, discretely hinting at a work’s crucial features. Be Kind Rewind, however, is no tragedy. It’s a comedy - and clearly a good one. You’d be a fool to think otherwise.
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
Al Pacino to Take On James Bond
By admin | February 15, 2008
You read that right. Apparently there is a new rumor that was floated to the guys over at AICN that Al Scent of a Woman Pacino would play the head honcho of the new, evil terrorist organization in the upcoming Bond film Quantum of Solace.
This is certainly a crazy rumor which may turn out to be 100% completely face. It almost seems out of character to me, for the Bond films, which have often shied away from such huge names, unless that star is Bond. Though arguably most Bond actors rose to their highest after being Bond, so even then, big celebrities are not often top choices. The few Bond movies that did recruit bigger names were terrible. Halle Berry, Terri Hatcher, etc.
I’m not entirely sure I’d want Pacino in this, but the rumor does state, at least in Quantum that it would be more of a cameo type appearance as the top dog of top dogs, rather than a main villain to match wits and bullets with. Stay tuned for more.
Sound Off: Is Pacino in a Bond movie a good thing?
Topics: Film Commentary | No Comments »
Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins (review)
By admin | February 15, 2008
I should have walked out at the “comical” dog-sex scene. Instead I endured until Martin Lawrence got skunked in the face — that should have made me happy, and yet I felt dirty all over, and had to escape. Still, I feel confident in saying, though I saw only two-thirds of the film, that this is one of the absolute worst movies ever produced by the hands of humans. Oh, sure, who wouldn’t be charmed by the “sentimental” spectacle of Lawrence’s hotshot L.A. talk-show host heading home to Bumfuck, The South, for his parents’ 50th wedding anniversary celebration, with his gorgon of a girlfriend — she won Survivor; that’s the kind of aggressive bitch she is — in tow, so that all and sundry of his redneck, blackface family can taunt him about how “white” he’s become? Theaters will have to take out special insurance for all the audience member suffering whiplash from trying to keep up with the changes in tone of this monstrosity, which veers from “sappy claptrap” to “minstrel show” with nary a warning: the only consistency to the film comes via the fact that just about every single character here is uniformly and unrelenting a horrible excuse for a human being. The only cinematic salvation possible in those last few minutes that I couldn’t bear to watch would have been if poor James Earl Jones, as Lawrence’s father, were actually raptured up into heaven by Jesus Christ himself, the Almighty Himself having taken pity upon him.
Visits Our Friends: Video Fixation
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
‘Jumper’ Movie Review
By admin | February 14, 2008
One ‘Jumper’ Not Worth Saving
Fallen Ones Rating 
America’s litigious society has now made it so that you can’t get coffee from a fast food chain without drinking it out of a cup warning you its contents may be hot. Everything has some sort of warning label attached, most of which we ignore. But I’m telling you right now, tickets to Jumper should include strongly worded language warning the buyer that headaches, outbreaks of uncontrollable laughter, and even an urge to do great bodily harm to those associated with the making of the film may occur upon viewing Jumper.
Exiting the theater a fellow critic complained there were more holes in that plot than in any movie she’d seen in quite a while, to which I responded, “What plot? This thing had a plot?” Jumper’s simply an excuse to use really cool technology to make characters bounce around the world visiting exotic locales for no particular reason other than the fact they look incredible onscreen. That’s it. If you try analyzing whatever story exists, you’ll find yourself taking a nasty trip down the rabbit hole into a mind-numbingly dull land filled with Samuel L Jackson clones zapping anything that moves with some sort of twisted version of a cattle prod. That analogy makes sense if you see the movie, which I’m definitely not suggesting you do.
The Story
David (Hayden Christensen) endures high school life as the kid who gets picked on by pretty much everyone. But as bad as life is during school hours, David’s home life is a whole lot worse. Mom left when he was just a young whippersnapper of 5 and dad’s got anger management issues along with a hefty drinking problem. At 15, David’s only hope of escaping his problems is by teleporting to different cities. Okay, that’s not quite what he dreams of when he’s wishing for a way out, but as luck would have it, David can actually transport himself to anywhere on the planet.
Jamie Bell and Hayden Christensen in Jumper.
This teleportation talent shows up out of nowhere, but David doesn’t seem shocked or surprised to find he’s able to go wherever he wants. He just seems to accept the fact that now he can teleport. One of the first things he does after packing his gear and hitting the road is rob a bank (but he leaves IOUs and he comes from a dysfunctional family so we can’t hold his bad deeds against him). Set financially, he can now use his powers for good to help people in need across the universe. Or that’s what he should be doing. But no, not our David. All he does is spend his days eating lunch on top of the Sphinx or finding killer waves to surf or meeting hot chicks in foreign bars (or maybe it’s foreign chicks in hot bars…).Since he’s able to take cash, clothing, and anything else he needs on his jumps, there’s not much of a challenge in bouncing around from country to country. And you’d think after 10 years of being the world’s biggest freeloading narcissist David would grow up a little or he’d get tired of being all alone. You’d be wrong. It’s not until he’s discovered by jumper hunters (referred to in the film as Paladins even though jumper hunters sounds much more intriguing) that he figures out he needs a special woman. That’s right, once he’s in danger he decides it’s time to reconnect with the girl who he had a crush on as a kid. And although it’s been 10 years since she last saw him, and everyone thinks he’s dead, she immediately packs up and takes off on a Roman holiday with this guy who could be a serial killer or an insurance salesman.
The leader of the Paladins is a real nutjob named Roland (Samuel L Jackson with weird white hair). Roland doesn’t like jumpers because he believes only God has the power to teleport. Armed with a gadget that ensnares jumpers in wire and zaps them with electricity so they can’t move, Roland and his Paladin pack hunt down jumpers while posing as members of different law enforcement agencies.Meanwhile, back at the ranch or in Egypt or Rome or London or wherever, David finds out he’s not all that special. He meets Griffin (Jamie Bell), a much more seasoned traveler whose only goal in life is to kill Paladins in general and Roland in particular. After deciding to team up like comic book superheroes sometimes do when publishers are trying to sell more copies, David and Griffin spend the rest of the movie alternately seeking out and running away from Roland. And, of course, David’s girlfriend gets in the way because that’s what women do in this type of movie.
The Cast
Can we just cut to the chase here? Hayden Christensen has all but killed his career with his performance in Jumper. Did the multitude of screenwriters adjust the script to simple sentences after Christensen was attached? If so, they didn’t do him any favors. His character strings together about 10 words in his lengthiest sentence and so it’s up to his facial expressions and body language to do most of the work. Unfortunately, Christensen is unable to tell the story when he’s limited to using just those tools.
Samuel L Jackson and Hayden Christensen square off in Jumper.
Samuel L Jackson is playing a purely one-note character, Rachel Bilson as the requisite damsel in distress is eye candy and nothing else, and poor Jamie Bell is left to be the sole character who shows some emotion. Bell’s actually kind of fun to watch; it’s too bad he didn’t enter the picture sooner - or in place of Christensen. As the one who fights the good fight for jumpers worldwide, Bell’s Griffin is truly the only character in the movie with a little meat on his bones. Diane Lane makes a cameo appearance as…I won’t spoil it for you, but suffice it to say the part’s hardly worthy of having her name so prominently displayed in the credits.
The Bottom Line
Don’t get suckered into buying a ticket for Jumper because the trailer looks semi-interesting. The trailer doesn’t convey just how disjointed the storyline is or how the film’s lead characters are repeatedly involved in senseless activities. Instead of fighting Roland with a gun or a knife or any normal weapon, Griffin and David use flame throwers and a double-decker bus. Wouldn’t it be more effective to grab a shotgun from any of the thousands of gun stores in the world and blow him away? And couldn’t the screenwriters have added at least one normal character who questions what’s going on? Instead, there’s an annoying and useless narrative track that provides what’s apparently supposed to be gripping backstory we can’t do without. It doesn’t do the trick.Where the power to teleport comes from never pops up. The hows, whats, and most importantly whys are also never addressed in Jumper. Jumpers jump, Paladins kill them, and nobody on the planet seems to notice grown men suddenly appearing out of nowhere in public locations (except for one small child in an airport). There are wormholes, cars flying all over the place, banks robbed, people killed, and no one cares. A teenager goes missing for 10 years, is presumed dead, and no one cares when he shows up alive and well. If no one in the make-believe world of Jumper gives a hoot about any of these things, neither should audiences.
GRADE: FJumper was directed by Doug Liman and is rated PG-13 for sequences of intense action violence, some language and brief sexuality.
Theatrical Release Date: February 14, 2008
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
New DVD releases include ‘Gone Baby Gone’
By admin | February 13, 2008
‘Gone Baby Gone’
Ben Affleck returns to his hometown of Boston with a sweeping crime drama that undoubtedly leaves viewers in a haze of moral uncertainty. Decisions don’t come easy in “Gone Baby Gone,” Affleck’s highly successful directorial debut. Of course, Affleck isn’t the only reason to check this one out. Shining performances from Ben’s brother, Casey, and Amy Ryan stand out in a film full of twists and turns. The younger Affleck handles the role of Patrick Kenzie, a small-time private investigator asked to look into the kidnapping of a local 4-year-old girl. Along with his girlfriend, Angie (Michelle Monaghan), and two veteran detectives (Ed Harris and John Ashton), Kenzie starts to piece together evidence to find the youngster. Eventually, though, he realizes that this single kidnapping is wrought with controversy. “Gone Baby Gone” is bound to draw comparisons to Clint Eastwood’s hit “Mystic River,” and not just because both films are set in and around the dark corners of Beantown. Dennis Lehane, who penned the 2003 thriller, also wrote this one. Through its authenticity and intelligence, “Gone Baby Gone” is a superb achievement for Affleck and his stellar cast. The drama continues onto DVD with an exclusive extended ending that leaves more questions. A featurette on casting the film is second-best, as Affleck used a ton of townies for the film. A mix of routine featurettes, interviews and commentary also are available. R, 2007. Our Take: 3.5 Stars.
Buy It: To witness a controversy that rivals New England’s own spygate. — Garrett Conti/Tribune-Review
______________________________________________________________
‘No Reservations’
Starring Catherine Zeta-Jones and Aaron Eckhart, “No Reservations” is a dish best ignored. The romantic story finds a stubborn and talented chef (Zeta-Jones) falling for an easy-going saucier (Eckhart). When Nick moves into Kate’s kitchen, he quickly warms to the rest of the staff. This angers Kate, and a good bit of arguing ensues on the way to opposites attracting. In that respect, “No Reservations,” directed by Scott Hicks, is a run-of-the-mill romance movie. One sidebar to the story is another new addition to Kate’s life. When her sister dies, she assumes the responsibility of her daughter — played by the talented Abigail Breslin. The youngster’s involvement in the film seems wasted and, at times, shallow, as her story is simply dropped for the blossoming romance between Nick and Kate. “No Reservations” might have displayed more depth if it focused on one storyline. As it is, the romance and adoption angles tend to ring hollow with not enough commitment. The lone extra is the Food Network show “Unwrapped,” which takes a closer look at the film and its recipes. PG, 2007. Our Take: 1.5 Stars.
Skip It: Expect a loss of appetite with this reservation. — GC
‘Becoming Jane’
Biopics always have had a place on the movie landscape. Lately, though, they’ve become cliches. Those responsible are happy to mask an unremarkable script with interesting costumes and beautiful settings and send them up for Oscar consideration. Credit “Becoming Jane,” directed by Julian Jarrold, for breaking out of that cycle. This moving celebration based on the famed British author Jane Austen entices the viewer with its depth and cleverness. Starring Anne Hathaway — as Jane — James McAvoy and James Cromwell, the film takes a close look at Austen’s personal life with little concentration on the writer’s classic novels. Before she became one of the giants of English Literature, Austen had quite a tumultuous love life. That’s covered here warmly, as Hathaway and McAvoy share a wonderful chemistry in a forbidden fling. Next to deleted scenes and commentary from Jarrold, writer Kevin Hood and producer Robert Bernstein, quality special features give the viewer a more historical look into Austen’s life and the inspiration her work still has today. PG, 2007. Our Take: 2.5 Stars.
Rent It: Sense and sensibility point to this one as a quality rental. — GC
‘We Own the Night’
This stylized drama from director James Gray is highlighted by explosive action and quality cinematography. But, as “We Own the Night” shines on the outside, key components like story and plot are lacking. Depth and key characteristics of the film — which stars Mark Wahlberg, Robert Duvall, Eva Mendes and Joaquin Phoenix — are simply left out, and characters ascend on twisting storylines with little intro. The story focuses on two brothers, one a decorated cop (Wahlberg) and the other a nightclub manager (Phoenix) surrounded by criminal elements. When a new outfit of drug dealers takes shots at his family, Bobby (Phoenix) has to take the next step in his life. The aforementioned action is covered tremendously among the film’s extras. “Police Action: Filming Cops, Cars and Chaos” covers the exceptional chase scene and plenty of other sequences. Another quality featurette — “A Moment in Crime: Creating Late ’80s Brooklyn” — highlights the quality settings on display. Commentary and a making-of featurette also are available. R, 2007. Our Take: 2 Stars.
Rent It: Check it out on the short term, but don’t own the night. — GC
Other releases
• “Martian Child”: A single sci-fi writer (John Cusack) opens up his life to a child with heavy emotional issues in this heartwarming drama made for families. Based on a novel of the same name by David Gerrold, the feature film comes with plenty of extras. Correlations between the book and movie are covered in individual featurettes. Deleted scenes and commentary by some of the crew also are available. PG, 2007. Our Take: 2 Stars.
• “Romance & Cigarettes”: An all-star cast (Kate Winslet and Steve Buscemi to name a few) delivers an entertaining time in this original musical directed by standout actor John Turturro. Extras include commentary and an introduction from Turturro, deleted scenes and a pretty cool making-of feature that covers the fresh aspects of the movie. R, 2007. Our Take: 3 Stars.
• “I Could Never Be Your Woman”: Romance emerges between an older women (Michelle Pfeiffer) and a young man (Paul Rudd) in this sweet romantic comedy that never made it to the big screen. The film’s production problems have been publicized — most recently in Entertainment Weekly. Deleted scenes and commentary make up the extras. PG-13, 2007. Our Take: 2.5 Stars.
• “Dedication”: Mandy Moore, Billy Crudup and Tom Wilkinson star in the dark and artsy love story. “Dedication” marks the directorial debut of actor Justin Theroux, and it’s highlighted by a quality score. No special features are included. R, 2007. Our Take: 2.5 Stars.
• “Blue State”: Liberal thinking and a developing romance are at the center of “Blue State,” starring Breckin Meyer and Anna Paquin. Directed by Marshall Lewy, this one goes to the heart of political dedication. Commentary is the lone extra. R, 2007. Our Take: 2 Stars.
• Re-releases: Two old titles have a new day, as “The Wiz” (1978, G, Diana Ross) and “Imitation of Life” (1933 and 1959, Unrated, Lana Turner) make their way onto DVD today. Both titles include extensive special features that highlight the production of the films.
Please visit our new friends: Promotional Items
Topics: Film Releases | No Comments »
At the movies, 3D’s hot all over again
By admin | February 11, 2008
Features like ‘Hannah Montana’ are the big hope
If it didn’t get huge amounts of attention, that’s not entirely surprising. It was Super Bowl weekend, after all, when nearly 100 million Americans, a record, tuned in to watch the underdog New York Giants yank a late-game victory from the grip of the favored New England Patriots.
But when it comes to records, this ranks up there with the big game. That same weekend, a movie of a pop concert featuring TV tween icon Hannah Montana (Miley Cyrus) smashed several important box office records.
While its gross wasn’t so huge–$31.1 million–it was the most ever for a movie opening on a Super Bowl weekend.
But what made “Hannah” so important was not its ticket sales but the movie’s format, 3D. While 3D has been around for years, it never quite fulfilled its promise. “Hannah Montana & Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert in 3D,” filmed in RealD, one of several newer formats, delivered and then some, and at a critical time for the film industry.
While ticket sales have been rising in recent years, moviemakers are feeling increasing pressure to improve the movie-going experience–the wow factor, as they might say in movieland–in the face of ever-richer at-home entertainment options, such as internet games and high-definition TV.
“Hannah’s $31 million opening is not only music to the ears of Walt Disney, theatre exhibitors, as well as purveyors of 3-D like RealD, it is a clear game-changer for the industry,” writes Jeff Bock, box office analyst, at Exhibitor Relations Co.
Among the big names hoping for big things from 3D are “Titanic” director James Cameron, George Lucas and Jeffrey Katzenberg.
It’s not hard to understand why. Costing just $7 million to make, “Hannah” fetched $15 a ticket, several dollars more than the price of a standard-format movie, which enabled the movie to gross a record $45,000 per screen, though showing on just 683 screens.
On average, 3D movies produce about three times the revenue per screen as the same movie in 2D, while also averaging twice the attendance per screen, according to Charlotte Jones, cinema analyst for Screen Digest, a media research firm.
Three-D technology has come a long way from the time, back in the ’50s, when folks had to wear uncomfortable red-green cardboard glasses in order to watch, and the movies were more fantastical than realistic. One still wears special glasses but they are considered more comfortable, and the visual experience is said be far more realistic.
Over the last few years, 3D movies have been trickling out in the various new 3D formats, one of the first being “Polar Express” back in 2004. It showed in Imax theaters.
Since then other technologies have emerged allowing more theaters to play 3D movies. Currently there are about 1,300 3D digital screens worldwide. That number is expected to continue to increase, hitting about 4,000 by the end of 2009.
As it does the number of 3D films being released will too. In 2008 there are five or six movies that will have 3D versions, including Walden Media’s “Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D,” Disney’s “Bolt” and nWave Pictures’ “Fly me to the Moon.” They follow “Hannah” and “U2 3D,” which also did well.
More movies are expected out this year, and 2009 also looks to be the big year, when Dreamworks is committed to only releasing movies in 3D.
Meanwhile, elsewhere in popcult, the poorly reviewed romantic comedy “Fool’s Gold” topped the box office over the weekend with $22.0 million in ticket sales, while last week’s No. 1, “Hannah,” dropped to No. 3.
In DVD rentals for the week ended Feb. 3, according to IMDb.com, the family comedy “The Game Plan” was No. 1 for the second straight week, followed again by “Good Luck Chuck.”
On iTunes this morning, Flo Rida’s “Low” was No. 1 for a 13th straight week, while “New Soul” by Yael Naim was No. 2 for the second straight week.
And in books, John Grisham’s latest title “The Appeal” debuted at No. 1 on The New York Times’ hardcover fiction best-sellers list for the week ended Feb. 2, and was also No. 1 on USA Today’s chart for the week ended Feb. 3.
Topics: Film Commentary | No Comments »
‘Strange Wilderness’
By admin | February 10, 2008
I don’t get paid to do this job. I don’t even get compensated to see the movies I’m supposed to review. And I was OK with that — until I saw Strange Wilderness.
The newest offering from Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison Productions was a sloppy film that makes Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo look Oscar-worthy. After I was surprisingly tickled by 2006’s stoner-flick Grandma’s Boy, I was interested to see whether Strange Wilderness would be able to capitalize on the production company’s comedic momentum.
Starring a slew of perpetual funny guys Steve Zahn (Saving Silverman), Jonah Hill (Superbad, Knocked Up) and Justin Long (Waiting…, Accepted), I thought the movie might be at least remotely funny. I was wrong. It’s almost as though the movie is more like a sketch comedy show, and the entire cast wasn’t taking anything about it seriously.
Zahn plays second-generation TV host Peter Gaulke, who is trying to keep afloat a popular nature show he inherited from his late father. With tanking ratings, the show is canceled and Zahn, along with his cronies, must find Bigfoot in the Ecuadorian jungle to keep the show on the air.
What follows is a disjointed series of mishaps that involve genitalia jokes, a five-minute giggle-fest about the name Dick, and people getting hit in the genitals (several times). Did I mention that there is a scene with a turkey attached to a character’s crotch?
After a few scenes, it’s apparent that much of the dialogue in the film is ad-libbed, but not well. Most of the time, it’s like the entire cast is trying too hard to be funny, and it just doesn’t work. Zahn, who is usually hilarious in supporting roles, can’t keep up any momentum in this film, probably because momentum was never established in the first place, and he just doesn’t deliver any sort of comedic timing with his jokes, if you can call them that.
Throughout the movie, there are periodic stock footage shots with Zahn’s character doing a voice-over. It might have worked in more moderation, but the fact that it is used so much in between different scenes, it seemed like they ran out of tape and decided to use the stock footage to make the movie longer. They succeeded in making it longer, but unfortunately not any funnier.
I was also disappointed in Hill’s character, whose recurring gag involves a handshake buzzer and — what else — hitting someone in the groin, all while slurring his words in a terrible version of a Southern accent.
Overall, if you are hunting for a wildlife show spoof movie that will entertain you for more than 10 minutes, Strange Wilderness is a must-miss.
Grade: F
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
Movie Review: In Bruges
By admin | February 8, 2008
Visually stunning photography of the silent byways and crannies of the ancient medieval city of Bruges frames a story of guilt and honor played out by wonderfully demented hit men
Ray has a problem. He is a murderer who has done a very bad thing. And doing a very bad thing is difficult for a man who earns his daily bread by gunning people down in the most macabre fashion imaginable; often shooting them multiple times so that the intent of the murder is quite unmistakable to the inquiring public. One can only imagine what it was, exactly, that the priest did to deserve it. But the unintended consequences will have to be addressed.
Played to the hilt by Colin Farrell, Ray is falling to pieces. In fact, Ray is falling to pieces almost as well as Farrell’s Terry is falling to pieces in Woody Allen’s most recent crime thriller, “Cassandra’s Dream.” In both cases, Farrell tries for the Guinness record for the protagonist existing on the verge of a nervous breakdown for the longest period in film. Put the two films together and he definitely gets the award.
His pal is Ken, played in a splendid performance by Brendan Gleeson. Ken is sort of a father type to Ray, although Ken also survives from day to day because he is well aware of the difference between friendship and business. This comes to a head when big boss Harry (Oscar nominee Ralph Fiennes) determines that Ray’s time has come at last and that his best friend and father figure Ken must do the dirty work.
At this point the film shifts to a parallel universe with Sir Ben Kingsley’s masterpiece, “Sexy Beast.” Although few actors win kudos for imitating anybody, Fiennes does a pretty good job of transforming into the sexy beast right before our very eyes. He is so emotionally detached and so viscerally, speechlessly enraged that the fury radiates from his eyes like Superman’s x-ray vision. The heat rises in a plume off his head as he spits out the news to his wife that he must travel to Bruges on business.
You see, this is a matter of honor to Harry. He gave Ken an order and Ken has no right to get human on him. All the while, Ken is actually getting to like Bruges (pronounced “Broozh), what with it being the home of most magnificent medieval architecture in Belgium, if not all of Western Europe. Ray, on the other hand, passes his time in hilarious torment viewing the ancient icons of the medieval crusades; showing the finer details of stripping the skin from the feet of pagans and testing ancient rope and lever mechanisms on unlucky disbelievers.
In the midst of all this, the eve of his almost certain demise, Ray has the extreme misfortune to fall in love. Ken has fallen in love with the city but completely understands that if Harry has his way, both he and Ken will be taking the place of the heathens in the current versions of those torture portraits.
An excellent next film for director Martin McDonagh, after a three year hiatus, following his Oscar winning Best Live Action Short Film, “Six Shooter,” in 2004. This is great stuff from start to finish with no lack of either action, raw grit or sublime edginess. The filming on location in Bruges required some of the most inventive angles and lighting you will ever see, with the moldy and cloistered buildings whispering their secrets and the boats sliding silently through the canals. BAFTA award winning lenser Eigil Bryld (“Becoming Jane”) was completely up to the task in a work of sumptuous photographic depth and complexity.
A completely enjoyable movie for the august amongst the crime-thriller enthusiasts. The R rating is completely for real, not only for the drug use and incredibly pervasive nasty language, but for some bloody violence of the first order. Best to leave all but the most mature teenagers home for this one.
Release: February 8, 2008 Limited
MPAA: Rated R for strong bloody violence, pervasive language and some drug use
Runtime: 107 minutes
Country: UK / Belgium
Language: English
Color: Color
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
Fool’s Gold Movie Review
By admin | February 5, 2008
You would have to be a fool to enjoy the aptly titled “Fool’s Gold.”
More than that, the film by director and co-writer Andy Tennant (“Hitch” and “Sweet Home Alabama”) couldn’t entertain a chimpanzee. Or a naked man playing the bongos while high, for that matter. And one would hope that star Matthew McConaughey (“A Time to Kill” and “Contact”) was as far from clear-headed as possible when he signed on to play the lead in this adventure romantic comedy gone atrociously awry co-written by John Claflin and Daniel Zelman (who have partnered on such classics as USA’s “They Nest”). You would never know Claflin and Zelman were classmates at Harvard when you shrink at hearing the most ridiculous dialogue and cringe while watching the most painfully mind-boggling story drag you for a full two hours across iodine-soaked sandpaper. But McConaughey hasn’t been anywhere near a truly great movie or script since “Frailty.” So what’s Kate Hudson’s excuse? The star made famous by Cameron Crowe’s “Almost Famous” seems to think she and McConaughey have chemistry after “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days,” a highly overrated romance where the onscreen relationship was too forced to feel remotely natural or even be entertaining; so it should be no surprise that McConaughey and Hudson are re-teaming for “Fool’s Gold,” a highly ineffectual, utterly excruciating adventure romance where the onscreen relationship isn’t even given enough effort to feel forced and contrived, and doesn’t come anywhere in the world near anything decent or minutely entertaining.
While getting a divorce, Finn (McConaughey) is too busy off diving for buried treasure, and he shows up late to his own divorce proceedings where Tess (Hudson) reams him out and flirts with the idea of flirting with him. Through long spurts of empty and pedestrian exposition, we discover that the couple used to love to search for treasure together, particularly one that was lost in 1715 and apparently, they are the only ones in the entire world actively hunting for it. Along the way, they drag a billionaire, Nigel (Donald Sutherland in a completely atypical role that he should have passed up without considering for even one split second), and his abominably mind-numbing rich and obnoxious daughter, Gemma (Alexis Dziena) on a quest for the sunken gold for money that Nigel doesn’t need, Gemma doesn’t understand, Tess doesn’t have a real reason to care about at all, and Finn doesn’t have the brains or the resources to go after alone. With gangsters, rivals, and nature working against them, Finn and Tess struggle through trials and tribulations that make no sense whatsoever and magically bring them together despite them having been hopelessly driven apart. To call the scenario absurd would be giving it too much credit. To say the dialogue and characters were nowhere near believable would be far too kind and only serve as a way to avoid explicatives from the revulsion this film causes in its rotten attempts to be fun and exciting.
With an overblown score that never fits the moment and makes the tension more awkward in the audience than alive on the screen, “Fool’s Gold” never fails to overdo every irritating character trait, every flat joke, and every completely manipulative attempt to make you feel anything for the characters or what they go through to end up at the most trite and unrelenting conclusion where you wish the characters would just all die so the movie could finally be over and the pain of watching it would pass. The movie is unforgivable in the trash it attempts to pedal as adventure, romance, humor, and most of all, writing. Even more jarring is the acting that is so inexcusably bad with some who have such palpable talent and yet that shining beacon of Hollywood dazzle is nowhere to be found in the dark abyss that this movie should be hurled into, never to see daylight again. Save yourself a lot of wasted time and money, and go see anything but “Fool’s Gold.” Sadly, there’s not a single redeeming quality, moment, or factor to the movie, save that it demonstrates exactly the kind of incredibly poor quality of movies that is being allowed to pass for entertainment, not to mention the far worse standards to which studios are sinking to get actors who can turn in performances worthy of Oscar gold into roles in films that the Razzie’s wouldn’t touch with a ten-foot pole in the hopes of luring the unsuspecting to the theater. Want a good Valentine’s Day flick with tropical islands, wacky adventure, and romantic comedy? Rent “Six Days, Seven Nights” with Harrison Ford.
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »
Movie Review: The Eye
By admin | February 1, 2008
Good special effects and some scary characters put together with great cinematography make this one notch up from a B horror film. Turn off those cell phones now, boys and girls
Cellular memory—it’s not just in your phone.
Adapted from the 2002 Pang Brothers thriller, David Moreau and Xavier Palud’s “The Eye” is about transplants that give more than the recipient bargained for. Can cells transmit memories, and more?
Sydney Wells (Jessica Alba) is a normal, 20-something, blind professional concert violinist living in an average million dollar condo in Southern California. That is, until she gets the break of a lifetime and someone gives her their eyes. Well, not the whole eye, just the cornea, for a transplant. The transplant is a success and her vision is entirely restored (yea, doctors!) but now she is seeing things that aren’t there. Like little boys with half their heads gone and flaming, running corpses locked into burning warehouses.
It’s gonna take more than Lasik to fix this kid.
Fortunately, she is hooked up with doctor Paul Falkner (Alessandro Nivola—“Junebug,” “Face/Off”) who knows all about transplants and the weird things they do to people. Like making it hard to sleep at night and causing indigestion. To bad for Sydney he has almost no experience in snarling grim reaper ghouls, faceless-corpse infested elevator rides and revenge obsessed spirits of the unburied dead. But he is learning.
Parker Posey plays Helen, whose part in this film is only slightly less exciting than her character’s name. Helen. Her best scene in the entire film is when she is taking the picture of Sydney and the little doomed brain tumor girl in the hospital. At least in that scene nobody can see her face and possibly connect her with her lame character at some time in the future. See Posey in “Party Girl” or any of director Christopher Guest’s films and forget she is part of “The Eye.”
Getting back to Dr. Paul, he is really cute. Like Sydney, he is a twenty-something rich person who is not only sexy as can be, but loyal, even if he acts unbelievably stupid at first part. But as time goes on, he starts to see that Sydney’s acting out behavior—knocking over tables and people in coffee houses, running around screaming her lungs out, talking to apparitions, smashing out lights and hacking her arms to ribbons while beating out upper story windows in her million dollar condo—might be significant. He takes action.
After he takes action and puts her back into the hospital, Sydney tells him she has to know the real story behind her transplanted corneas. They were not from just any person. They were from a person with a special gift and, as a result, Sydney has a special purpose. And it’s not just to hide Parker Posey’s face so she won’t be recognized for the rest of the film.
The last half of the flick is about Sydney finding the purpose behind her peepers. It stops with the digital effects and starts with the real plot, which is pretty cool. As it turns out, the lives of several dozen persons who may or may not die in a flaming gasoline truck crash at a dusty deserted Mexican border crossing depends on whether or not she can do the right thing. The right thing requires ignoring the snarling grim reapers and bearing up under the deafening growls, crashes, slaps and distorted screams of her audio hallucinations. In fact, the audience has to bear up under these same audio effects and believe me, it ain’t easy.
But in addition to the cellar witch hangings and deformed corpse stalkers she also has to smarten Dr. Paul up fast, and he is not showing a lot of smarts at any point in the film.
All-in-all, a good scary movie and a film all the better for the wisely chosen and executed PG-13 rating. No blood splatter, flying brains or psycho sex. But lots of good digital special effects about what it’s like to crack up, be burned alive, jump out a window, hang yourself, etc. Also, a pretty good picture of a woman bearing up under the pressure instead of just running to Daddy or Hubbie for protection. Tough choices have to be made. Ignore the grim reaper. Good lessons.
Release: February 1, 2008
MPAA: Rated PG-13 for violence/terror and disturbing content
Runtime: 97 minutes
Country: USA
Language: English
Color: Color
Topics: Film Reviews | No Comments »