Movie Review: Piranha 3D

Sometimes a movie comes out that is just so bad that its brilliant. That is the kind of movie Piranha 3D tries to be. And fails. It has its sweet parts of course. Like when two people are carrying a Piranha-eaten girl out of the water and she breaks in half. Or when a girls hair gets caught in the propeller of a boat and she gets scalped. Or when Jerry O'Connell dies so he has to stop talking (even though he doesn't.) But I'm getting ahead of myself! Onto the plot!

There isn't one! Basically, a beer bottle causes a earth quake that leads to hundreds of previously cannibalistic prehistoric piranhas to be released on a Spring Break party lake. As you can imagine, terror ensues.  

The characters were awful. But they were very predictable in that they did everything that badly written characters in horror movies have to do. The boy who's supposed to be baby sitting his siblings, instead abandons them and runs off right into the arms (or teeth) of awaiting danger. The kids, of course, don't stay put like they're supposed to and later must be rescued. My biggest problem is: If you're making a movie called Piranha 3D, which is purposefully, and shamelessly all about boobs and blood, why do you need all the moral dilemmas? Just have fun with it! We don't come to these movies to watch the ugly boy (who I'm a better actor than) apologize to his Sheriff mom about being an irresponsible baby sitter. We come for boobs and blood. And yes this movie had it, but that I couldn't even enjoy. Why? I'm a Buddhist. Why else? The terrible 3D. 

I love Avatar 3D. It's incredible. Especially in IMAX.  It turns an awesome movie into a breath taking experience. There is absolutely no reason to see any other movie in 3D at this point. Nothing stands up. It's just a gimmick and in this movie it was a nauseating, head ache inducing gimmick. I guess you can consider what this movie did 3D, but it really just looked like a pop up book. The screen was flat, and heads and fish and boobs stuck out at you making you go cross eyed. It was not enjoyable and it ruined all the sweet blood in the movie for me.

Conclusion? This was always going to be a bad movie but it should have been an awesome bad movie. The people who made it, however, weren't talented enough to make a good bad movie so they ended up with just a really bad bad movie.  It makes me sad sad.

One good this came out of this movie. And this is this terrific For Your Consideration ad they made. It's awesome.

D

I am legally required to inform you that I'm not really Buddist.

Movie Review: "Splice"

I have spent a lot of time trying to think about how to describe this movie. I can't. I can't figure out if this movie is good or not. Honestly I don't know if I loved it, or I'm too scared of what it'll do to me if I say that I don't like it. It's entirely batsh*t crazy, but i think in the way that Howard Hughes was batsh*t crazy in that it might be brilliant too. I think the only way I can fully describe how I feel about this film is to show you. This was my face for pretty much the entire film:

See the mingled fear, confusion, disgust and oh-no-they-di'en't!!! all over my face. This movie took me places I never wanted to go, but that I don't regret going. It's a dark grotesque family drama and I kinda loved it. I've come to the conclusion that they made me feel exactly how they wanted me to feel. No film has ever made me feel this one which means that it was incredibly effective so I think they actually achieved what they wanted to. I don't know what sick mind would make me want to feel those things but they were successful. Well done.

B+

Movie Review: "Jonah Hex"

Ugh so I got paid to watch this movie at the midnight with an audience and I still texted through the whole thing. I was going to try to be clever and funny but someone else already did it for me. I agree with everything this guys says and he says it better than I would so just read it. 

This movie has everything.  EVERYTHING CATCHES FIRE!  EVERY BAD GUY GETS KILLED TWICE! SILLY WIGS FOR EVERYONE!

And perhaps the best part, the expository dialog.  Expository dialog gets a bad rap — dialog that provides backstory and moves the story along isn’t bad in and of itself, but in Jonah Hex, it’s terrible.  Awesomelyterrible.  Probably ninety percent of the film is expository dialog, with the characters going off on some soliloquy that’s all but meaningless to the plot anyway. I would tell you to make a drinking game out of it and drink every time there was hilariously expository dialog, but you might die.

The film begins with Jonah Hex telling us his entire life story via voice over, just so we’re properly caught up when he kills some random people with a horse-mounted gatling gun in the first scene.  Soon after, we need to know who the villain is.  This is accomplished through a meeting between President Ulysses S. Grant and his right-hand man, Lieutenant Cornelius P. Mustache, played by Will Arnett.  They express worry over a rogue Confederate general, Quentin Turnbull.  “Do you know what Turnbull’s Mexican servants called him?” Grant asks rhetorically.  “‘El Terorista,’” he answers.

But what does ‘El Terorista’ mean???  THE WORLD MAY NEVER KNOW.

CUE JOHN MALKOVICH IN PREPOSTEROUS WIG!  NOW HAM IT UP AND IGNORE ALL PUNCTUATION!  ACTION!

From there, Jonah Hex kills some more people.  Wouldn’t you know it, they keep trying to F with him.  But all he cares about are two things, collecting bounties and finding Quentin Turnbull, the man who burned his family alive.  Hex is an outlaw (who’s nice to animals).  But all that changes when Quentin Turnbull fakes his own death for some reason, and instantly resurfaces with a super weapon built by Eli Whitney.  We know this because Turnbull draws up a giant diagram of the weapon on the wall.  He explains to his right-hand man that it was built by Eli Whitney, “the man who invented the cotton gin and started the industrial revolution.”  You know, that thing that happened a few weeks prior.

F*CK YEAH, HISTORY LESSONS!

We’re not sure why Turnbull’s men follow him, but they must really like him because they chant “TURNBULL! TURNBULL! TURNBULL!” whenever he’s around.  Of course, with Turnbull hell bent on destroying the country for some reason, the country’s only hope may be the outlaw Jonah Hex.  Which we know because President Grant tells Will Arnett, “This outlaw Jonah Hex may be our country’s only hope.”

From there, Jonah Hex teams up with the army to go after Quentin Turnbull.  And by “teams up with the army,” I mean they deputize him in a whore house, leave together, and then never again appear in a scene together  for the rest of the movie. After that, Jonah Hex goes to an underground MMA fight featuring an acid-spitting reptile man for some reason.  Actually, there is a reason, and that reason is “because it’s awesome.”  Oh, and did I mention the reptile man’s MMA moves incorporate parkour?  Because f*ck yeah they do.

Point being, Hex prefers to go it alone.  In the process, he gets killed like six times.  And every time he dies, he gets resuscitated by faceless Indians who exist solely for that purpose.  Also, they’re Crow indians so crows follow Jonah Hex wherever he goes.  And if you’re worried that all that dying is going to be boring, don’t be, because every time he kind of dies, he FIGHTS QUENTIN TURNBULL IN PURGATORY!  At one point, the scene intercuts between Hex beating up Turnbull in real life while simultaneously beating him up in some murky dream state.  KILL HIM TWICE!  MAKE HIM DEAD!

Oh right, Jonah Hex can revive dead people to talk to them.  You’d think he’d use this power to maybe apologize to all the random dudes he killed, or to ask, “Hey, so what’s up with the afterlife?  Is it all ice cream and sluts or what?”  But mainly he just uses it to PUNISH THEM EXTRA!  Not only can he talk to dead people, he can touch them and make their skin burn for some reason (which is useful for getting information).  “The less time they been dead, the faster it happens,” he helpfully informs us.  Uh, okay.  Look, the main reason I mention this is because at one point, Jonah Hex kills a guy, then immediately revives him so that he can PUNCH HIM INTO A MILLION SPARKS!  OOH WAH-AH AH AH!

I don’t want to spoil much more of it, but this might the most OOH WAH-AH AH AH-iest movie I’ve ever seen.  Okay, I’m going include just one more detail, because I think it sums up the movie as a whole: Quentin Turnbull, who plans to destroy the US Capitol with his super weapon on the 4th of July, plans to fire this weapon from aboard his ship coming up the Potomac.  As this ship steams towards the Capitol, one of Turnbull’s men takes aim through the periscope.  We cut to the guy’s POV looking through the periscope.  I sh*t you not, the periscope sight has the outline of the US Capitol building drawn into it.

Jeez, it’s a good thing they approached the capitol from precisely the same angle.  And it’s a good thing I saw this movie so that I could tell you about it.  Grown Ups and Knight and Day open this weekend.  F*ck those movies.  See this one.  I guarantee you’ll be talking about it longer."

Good stuff. I would like to add that this supposed weapon that Eli Whitney invented to destroy the world is some kind of bomb that looks like an effing dragonball. I'M NOT KIDDING! This movie is probably the worst thing I've seen this year. And that's really tough competition because everything sucks this year. Everything.

F

Movie Review: "Shrek Forever After"

Oh the humanity! Why did we need another Shrek movie?! Quick answer: The last one made more than it cost. Who cares if they were stretching the story of one film over the span of four! As long as there's butts in the seats! It seems as if this is going to be last in this series. That's what they say at least, but they also said that about many other one-named sequel spawning monsters (Freddie, Jason, Jigsaw, Carrie [that's Carrie Bradshaw from Sex and the City. Not Carrie from Carrie based on the novel Carrie by Stephen King {though that sported at least one unnecessary sequel and/or remake as well}]).  However we still have to suffer through this movie and as it so proudly boats, "It's not ogre till its ogre." Who wants to bet the tag-line for Shrek Five-Ever After will be, "It wasn't ogre."

Anyway this movie thinks up some other ridiculous obstacle to put in the way of our favorite two ogre's true happiness. This fumbling of originality is of course covered in a very pretty, fairy-tale-spoofing package. Like with any satirical series that goes on long after it runs out of gas, (Glee anyone?) it has become almost a mockery of itself. Proof of these "creative minds" (awkward, pubescent cousin to Criminal Minds on CBS) losing their touch is clearly evidenced by the plot: Mid-life crisis Shrek gets sucked into an alternate universe and has to re-woo Fiona before the sun comes up or he and his old life cease to exist. If you've resorted to other dimensions, you should probably just pack it in right now. The only story to ever make this sub plot OK was Power Rangers and that's only because all those other dimensions ever consisted of were huge battle rooms adorned with constant fake fog. Maybe, also, it's because I was a kid then, I didn't really understand what was going on, and I though 'alternate dimension' was that studio that made the Mortal Kombat movies (which were, coincidentally enough, often shot in battle rooms with constant fake fog.)

Anyway this is all because of a curse put on by Rumplestilskin who makes a deal with Shrek blah blah blah. I don't care. Neither should you. It's pointless really. It is a completely harmless film. OKish to take the kids too. It's not good Dreamworks like Panda or Dragon but it's not awful Dreamworks like Madagascar or Shark Tale. It falls somewhere in the middle. Its probably even better than the last Shrek film which was just a retread of the second one which was a fancy retread of the first one which was a decently clever retread of Beauty and the Beast. If you miss this you're not missing anything. If you see it you're not totally wasting two hours of your life.  I do want to point out one really ridiculous thing though. One thing that re-proves, even though they had a kinda decent year, that Dreamworks is still a one trick donkey:

Dreamworks face!

C

Soupy Twist

Movie Review: "Prince of Persia"

Called it! If you are a long time blollower or fan (which is basically all of you since I've been at this exactly 58 days) you know that in my wildly acclaimed post, Worst Trailers 2: The Squeakquel I said this: "...mark my words, it will be one of the worst films of [this] year." Consider them marked. Boo to the ya! If you're confused about what's happening here, you're not the only one, sometime my fingers work faster than my brain, but that's not the point!  The point is six months ago I said pretty much everything that needed to ever be said about this film right here. This movie is just a mish mash of crap they pulled from all the other successful movies of this genre and then peanut-butter-and-jellied together into one big old sticky mess. I'm not really going to elaborate on that much, just going to tell you a couple of thoughts I had while getting paid to watch this movie:

• They try to throw in this plot twist where he thinks his brother killed his father, but then it was really his uncle that killed his father. One problem- his uncle is played by Ben Kinglsey. How the f*** do you have an uncle who looks like somebody who might be played by Ben Kinglsey and not immediately know he's the bad guy. I live my life by this principle. Anyone who looks like they could be played by Ben Kinglsey in the eventual made for TV movie of my life, I immediately shun them.  I've never had to bring a mystical dagger of time to the secret guardian temple. Just saying. 
• Once we establish that Ben Kinglsey is actually the bad guy (surprise!) he goes back to a secret lair where he has a group of magic ninja's with grenades who can control the weather and speak parseltongue. Not kidding.
• During one of these some-kind-of-demon summoned sand storms Jake and Hot Princess who hate each other (of course) take refuge in a small tent that, when we see it from the outside, is essentially a blinket draped over some sticks. It looked like Eeyore's hovel. But that's not the point. The point is during the terrible sand storm Jake, Hot Princess, and half of their horse take refuge under it and it is there, for the first time, that their hands caress each others and they look deep into each others eyes. They don't kiss yet because they have to spend the whole rest of the movie looking deep into each others eyes. Too... much... sexual... tension... blaaaaaaa! 
• And just when you thought they couldn't cram one more little cliche in there up pops an end of the world sub plot. Geez. 
• One more thing, this movie is so unoriginal it couldn't even come up with its own score. It had to steal it. From the Mask of Zorro. You can't fool me Jake Gyllenhaal. I saw The Mask of Zorro three times in theaters. I know what the score sounds like!

All in all it was a waste of my time and if I wasn't getting paid for it, I would have started a facebook page, much in the vain of the one that got Betty White to host SNL, to assasinate Jake Gyllenhaal. He was really awful here. Like really awful. Like please remind me if you were ever good in anything awful. The director of this is Mike Newell who is the only man to take over a franchise from bad director Chris Columbus and actually make a worse film (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire). This is even worse than that. 

D-


P.S. Have I plugged this link enough today? (That's what she said)


P.P.S. First person to catch the Community reference gets two free movie tickets.

Movie Review: "Iron Man 2"

Well this is it. What we've all been waiting for. Robert Downy Jr. sporting a red metal suit and a quippy attitude. Again. Unfortunately that's not what we got. What we got was a two hour and thirty minute long prequel to The Avengers- the horrible idea to join Iron Man, Nick Fury, The Hulk, Thor, Captain America and others all together for one big huge epic (fail of a) movie. There's no way The Avengers will be a good movie. With all those stars and all that story the only way it could be even decent is if it were over three hours long and lots of big name people died. That's the only way I'll be satisfied. I think Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) should get eaten by a genetically enhanced smart shark much earlier than expected and The Hulk (Edward Norton) should get curb stomped or curb stomp someone (listen I'll just be happy if someone gets curb stomped). But they won't do that. They can't put these characters in any actual danger because then how will they make The Avengers 2 and Superfriends Vs. The Avengers! It's all a huge gimmick and I hate gimmicks. 

I focus so much time on The Avengers, because that's what this movie wants. It doesn't want us to see a good Iron Man flick (It doesn't show us one). It wants us to see how sweet The Avengers is going to be! Look at everything from the (un) cleverly hidden Captain America shield that turns up in the film to the last seconds of the movie (after the credits) when they set up next summers Avenger's prequel Thor. But if I must say things about this movie then it was your typical sequel- bigger, louder, faster, stronger, and a much, much worse film. Now, lets clear something up: The first Iron Man wasn't nearly as good as people thought it was. They were just confused by Robert Downy Jr.'s comedic timing and facial hair. He's great in both these films and he's really the only reason to see them. Ask anyone who loves the first one why they loved it. "Robert Downy Jr. is awesome!" Ask them what else. "Uhh... explosions?" And those are just the articulate ones. Now Iron Man isn't a bad film by any means. It ranks somewhere between Spider-Man and X2 on the good comic book films list (that's about 4-5 notches from the top if you're wondering), but it's more of a cultural phenomenon like Napoleon Dynamite than it is a great comic book movie like Batman Beings. 

This one had even less going for it since we saw inside their bag of tricks with the first one. They try to insert conflict with Tony Stark slowly dying. Know how I know they ran out of cool ideas? He had to f***ing create a new element to survive. And he does. Over a weekend. Ridiculous. Also they gave Pepper Potts something cool to do in running Stark Industries only to have it yanked out from her by the end of the film because she wants to jump in bed with Tony. Take it from The Office- once the 'will they won't they' sexual tension becomes the "they did" sexual confusion, your series is over. That's how I feel about these movies. They had a great start, but didn't prepare enough pre race and now they're just panting into the finish line. Oh well at least when (not if) they make more, we'll still get to watch RDJ be smart and quippy (until after the third film when they reboot the series with Jake Gyllenhaal.)

C+

Movie Review: "The Joneses"

I'm real behind on my film reviews so lets start here with The Joneses starring a post-X-Files David Duchovney and a mid-Ashton Kutcher Demi Moore. This is a film that actually has a pretty clever premise. Its about a group of people posing as a family who work for a company that sets them up with all the latest and greatest of their sponsor's merchandise and the family attempts to sell it. They pose as the perfect family with all the latest toys and make their neighbors all go out and buy those toys too. Essentially they're walking, talking commercials except the people don't know they're being sold anything. They just buy it because they want to keep up the with the Joneses (Hey! I wonder if that's where they got the name!) It's a pretty cool idea for a movie and that pretty cool idea plays out for about three quarters of the film. Then it descends from "an excellent zeitgeist film" (raves Richard Corliss of TIME magazine) into "the most cliche ending ever thereby ruining the entire hour and a half of film proceeding it and forcing me to release my bowels in the theater in a fit of annoyance" (shouts Radcliff Misseri of Misseri Loves Company).

This movie had a really good thing going- a clever idea, good actors, pretty houses etc.- but then it ruined it all. How? It lost its balls and got a conscious. First thing that it got wrong: We had to see how, by them being good salesmen, they were effectively ruining the lives of everyone around them because everyone around them was forced to buy everything they were selling causing them to go in debt.  This was, of course, The Joneses fault and not the neighbors who were too proud and idiotic to just not buy something they couldn't afford. No, we had to see David Duchovney make that regret face he made everything he didn't ask an alien if the truth was really out there (Spoiler: it's not. I just saved you nine seasons of TV). He had to make the obligatory speech about how he was wrong and he's sorry and blah blah blah (insert moral here). Shameful. Second thing it got wrong: It of course forced a love story where they, through all they've been through being the evil selling people, forsake their great jobs and lives and run off in the sunset together. Third thing it got wrong: The kids in the family, instead of acting like grown professionals who chose this profession and make bank doing it, they act like real messed up kids who hate their lives. Why? This is never explained. I guess it's supposed to be a metaphor for a real family (thats thing it got wrong 3.5). Fourth thing it got wrong: A middle aged man in wet tighty whities. Invest in some boxers man, you spent like eighty grand keeping up with the Joneses. A pack is only like six bucks.  Over all it's a rather clunker of a movie. If they had kept to their premise and not had to feel remorse and regret for doing their job like idiots a much better movie could have come out of this. Oh well. I'm sure they'll remake it in like six months.

C

Movie Review: "Death at a Funeral"

Thank God I got paid to watch this movie as opposed to having to pay for it. What a crap heap. If you read my dissection of this trailer you know how I feel about the fact that this movie was even made. This movie did nothing less than steal a great idea because the people behind it (Chris Rock) couldn't think of any decent ideas of their own. Now I thought maybe this version would stray a bit from the original. You know, attempt to jazz it up or make it more American or something, which would have been a terrible travesty to being with. What they did something even lower. They just basically made the exact same movie with different actors. They didn't even try to adapt it to their own humor or audience. Maybe they knew that would have failed and so they tried to completely steal the other version. In the end they failed even more. The result is kind of like a Tyler Perry version of the British Death at a Funeral (I know you can't hear my sarcasm, so i'll tell you up front, this is not a good thing, though I'm sure Oprah loved this movie).

Now the great thing about the British original is that it was so smart, and witty, and tongue in cheek. They really had some pretty hilarious idea in there. When you try to change it for an American audience which understand neither wit nor smart humor you already have problems. This movie's answer to that; everything the other movie humorously implies, this movie shouts at your face. See, good comedy is like horror films. In a horror film, you want to show the audience as little as possible, because what we can imagine is infinitely more scary than anything a make up artist can create. Good humor is the same way. It doesn't throw the entire joke and why it's funny out there. It gives you a set up and lets you have to figure out why its funny. Basically you have to use your head which is why Americans normally don't make anything very funny. This is also why one of the best comedies of all time, Arrested Development, was cancelled on TV after three and a half while one of the worst, Two and a Half Men, is going into its 8th season. Arrested Development asked you to think and just happened to be brilliant. Two and a Half Men ensures that you will never have to think. Ever.

Not to say this movie doesn't try to be funny though. It does. It tries really hard. It takes everything from the British original and recycles it, but it doesn't have the timing or the wit to pull it off. I don't think I laughed once at this movie because every single 'joke' falls flat. To be a funny actor you have to understand why the material you are given is funny. Just the fact that they thought it'd be a good idea to remake and Americanize this movie proves that they didn't get the humor to begin with, and therefore can't recreate and sell it. It ends up feeling like they're trying too hard, because the ideas in the script are hilarious, but the script and the performances aren't. Oh, but they are trying to be. They're trying really hard. You can't try to be funny in comedy! You just are or you aren't! This film is not.

Not to say there isn't decent parts. I lied before. I said I didn't laugh once. I actually think I laughed twice and both times it was at James Marsden. He's quite funny here. It pales in comparison to Alan Tudyk in the original, but what can you do? Another high point, Peter Dinklage. He and Marsden are the only two in this who give good performances. The rest are over the top or boring. I know it's weird to have both in a comedy, but that's what you get when you're trying too hard.

Chris Rock is a funny guy. I'm not trying to say he's not. I'm just trying to say that he was wrong for remaking this movie. And I'm saying that during his big motivational speech at the end he looks like he's trying to remember his lines. And I'm saying that he kind of looks like the zebra he plays in Madagascar. And I'm wondering if that's wrong to say. And I've decided that I don't care because it's true.

I'll take one moment to set up and share (possibly) the worst joke in this entire more, and trust me there's a lot. Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence are brothers. Chris is going to do the eulogy for his father because he's older (does that make no sense to anyone else?) but Martin is a writer so everyone thinks he should do the speech. When someone points this out to him, he says "But I'm a writer too." The man responds by saying, "We all write checks Aaron." Ooooh, clever.

Anyway this movie is a waste of time and so unnecessary. Rent the original. Seriously. It's hilarious. Skip this by all means. And if you don't skip this, and you pay money to see it, and they make a sequel, I am going to punch you in the throat. You've been warned.

D-

Movie Review: "Kick Ass"

One of the perks about being a manager at a movie theater is I have to (get to) screen films. See, we get reels of film in that are then combined together to make a print. That print is what you see when you go to the movies. To make sure that each print is ready for audience viewing, one of the managers has to screen it before we ever show it to the public. So, the other night I sat down in a theater all by myself at 11:00 pm and got paid to watch Kick Ass. And that it did. This movie totally describes itself.

Somehow this movie manages to be a pretty awesome super hero origin story all the while satirizing the entire genre. While doing this it creates a super hero story that is completely thrilling, surprising and original. It is better than most super hero movies though (and by most I mean nearly all) because you feel that these characters are in legitimate danger the entire time. One major flaw in the super hero genre is how super these characters really are. I couldn't get into Superman Returns at all because anytime Superman would should up the day was saved. The dude's invincible. Or take X-Men for instance, you know they're not going to kill off Wolverine or Storm because they always want to make sequels, and Halle Berry would be mad pissed if she doesn't get the appropriate screen time or her new "sexy Storm" hair cut. There's no real danger and that completely diffuses the suspense. Even Spider-man or Batman who are the most human and deep in this genre, you know that no matter what they go through, they're going to win in the end. That is not the case in this movie.

Kick Ass takes place in the real world. The Narrator, Dave (Kick Ass) Lizewski, makes many references to famous comic books, movies and actors. This is not Gotham City. This is real life New York. These people have no super powers. They are vulnerable human beings. They have special skills sure, but no powers. When these characters suit up, they are risking their lives. The movie pull no punches about this early on. Kick Ass' first attempt at heroism ends pretty badly for him. Also, along this same line, it is constantly apparent that when these heroes kill a bad guys, they're legitimately ending a life. You get that feeling and it adds to the realism in a very interesting way. This isn't 2012 where billions of people are dying and you don't care as long as John Cusack is safe. No, you don't care about the bad guys necessarily, but you're constantly aware that when they die, they die. Throughout the entire movie, they most often die at the hand of an 11 year old girl.

Chloe Grace Moretz seems to be popping up everywhere. She was Joseph Gordon-Levitts younger sister/therapist confidant in last years (500) Days of Summer. I just found out she's playing the female lead in the new Let the Right One In American remake. I can't think of someone better. She's awesome here. She doesn't give an Oscar winning performance or anything, but for an 11 year old who kills scores of people and curses like a sailor, she does a pretty damn good job. Her father is played by Nicholas Cage who is better here than he has been in years (save for The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call- New Orleans which I haven't seen, but heard he's spectacular in.) Aaron Johnson who play Dave/Kick Ass is someone I had never heard of, but he does a pretty good job. He looks a lot like Tobey McGuire in a mask, though, which I'm sure helped him secure the job. He shows a vunerability with Dave that missed on a lot of these super hero performances. Especially when they're teenagers. It works really well. Christopher Mintz-Plasse is the biggest surprise of all to me though. I never would have thought after watching him in Superbad that he would be able to pull off a real performance with depth and nuance. He does that here. He did it in Role Models too. He's really a quite a good actor. His character works for me too, and it's not at all what I expected from the trailers. It's a very well written and well acted part, but I won't say anything more than that.

What really works in Kick Ass is the action. That's what won me over initially. It is expertly crafted and shot by director Matthew Vaughn. It's exciting, frenetic and fun. This movie is better than any movie called Kick Ass has any right to be. Check it out. You won't be disappointed.

A-

Movie Review: "Date Night"

Mild manner couple Phil and Claire Foster (Steve Carell and Tina Fey) just want a simple night on the town. They want one night where they don't go to same family restaurant in their New Jersey town. Just one date night away from the kids and responsibilities. Of course they are rewarded by getting caught up in a dangerous political scandal where they must drive sports cars in car chases, don sexy disguises, and end the corruption once and for all, all the while rediscovering their love for each other and re-igniting their marriage.

This is where Date Night fails. I would have been happy to watch Tina Fey drink milk and make quippy remarks for two hours. Steve Carell used to be funny too, before he played every character exactly like Michael Scott from The Office. They don't need to put these two in a highly formulaic action movie to get butts in the seats. Also, why did these guys need to have problems in their marriage that could only be resolved by a night of car chases and gun fire? That part is too cliche. Fortunately, the problems they have aren't that big or serious. Their really quite silly actually. So much so, it just reaffirms my belief that they didn't really need that subplot; they feel like they've just become really good room mates instead of lovers.

This belief stems from two friends who are getting a divorce for that very reason. He wants, I dunno, man time. She wants to "do" three dudes at once. It's stupid, but it sets up the insecurities for Phil and Claire's marriage. Phil and Claire, however, really have a great marriage. They love each other. They work well together. They're good parents. They're not selfish. They're kind of the best hollywood marriage I've ever seen. One that show that it's not about the excitement and getting what you want, it's about loving your spouse and catering to what they need. That's why it annoys me so much that they have to discover that they're indeed missing out on something. Sometimes marriage is being really good room mates. I know I haven't been married publically before, but I wanted their marriage. It was sweet and fun and funny. Oh well, I guess if everything was fine to begin with they wouldn't need car chases to rediscover themselves. That's Hollywood.

Where this movie succeeds? Two words; Tina Fey. She's maybe the most likable entertainer in the business at the moment in that: A. She wrote a high school teen drama and made it hilarious and awesome (Mean Girls). B. She actually made SNL worth watching for a small amount of time (Weekend Update). And C. She makes me not only watch, but enjoy watching Tracy Morgan (30 Rock). On top of that she has the most consistently funny sitcom on television (30 Rock is ending its fourth season just as strong or strong than its past seasons). Name one other person capable of any of that. Pretty much everything she says is hilarious in this movie too. She's worth the price of the ticket alone. Steve Carell is pretty good, but i've grown quite bored of him. He, like his famous sitcom, The Office, fails to evolve as a entertainer and therefore is just tired and predictable. He was decent in this film, but I felt like I'd seen it all before. Try something new! Over all, I really enjoyed Date Night because its flaws are very small parts of the film and Tina Fey is a very big part.

B-

Movie Review: "The Ghost Writer"

This movie, starring a solid Ewan McGregor and directed by the world famous (and infamous) Oscar winning director, Roman Polanski, is a very good film. The title, however, is unfortunate. It's a completely appropriate and logical title for what the film is, don't get me wrong. It just has the unfortunate problem of being confused with this movie:

Or perhaps even works, this after school teen drama:

The former was an atrociously bad comic book revenge movie starring Nicholas Cage. The latter, a 90s show about a bright light (the ghost writer!) that zipped around and helped preteens learn to read or solve murders or something. (The highlight for me is the mid-thirties mail woman affectionately named, "Grandma Jenkins.")

This, however is a different movie entirely. When they don't take the form of moving balls of alien light, ghost writers, in real life, are hired to be the unofficial author of something written by a famous person. They do all the work. The famous person gets all the credit. Many autobiographies are written this way. Songs too. For instance, when Miley Cyrus published her autobiography, Miles to Go, I'm going to venture a (educated) guess that it was the ghost, not Miley, who did the writing. I make this educated guess with the knowlege that had Miley, herself, indeed written said book, it would have looked much more like this, "i m soooooo much bttr thn that selena gomez. m i rite? l8r h8r!"

In any case, McGregor plays the "Ghost" to former British prime minister Adam Lang (Pierce Brosnan). Surrounded by recent scandal, Lang has taken up residence in a multimillion dollar house on an island off the east coast. This is where much of the action takes place, though perhaps action isn't the word. Many people complain that this film is boring. I agree to an extent. I think it is boring to anyone who's used to the plot of whatever film their watching dragging them along as quickly as possible so as not to lose them. That's how we, Americans, commonly make films anyway. There's even explosions in Julia Roberts movies for pete's sake. This film takes its time. It's risky to put out a film like this in a time when most movie goers expect to be thrilled and surprised. This film did thrill and surprise me. I just had to be patient first.

So much of this film is mood. The location where they shot is stunning. It's grey and nearly always rainy. (A metaphor for how this dishonored ex diplomat feels as the world turns against him perhaps?) There is a mystery here, but it doesn't neatly unfold at just the expected time the way that most films of this genre do. It's much too smart and well made for that. You can always tell when you're watching the work of a master director. Everything feels so exact, so planned and organized. As if he has firmly grasped your hand and is leading you through this story. You get that sense here. Say what you will about Polanski's personal life and his past sins, but they're completely irrelevant here. His direction is what should be discussed and it's flawless.

The highlight of this film is Olivia Williams. She's been in many things over the years, but perhaps never really give the right role or the freedom to shine. And here, shine she does. She's fantastic and its possibly the best part of the film. The other acting is quite strong too. Kim Cattrall fubbs her British accent pretty spectacularly every time she speaks, but McGregor and Brosnan both do some of their best work in years.

There was something that struck me as interesting (and distracting) during this film, however. Numerous times they dubbed over the f word with other words tv stlye. I would suggest maybe they read my previous post on the subject, however 'chicken faggot' was no where to be found either. It was odd and off setting and I'm not sure why they did it. Probably to garner a PG-13 rating in hopes to do more business, but in this day and age that hardly seems necessary. This, however, is only one small mistep in what truely is a great film.

A-

Movie Review: "Repo Men"

Did anyone ever see Repo: The Genetic Opera? Me neither. But it came out a year or two ago and had the exact same plot as this movie. People who can't pay for their new organs have them ripped out by a repo man. That one, however is a musical with Paris Hilton and Alexa Vega. Whatever you think about this movie, you'd probably have to admit it's the lesser of two evils. But, I really want to know how they got away with making this one, stealing the plot from such a recent movie. I know! I know! They repo'ed that movie's plot because it didn't make enough money in theaters or on video to pay for itself! That must be it.

Anyway, this incarnation at least stars some decent actors. Jude Law. Forrest Whitaker. Liev Schreiber. These guys rock. Why'd they sign onto this? Well I just have to guess that the recession is hitting Hollywood too. This movie also stars Alice Braga who never read a bleak, post apocalyptic script she didn't like. I Am Legend. Blindness. This. Next she's going to be in the new Robert Rodriguez directed Predators. She's the Jamie Lee Curtis of end of the world movies.

In spite of all that it is, I really think this movie had an interesting idea. With people dying from organ failure every day, it's not too far fetched to believe that we would try to find a way to create artificial organs to assist us in living. Have they already done this? What do I look like to you? Someone who reads science magazines?! No, I'm perfectly fine with my Entertainment Weekly, thank you. Anyway despite the slightly intriguing concept, this movie goes wrong fairly quickly. I really hate it when characters act out of character just to drive the plot. This happens in the form of Jude Laws wife, who is almost too much of a chicken faggot to be believed for most of her screen time. She is given no motivation or reason really. She just is. Why? Because we need her to be to get Jude Law to where he needs to be for the rest of this 'story'.

It goes from predictable to much worse with Jude Law- who now has a fake heart he can't pay for pumping blood through his veins- and Alice Braga running away from once friend Forest Whitaker. Of course eventually they decide they must pull a matrix and break into the huge corporation to cancel their overdue organs out of the system so they can escape forever. They meet only enough guards to do a couple of slow-mo segments of people getting shot up before they get to where they need to be. Then it gets more ridiculous.

In the end it tries to turn into a much less compelling and thought out, Vanilla Sky, which I actually totally saw coming. If you've seen Vanilla sky, you can probably guess the ending as well. If you haven't I won't ruin that great movie for you by telling you the ending of this one. Part of me really does want to ruin this one for everyone though, just to punish it for repo-ing two hours out of my life.

D

Soupy Twist.

Movie Review: "How to Train Your Dragon"

Let me start this review off by saying something that I know is going to be contraversial. Dreamworks Animation Studios doesn't know how to make films. They know how to make gimmicks and market them to the right audience. Shrek 3, Monsters Vs. Aliens, and both Madagascars are prime examples of this. They do, however occasionally, strike gold and this fortunately is one of those times. In fact I would put How to Train Your Dragon solidly in the top one or two spot in their entire cannon. It's battling, of course with Kung Fu Panda. Both of these films are rapturously beautiful and when the beauty is on screen it distracts from the clamor of most of the characters.

The sad thing is, even at its absolute best, Dreamworks can't touch the lowliest of Pixar films. Well, maybe Cars, but still. Why is this? Story. I happen to know a someone who works for Pixar and she shared with me that they place all their thought and emphasis on the story. It is their highest priority. They will throw out months of animation work if they realize the story is lacking. This is what film making is about. Story. So few other film makers realize or even care about this fact.

The story of How to Train Your Dragon is pretty much the same exact story you've seen in every other movie ever. The likable outsider is ridiculed by everyone on the inside. He wants to fit in. He's not good enough. Then, he finds he has a special talent that none of the others have (in this case it's training dragons!). Of course tragedy strikes and he must display his special talent and save the village. In the end everyone loves him. Yay! This is where this film goes wrong. Pretty much all the time Hiccup (said outsider) spends in his Viking village is torn right out of the pages of the cliche handbook. His father is disappointed in him. In the end he accepts him! The girl he wants thinks he's a loser. In the end she gives him a very awkward kiss in front of the whole village! Everyone thinks he's a failure. In the end everyone loves him and realizes he was right all along and change their two hundred year old mindsets and customs to accommodate his! Sorry, erm... SPOILER ALERT. The other characters in the village are just characatures voiced by loud, popular comedians aimed at getting more people into the theater. See what I mean about gimmick?

When Hiccup gets away to... ahem... train his dragon, Toothless is when the movie soars out of its cliches into something really magical. There's little talking, but lots of story and it's way more interesting to me than watching a bunch of annoying Vikings make current pop culture jokes. Toothless, animated with that characteristics of cats and dogs and other animals I'm sure, really pops off the screen. He is such a vivid character and never says a word. Their flying scenes together are amazing. Worth the price of the ticket alone. Their relationship is pretty touching too. I don't know why the whole movie isn't this way. They think they have to add in the stupid loud characters for the kids, yet WALL*E proved kids will still love a movie with no talking. They'll love this one too. When they get out of the theater and they're talking about the movie do you know who they'll be talking about? Not the Jonah Hill voiced Snotlout. Or even America Ferrera as the love interests, Astrid. They'll be talking about Toothless and Hiccup. They won't care that they weren't speaking. They be entraced, like I was, by their story.

Now I know I'm being harsh here. This is actually one of the better films I've seen recently. I just know that it had much more potential had they been a little riskier and not fallen into their comfort zones. There is something that they do at the end which was pretty surprising and pretty impressive on a storytelling level. I won't ruin it for you but kudos to them for that. All in all it was a good film. Worth a watch.

B

Movie Review: "Clash of the Titans"

There's nothing more desperate than filming an entire movie in 2D technology, and then after seeing the success that Avatar had in 3D, pushing back your movie a week and hastily converting the whole thing into 3D. This is the problem with the film industry. It's all about the money and not about the craft. We are currently in one of the worst recessions in our countries history. That, if nothing else, should tip off to the fact that Americans really don't know how to spend their money wisely. That's mirrored in their making Transformers 2 the second highest grossing film last year, and people actually going to see this in 3D. It's sad and stupid but people do it. Good for them, as businessmen, to ride on the coat tails of a much better and revolutionary film. Bad for them as film makers.

You can say what you want about Avatar and its story. Yes we've seen those elements before, but no one can argue that it wasn't a gorgeous, mind-blowing visual feast; an experience in 3D unlike any we've ever seen or probably will see for a while (at least until Avatar 2). I cannot fault films like Up or How to Train Your Dragon, because these were actually made in 3D. Also they implement 3D in the way that Avatar did- to enhance the story, not distract from it. Films like Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans that convert later not only look like piss but are just a gimmick to get more money out of their mediocre films. It's annoying.

Now I know this is supposed to be a review about the film and I have barely mentioned it so here we go. It wasn't awful. It was exactly what you expect with this kind of movie; lots of action, not much dialogue or acting. It desperately tries to be better ancient war adventure films with everything from short skirts (Gladiator) to fun/crazy side characters (Braveheart). Don't forget monsters who see through their hands (Pan's Labyrinth)! I will admit, I had fun. I've been getting into Greek Mythology a lot lately, and that aspect of it was interesting to me. Was it accurate? Probably not. But what do you expect?! They're action film makers! Not historians or book readers!

I did like this film. It wasn't good but I enjoyed it for what it was. Ralph Fiennes, always terrific, makes for a legitimately frightening Hades. And what the frak is up with Liam Neeson constantly playing ficticious gods?



(He voiced Aslan in the Narnia movies if you don't get the reference)

C-

Soupy Twist.

Movie Review: "Diary of a Wimpy Kid"

Ok I know what you're thinking and I just want to preface that by saying that I have an eleven year old sister who I took this to. If you've read my previous posts you know how I feel about awful kids films- Anyone who watches them should be sent to an island with no food or water, forced to survive in an uncanny 'Lord of the Flies' type situation. (I will also accept 'The Most Dangerous Game'). I know it sounds cruel, but our countries intellect is rotting and I've created a graph to clearly show exactly what's responsible for this. WARNING: This may be disturbing.



As you can see, based on the research 'Crappy Kids Films' is by and large the greatest reason for the dumbing down of America's youth. I am a HUGE advocate against this if you haven't already noticed.

This movie, however, doesn't really fall in that category. No, it's not great, but it is surprisingly amusing. It has a sort of go for broke humor that, unlike most Disney Channel Originals, actually works here. Stuff like a Jr. High newspaper with a front page story that reads, "Cheerleader Gains Pound." That's moderately funny stuff. At least for something marketed at kids that wasn't made by Pixar.

There was one scene that was ridiculous however. The Wimpy Kid and his overweight friend are playing outside in the snow, but instead of back in the old days when you would either go someplace that had snow, or cover a set in white stuff so it looked like snow, the makers of this movie saw fit to shoot the whole scene on a green screen and digitally insert the street covered in snow afterwards. Suffice to say, it looks like chont.

There is one reason, mainly, that I am recommending this movie. (Maybe recommending isn't the right word... hmmm... not completely trashing..?) The reason has a one word answer. Like Freddie or Jason or Rocky or Cher this character needs no more than one name. That name; Fregley! I'm not even sure I'm spelling it right, nor do I care. This kid was hilarious. I would watch an entire movie about him. Forget these normal, full of themselves prepubescents! Lets explore Freglie's world with his special freckle and taxadermied cryptid! His nearly scary friendliness and that amazing unicorn costume. He, for me, single handedly saved this movie from mediocrity.

"I can hear you breathing Greg Heffley."

C

Soupy Twist.

P.S. If you guys can't see the graph clearly click on it. It should take you to a window where you can read it better.