Unknown

I am writing this review half asleep, but that shouldn't matter, and in fact it may be fitting for this film, because Liam Neeson looked like he was generally half asleep while making it.

I'm not saying that Unknown is a BAD movie, only that it could have been much much better.

The action starts with Dr. Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) and his wife Elizabeth (January Jones) arriving in Berlin for a biological conference of some kind. A luggage mishap sends Martin back towards the airport when a car crash derails his vacation plans and sends his reality spinning.

It seems that a coma has dropped Martin Harris off the face of the Earth. He finds his wife, who doesn't recognize him and is married to a man who has assumed his identity. Martin must unravel the mystery of who he is, or was; is his situation the result of a brain injury, or is he caught up in a sinister plot?

I checked the film out with my friends Jeff, Casey, and Greyson. While we were somewhat divided on how we felt about the film overall, we all agreed on what was wrong with it, so I'll start there. (I think a simple Pros/Cons list should be easy enough at this hour...)

Cons:

1. It is Stupid

Specifically, the ending is stupid. Without giving too much away, there is at one point a giant digital clock attached to... something...(use your imagination) which is completely and ridiculously unnecessary.

Besides that, the viewer is required to take a few too many leaps of faith for my liking.

Also I'd like to point out that, while the marketing team for Unknown would like you to believe it is an action packed thriller, there are only very few adrenaline-soaked moments. Mostly, Martin goes about uncovering the mystery the peaceful (read: boring) way. You know, running around Berlin, telling his crazy story to anyone who will listen.

2. January Jones

Ouch. She was really bad in this. Jeff pointed out a moment in the film, when Martin has tracked her down, that the audience (the one's who didn't watch the trailer anyway) learns that she no longer recognizes him. She did that little head tilt to the side, you know like a dog? Here I'll just show you:




I still to this day have not seen Jones project any emotion in a role other than icy ruthlessness. She's beautiful and all, but seriously, it might be time to hang it up. She hasn't improved since the 2003 Adam Sandler flick Anger Management, which says a lot.

She wasn't alone in this film though... most of the acting was pretty subpar, even from Liam and Inglourious Basterd's Diane Kruger.

3. The Corny Subplot

If you've seen the movie, you get it.



Ok, it's time for...

Pros:

1. High Production Value

The writers and actors may have phoned it in, but the production crew tried their darndest to make up for it. For the most part the movie looks and sounds great. At this point in film making history, anything not shot exclusively in front of a green-screen is good in my book. This movie gets props for using real locations in Berlin, and having actual sets with pretty good set design.

Take a decent, extended action sequence and some fairly well done "trippy" parts, and the filmmakers could have had a good movie on their hands. Oh well.

2. Bruno Ganz

Ganz, who played in one of my favorite movies, Wings of Desire, is the lone acting standout. Jurgen, an ex-Stasi private detective, is an early ally for Harris, and helps him piece the mystery together. This sickly old man provided pretty much the only tension I felt in the film, while waiting for the tottering, coughing old man to suddenly keel over in every shot.


3. SPOILER ALERT!!




January Jones got blown up.




The film is entertaining enough if you go into it with low enough expectations. I did and enjoyed the few moments of quality enough to not give it a failing grade. Unknown does take itself too seriously however, which annoyed me. I would have liked the film more if it accepted its own cheesiness. As it stands, Unknown is a poor man's Bourne.



Attendance: 3/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 1/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Plot: 2/5
Action: 1/5
Liam Neeson < 90's Harrison Ford




Overall: 5/10

Just Go With It

There are some actors who compel you to see every film they are in, because you never know what to expect. Actors like Daniel Day-Lewis, Russell Crowe, even Leonardo DiCaprio of late.

And then there is Adam Sandler.

Sandler has played the same part for the better part of twenty years and is still reeling in massive audiences. He may have had more misses than hits over the last decade, but box office wise the eternal man-boy is going strong.

Some of you may remember my scorn filled review of his last effort, Grown Ups, which was my least favorite film of the year. Well, you can put all your fears of a repeat aside because Just Go With It was welcomely, shockingly, mediocre! Huzzah, Mr. Sandler!

The plot of Just Go With It centers on Sandler's Danny, a shallow plastic surgeon (is there any other kind?) who is caught in a web of lies as he tries to bed a beautiful, much younger teacher Palmer, played by new-comer Brooklyn Decker of Sports Illustrated fame. The rookie actress held her own playing the dumb blonde here and she could make a career of it, but lets hope her self esteem convinces her to try other career paths.

Just Go With It also stars Jennifer Aniston as Danny's endlessly loyal assistant Katherine, whom he finagles into posing as his soon to be ex-wife.

Naturally, the lie begins to roll out of control, and rather than just admitting the truth, simple as it may be, Danny is soon buying a weekend get away at a posh Hawaii resort for Palmer, Katherine, her two kids, and Danny's cousin Eddie (Nick Swardson, who as far as I could tell was only there for "comic" relief; his often unfunny character was a low point in the movie).

There are actually some laughs to be had in Just Go With It, which was a relief. Sandler's one liners and funny voices actually hit their mark more often than not, and Katherine's kids (named Kikidee and Bart by Danny) were also a comedic high point. Their smart milking of the situation was good for quite a few chuckles at least.

As promised by the trailer there is plenty of female flesh on display, which could be what pushed this film to a weekend box office victory over the Bieb. Having Decker come out of the water Ursula Andress style in a too-small bikini was a no brainer. But Aniston, at 41 years old, held her own in a later scene and was the more appealing female character throughout the film, making Danny look like even more of an idiot.

As mentioned earlier, amongst the low points of the film is Swarsdon's character who really just seems along for the ride. His incessant antics were mildly entertaining at best, and at one point I honestly hoped his character would be killed by a feral pig. Alas, no such luck.

The film has some stretches of poorly directed and edited exposition at its beginning, as well as some mistimed physical gags. The introduction of Palmer into Danny's life happens mind-numbingly fast even by romcom standards. However, the movie was saved by some good lines and a few well used cameos and small appearances.

At the end of the day, regardless of quality this film will break 100 million box office just because Sandler is in it. I'm ok with that, having learned to accept it as one of the immutable laws of Hollywood (along with biopic+big name= Oscar nomination). I only hope that audiences going to see it are ok with accepting the immutable laws of Adam Sandler; He will play a morally suspect man, learn a few lessons about love and honesty along the way, and there will be nut shots.

Attendance: 3/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 3/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 3/5
Plot: 2/5
Best Running Gag: Plastic surgery gone wrong

Overall: 6/10

The Social Network

I remember when I first heard they were making a Facebook movie.

To call my reaction "mixed" would be a compliment. I was genuinely amused that such a trivial topic would be adapted to a film. "A movie about Facebook? HA!" (My exact words at the time).

But then details began trickling in. David Fincher was attached to direct Aaron Sorkin's screenplay. The trailer revealed the film to be more a biopic of Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg than anything else. Despite the apparent involvement of Justin Timberlake, The Social Network was starting to look like it had promise.

So I went into the theatre with a reasonable amount of expectation. Knowing Fincher's ouevre, it is hard to go into any of his films without expecting to be entertained. And happily, The Social Network delivered.

From the opening of the movie we are immediately clued into one glaring fact; Mark Zuckerberg is not the most socially adept person in the world. The irony that such an introverted person created the world's largest social networking site is prevalent throughout the film, as Zuckerberg manages to alienate his school, his family, and his friends all while on the quest for the millionth Facebook member.

In typical Fincher form, the cinematography is dark and brooding. Much of the action is confined to the dorm rooms and exclusive clubs of Harvard, with the occasional jaunt forward in time to the law office board rooms where litigations against Zuckerberg took place. The screenplay weaves in and out of the telling of Facebook's creation in the mid 2000's and the more recent legal actions against it by both the Winklevoss brothers, who claim Zuckerberg stole their idea for the massive social site, and former Facebook CFO Eduardo Saverin, claiming he was bilked out of his stock option when the company went public.

All the back story and intrigue makes for a fascinating account about how something that we now all take for granted came to be.

Jesse Eisenberg (Zombieland) is a revelation as the wormish Zuckerberg. I was surprised at how well he performed the character's social isolation whilst becoming the corporate world's darling. The rest of the supporting cast is also well up to the task. Andrew Garfield (about to turn up as Peter Parker in the Spiderman reboot) was earnest in his portrayal of Saverin, and Armie Hammer provided many humorous moments in his dual roles as the somewhat foppish Winklevoss twins.

The film is of course not without its shortcomings. For those who want some real action in their films, look elsewhere. The Social Network consists of a bunch of nerds talking about nerdy things, and lawyers talking about lawyerly things, sometimes at the same time! But it was all interesting to me.

Also, forget about finding any strong female characters. The most prolific woman in the story begins her character arc performing sexual acts in a bar bathroom and ends it setting a fire in an apartment.

The Social Network has been called the Citizen Kane of our time. While it doesn't match the quality of the latter, Fincher's film is similar in its portrayal of a flawed but ultimately well meaning media mogul. The backstory of the making of Facebook proves to be worthy of a feature film. In a time when very few original movies are coming out, The Social Network is a welcome find at the theater.



Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 3/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Plot: 4/5
Acting Performances: 4/5
Timberlake Douchiness Factor: 6/5



Overall: 8/10

You Again

I was somewhat reluctant to go see You Again. I mean, I had seen the trailer and already knew everything I needed to know. Small town girl is ridiculed in high school, goes on to become pretty and successful, and returns home only to find her brother marrying the girl who made her life miserable in high school, thus regressing back to her high school self. Oh, and Betty White shows up and some point, as she is going to do in every romantic comedy from here on out until she dies or her sudden unexplained popularity falls by the wayside.

I COULD have just written a half assed review, based on the trailer, and none of you would be the wiser. However, I am glad I actually went to see the film so that I can tell you all not to go see it, as it was a complete waste of time and the talent of everyone involved.

And there is a LOT of talent, here. Besides White, the cast includes both Jamie Lee Curtis and Sigourney Weaver, as well as the charming Kristin Bell in the lead as Marni. Add to that some impressive cameos and you could have had the makings of a real success.

Unfortunately, You Again falters out of the gate and never manages to gain back any ground. The film is uneven, unfunny, and implausible. A sloppily directed opening introduces Marni as an awkward teenager, speaking to a camera for the High School time capsule (new pet peeve- web cam shots which are popping up everywhere, from Avatar to Easy A). We see her being tormented, as the entire school, led by Odette Yustman's Joanna, singing "We Are the Champions", picks her up and puts her outside, locking the door. Huh? This scene was so weird and so unnatural, I never recovered. Did the writer/director/anyone actually get harassed in high school? Because it wouldn't appear so.

Anyway, years later Marni is revealed to be an attractive and successful publicist. She returns home to find out, to her horror, somehow her brother is marrying the girl who made her life a living hell and, no one has any clue about it at all. Even Joanna herself seems to have no memory of her actions.

She has the family around her little finger, too, all the more vexing to Marni, who decides the only course of action is to reveal Joanna for who she was, in high school. I know, makes no sense. Well, its not my fault.

The film relies on pratfalls and shenanigans of the basest form. Marni falling into an anthill (HA...) her mom getting sprayed in the face with water (ha....), or that dude Marni likes getting hit in the face (hmm). This would be ok, except NONE of the schtick is actually funny. I thought I was going to make it through the entire film without laughing once, but a brilliant cameo appearance (I'll keep it a secret to force you to go see this movie*) in the last five minutes saved the day. Too bad I had to slog through 100 minutes of sloppy and ridiculous You Again to get there.

Marni nearly succeeds in her devious plan, but the dream wedding does indeed happen, of course not before the bride and groom both befall their own "funny" injuries, landing them both in the hospital. So, the dream wedding takes place in a hospital cafeteria, complete with Hall and Oates. Yeah, ok.

Oh, and for the record, I didn't include Yustman in my discussion on talent because... well, you can figure that out for yourself.


Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 0/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 1/5
Plot: 2/5
(*Just Kidding): It was Cloris Leachman

Overall: 4/10

Easy A

I saw Easy A on opening night, and was pretty impressed with the turnout. I'd say there were about 6 groups of at least ten young teen girls (what message did THEY get from this film, I wonder?), and a few girls in their twenties who dragged along their boyfriends, myself included.

I will be the first to admit that I didn't walk into the film with the highest expectations. I have little reason to expect anything from a female centered high school comedy because A. these films are not meant for my demographic and B. there hasn't been a good one made since Mean Girls. Well, imagine my surprise when Easy A turned out to be one of the more mature and intelligent films I have seen in a long while.

Granted, it isn't spectacularly funny or introspective, but it sure wasn't boring either. Emma Stone is charismatic as the main character Olive, a girl who sullies her squeaky clean reputation in order to increase her social standing. An interesting study in Shavian class structures and existentialism, or just a simple minded teenage comedy? It could be viewed either way, which can't be said about many other films of this ilk.

(Am I looking too deep into this?... Probably. Moving on.)

Olive accidentally starts a rumor concerning her own sexual prowess. Rather than squelch the rumor, she instead provokes its spreading amongst her peers. In no time she is a well known harlot, who secretly allows the nerds and losers to say they had sex with her in exchange for gift cards and coupons.

Things get complicated when Amanda Bynes' Marianne, an overtly religious promoter of abstinence, takes it upon herself to rid the school of Olive's influence.

Strong casting aids in pulling this film past the line of respectability. Thomas Hayden Church and Lisa Kudrow are the married teacher/counselor team who have problems of their own. Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci are perfect as Olive's trusting and over-sharing parents. And Penn Badgely, who supposedly is from some stupid TV show, turns up as the school mascot/Olive's long time crush, and the only boy in the school who seems to be impervious to the gossip web.

I have to say that I had a tough time understanding Olive's motivation. Social standing is nice, yes, but at what cost? Hopefully someone can explain to me what exactly it is about being popular that outranks being respected.

Even so, I still enjoyed Easy A overall. the most humor came in the scenes between Olive and her parents, but the rest of the film was not lacking in laughs. And the film's depiction of the teenaged gossip mill as it is today was spot on. This is the Ferris Bueller of this generation. Ok, maybe thats going a bit far, but you get the idea.


Attendance: 4/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 4/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Humor: 4/5
Plot: 3/5
Amanda Bynes: Should stay retired; ick



Overall: 7/10

Resident Evil: Afterlife

Since no one actually VOTED for this movie, the review will be short and sweet.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I haven't seen ANY of the other Resident Evil movies, just played the games.

Basically I went into the theater with very minimal expectations.

So I was not at all surprised when I viewed a ho hum mash up of action and horror movie cliches that was barely worth the price of admission, clocking in at an hour and a half. This is one of those rare movies that could have been better if it were a bit longer, if the dramatic tension played out for longer, a little more exposition here or there, etc.

Resident Evil: Afterlife is a film that is all style and little if any substance.

For those who don't know the back story of Resident Evil, the Umbrella Corporation has unleashed a deadly virus that transforms people into zombies and has wiped out most of civilization.

In the opening act Alice (Milla Jovovich) and her clones storm the evil Umbrella corporation's headquarters en masse. The real Alice stows away on the evil dude (didn't catch his name)'s escape helicopter as the base self destructs. As they fight on the helicopter is crashes, and Alice brushes herself off and gets in a plane and flies away or something. Yeah, I was confused.

The meat of the film is Alice's search for Arcadia, a refuge for survivors of the virus that has devastated the planet.

She meets up with a small group of survivors holed up in an abandoned prison, surrounded by a crowd of infected. This is where the horror elements come into play, and where the movie (briefly) shines.

Unfortunately, the rest is just too bogged down with "action movie coolness". Infinite ammo guns, ninja stars, bullet time... this is all stuff I have seen before in other movies, far too many times. It is not 1999 anymore, it is high time to do away with bullet time.

Some pros include the music score, with was uniformly pretty cool, and the production design, although much of it is CG. The movie looks and sounds very good. Also the acting is decent, nothing Oscar caliber here of course but serviceable for this type of movie.

Cons include most everything story wise, although perhaps I should indeed have watched the first three (...naaah...). The plot and characters are so two dimensional that the whole film feels flat, even if it is in 3D.

Oh and speaking of the 3D, it is nothing revolutionary, and mostly only pops up in the action segments (duh) but it was fairly well done and not headache inducing. Can't say it really added anything to the film however.

On the whole, Resident Evil: Afterlife cannot be faulted too much because it is exactly what fans of the franchise wanted, I'm sure. More action, more violence, more gore. Story and characters are always secondary in these movies.

It is always a shame when you see filmmakers keep churning out the same formulaic stories with different action sequences plugged in, but long as audiences keep paying for it, its hard to blame them.




Attendance: 0/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 0/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Action: 3/5
Plot: 2/5
Reloads: None




Overall: 5/10

Machete

If you are like me and the five other people who went to see Grindhouse in theaters, you will probably agree that the fake trailers were arguably more entertaining than the double feature of Planet Terror and Death Proof. Of all the trailers, the one that was far and away the most memorable to me was Machete. With its awesome tag line ("They f#*#ed with the wrong Mexican") and the casting of Danny Trejo, the trailer was funny and believable. I was not at all surprised when I heard Robert Rodriguez was developing the story into its own feature.

They did a remarkable job in staying true to the original trailer! Same Machete, same bad guy, same Cheech. It is awesome how lots of the stuff they shot for the trailer made it into this film. It is pretty clear Rodriguez was planning on expanding it all along.

The film is exactly what you would expect. Lots of gore, lots of exploding things, lots of hot, mostly naked girls. In short, a very loving homage to the seventies exploitation flicks (If African American entries are "blaxploitation, is Machete "mexploitation"?)

The main difference here from the trailer is the casting of the other main roles. Rodriguez did a superb job rounding up a big name cast including Robert De Niro, Jessica Alba, and Lindsay Lohan (I know, I know, but she basically played herself so it worked).

De Niro plays a parody of George W. Bush, a Texas senator who is dead set against illegal immigration, favoring an electric fence and even more radical measures. Ex-Federale Machete is hired to assassinate the senator, but the whole plot falls apart and he must go on the run from the authorities as well as the man who hired him.

Along the way he encounters many luscious ladies, including Alba and Michelle Rodriguez, who operates a Taco truck by the hardware store and might have some ulterior motives.

The whole package of the film is hard to fault. The plot is a one dimensional revenge saga, the gore is over the top, and the serious scenes are intentionally cheesy. It all works on the level of "tribute", and it works well. Don't see this movie if you are in the mood for serious drama. If you are interested in learning fun new ways to rappel down three stories (hint: the human intestine is 60 feet long!), then you need to see this film.



Attendance: 3/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 4/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 4/5
Action: 4/5
Close up cut-away of something sharp: Its going in someone's face later




Overall: 8/10

The Switch

I took the opportunity to combine blog business with my personal affairs, killing two birds with one stone by taking Stephanie with me to see The Switch. I figured it looked like a perfect date movie, although she did pay for the two of us, hmm. Well anyway, I guess I am a crappy boyfriend.

I was right about The Switch, though. It is downright charming. Not my favorite quality in a film, mind you, but when that is what the flick is going for I cannot fault it for succeeding.

I haven't been pleasantly surprised by many films recently, but this one was better than I had feared. I didn't know anything about it beyond the basic premise (guy stuck in friend zone drunkenly impregnates his gal pal). The writers could have had a field day with that set up. In the hands of Judd Apatow and Co. we might have ended up with Knocked Up 2: Knocked Up Harder or something, but instead the film is understated, touching on the purely comedic aspects of the predicament early before settling in to the more emotional stuff later.

That being said, it is important to point out that The Switch is not altogether that funny. It was marketed as a straight forward rom-com but really that is only a half truth. Jeff Goldblum is humorous as Leonard, Wally (Jason Bateman)'s wry confidant, while Juliette Lewis plays Debbie, Kassie (Jennifer Aniston)'s BFF, with bizarre vigor. The two supporting players inject much of the comedy into the film.

The two leads, however, are spared from the typical pratfalls and physical gags that are so annoyingly common to the chick flick genre (although Bateman does have some good drunken scenes). Instead, the two are given scenes and lines that actually carry emotional weight, especially Bateman in his interactions with his supposed son Sebastian.

Ah yes, the boy. Played by Thomas Robinson, Sebastian could not have been any cuter if the casting director tried. Child actors miss the mark all too often in films such as this, especially when given such a heavy load, but the young Robinson was fine. His scenes with Bateman are the highlight of the film.

At the end of the night, I left the theater satisfied. Not emotionally taxed, not questioning the meaning of life or anything like that, but satisfied. Bottom line, The Switch isn't great, but I applaud it for trying to be different.


Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 2/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 2/5
Acting Performances: 4/5
Discuss: Diane Sawyer= Arousing? Yea or nay



Overall: 6/10

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

You guys chose for me to go see Scott Pilgrim vs. the World last weekend and I obliged, heading to the Friday night showing with Stephanie.

I went into the theater with absolutely no expectations. I have never read the graphic novel on which the film is based, so I didn't know what was coming my way. The film wasted little time showing its hand; by the time the Universal logo appears, you will be clued into the uber-geeky nature of the Scott Pilgrim universe.

If you have never played one of the old 8 bit Nintendo systems, or heck, video games in general, 90% of the humor in Scott Pilgrim will zoom miles over your head. Fortunately for me, I am somewhat of a dork, so I enjoyed all the little inside jokes.

Visually, the movie brings much of the graphic novel aesthetic with it. Split screen shots, visual representations of sounds, explosions of hearts when Scott kisses the girl of his dreams Ramona, etc. This one of the most visually impressive films I have seen since 300.

It seems that every frame has been constructed with the greatest care by director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead). From the intimate romance scenes to the spectacular "battles" between Scott and Ramona's evil exes, the entire film is stimulating to the aural and visual sensibilities.

The "battles" are amazing. You would think that Scott fighting seven different exes would get old, but each one is unique and rewarding in its own way. My favorite involves a sonic fight between Scott's band The Sex Bob-ombs (Mario joke) and the Katayanagi brothers.

That brings me to the music. I don't know why, but the thrashy amateurish punk rock of Scott's band seemed to fit the film perfectly. The band members are earnest, aware of their own mediocrity yet still determined to make it to the top. Alison Pill is especially memorable as Kim, Scott's own ex and the band's Animal-esque drummer.

I know I have dissed Michael Cera before for simply playing himself in every movie. He does more of that here, but also shows a side of himself that I have not yet seen. He has a chance in the later fights to play the badass, albeit a nerdy one.

So I enjoyed the film for its quirks, its visuals, its music, and its action. The story takes a back seat in this one, but thats ok. I suppose to enjoy it you have to be able to accept the premise that a woman's evil exes are joined into a guild by her evilest ex to keep her from dating other guys. I accepted it, and found a considerable amount of fun in Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.


Attendance: 4/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 1/5
Crowd Response: 4/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Humor: 4/5
Plot: 3/5
Thank God: They didn't make this in 3D



Overall: 7/10

Dinner for Schmucks

I was unfortunately barred from watching Dinner for Schmucks last weekend due to filming the 48 hour project I was working on. I saw it as soon as possible afterwards.

Honestly, I was surprised by this movie. This summer has been somewhat lacking in the straight up comedy department (don't make me mention the only other notable entry so far... ick), so Dinner for Schmucks was something I needed to see, plus I was still decompressing from a stressful weekend, so the film hit me at an opportune time. I enjoyed it. (editors note: haven't seen Cyrus yet)

Granted, Dinner for Schmucks is not THAT funny. Nor is it memorable, or altogether different from any of the other raunchy comedies from the last few years. But it kept me smiling throughout, which, this summer, might just be enough for me to crown it comedy of the year.

But the film has a heart at its center, and not an imitation heart either (ok ok, think Grown Ups) but a sincere attempt at making characters that the audience really can care about. Steve Carrell is endearing as Barry, the lovable idiot who is perhaps wiser than he seems. Paul Rudd, one of my favorite comic actors, does a good job as Tim, the lead character whose descent into the corporate world provides the impetus for conflict.

This is a movie that is pretty much entirely about the characters. What little story there is mostly serves to introduce us to schmuck after schmuck, culminating in the dinner from the title where they vie for the trophy for the most "special" guest.

This wouldn't work if the characters were boring or unfunny, but fortunately, there are plenty of great comic actors hamming it up playing dumb, and it saves the movie. Jemaine Clement was my favorite, playing an artist who is perhaps a little too into his work. He didn't even garner an invite for the dinner! Too bad.

The schmucks at the dinner are mostly forgettable, save for Barry and his equally strange boss, played by Zach Galafianakis. For all the builup given to the dinner party (see: title of the movie), the scene is actually a let down. Nothing all that spectacular or funny happens which was disappointing.

So Dinner for Schmucks was enjoyable for a night out, but I can't say how much I would have liked it if I expected ANYTHING from it. It was funny enough, only just. Charming enough, if barely. So, not one I would watch again or recommend to see in theaters but it is a solid enjoyable film.


Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 3/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 3/5
Acting Performances: 3/5
You may say I'm a dreamer: but I'm not.



Overall: 6/10

Salt

I had the privilege of spending last weekend in rural Nebraska. I was worried that the four horse town I was staying in would prevent me from watching your selection, Salt, but to my pleasant surprise my parents and I came across the Eagle Theater, a four screen movie theater that looked to date back to at least the fifties. Tickets were six dollars, and we got two bottles of water, a small popcorn, a box of junior mints and a bag of Reeses Pieces for eight. Talk about culture shock. The theater itself was cozy, art-deco inspired, and had very nice seats. I actually got to look upwards at the screen, which I love but can only do from the front row around these parts. So all and all, even before the movie began this was my most enjoyable and surprising excursion to the cinema yet this summer. I might have to trek to the Eagle every weekend.



As for the film itself, Salt didn't disappoint, although considering I did not go in to the theater with very high expectations I should elaborate.

Let me just say first off that it is refreshing to finally see a film like this centered around a strong female lead. Angelina Jolie plays her role with an unnerving confidence, while also portraying an inner vulnerability. Roles such as this, double agents or double-double agents or whatever, are always tricky, when you have to convey something to the audience while concealing it from the other characters. Difficult stuff, but something Salt pulls off admirably well. So major points for having a girl up there, kicking ass.

Unfortunately, the film as a whole is not a vehicle worthy of Jolie's talents. Instead of really going in a different direction with the female spy angle, it seems copied and pasted into the same spy flick formula from the Bourne films, Die Hard, and many others. Jolie's Evelyn Salt is desexualized to the point where it is not out of the realm of possibility to imagine the entire film with a man in the role instead. In fact, this is exactly how the project came about. Tom Cruise stepped out, Jolie came in, and the filmmakers thought that was enough. Well, it keeps the film above the rest of the schlocky action flicks of recent years, but only barely. For the little amount that Salt is unusual for having a female lead, it is very much cliched in every other aspect.

And the worst cliche of all is implausibility. Salt could have been such a smart movie, but instead it devolves into some of the usual tricks, plus inventing some of its own.

Among the "wow really?" eye rolling moments: Jolie emptying an assault rifle into a three foot thick wall to drill through it to a lock release mechanism, Jolie surviving and walking away uninjured from a forty foot fall inside a police car, and the best of all, moments after a man says, "once this door is shut, God himself couldn't get through", a swat team uses a blow torch to easily get through it. Bad, bad ,writing.

Salt at least kept me entertained though. The entire film is literally action packed, essentially an hour long chase scene with the occasional assassination thrown in. Jolie, despite looking like Kate Moss, manages to savagely beat down every body-armored 230 pound SWAT officer in her path. The film's story provides adequate twists and turns, enough to keep even me guessing until the end an ending which naturally sets up the inevitable Salt franchise. Lets only hope that the filmmakers in charge can do more with Salt's feminine side next time around; that would have been much more interesting than Bourne with breasts.


Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 2/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Action: 4/5
Acting Performances: 4/5
Implausibility: 5/5, too high to ignore.

Overall: 6/10

Inception

I really feel that the more I say about the film, the more disservice I do to those who want to see it. It is best to go in completely fresh so I will refrain from any synopsis here. If you go to Frank Costanza levels to avoid spoilers, might as well not read any of this, just go see the film!




Anyone who has ever dreamed has surely made note of the fact that the dream world operates with a different set of rules, as far as time and space are concerned.

Christopher Nolan's latest film Inception takes these rules and sets an entire movie around them, playing with the audience up until the very last shot cuts to black.

The effect is... bold, brilliant, entertaining, confusing.... all of the above.

I had a very strange experience with my first viewing of this film. Going in to the night, I was beyond excited. This has been my most anticipated film since it was first announced, and frankly there aren't any movies on the horizon that look to measure that level of excitement.

I went to the midnight showing with Stephanie and my friends Jeff, Casey and Greyson, not sure if it would be modestly crowded (ala Toy Story) or swamped (more akin to Eclipse but with fewer Team Jacob T-shirts).

Sadly, neither proved to be the case. There was NO LINE. By the time the previews started, the theater was only half full, as it remained. Needless to say, this was disappointing.

My disappointment continued as Inception began, a nonstop barrage of pretty images and characters yes but for the life of me, I had no idea what was happening. Was this going to be the biggest disappointment of the summer, nay, my life?

In a word: No. In two words, hell no! Once again, Christopher Nolan has constructed a cerebral thriller that pulls no punches, forcing the viewer to struggle initially but then rewarding that first grasp of understanding with a eureka moment which pays off for the rest of the film.

Those who have seen Memento should already be familiar with this arrangement.

The last hour or so Inception completely erased any doubts I had through the first act; not only is this movie not a disappointment, it is one of the most entertaining films I have ever seen.

What Nolan has managed to do here is make a brainy action thriller that combines the mind-bending plot of indie thriller Memento with the enormous budget and action set pieces of summer blockbuster The Dark Knight. In other words, a movie that should be enjoyed by just about anyone (to those complaining that the plot is too hard to follow; Inception is more cohesive than anything Michael Bay has done so shut your traps).

Nolan also proves once again that he is a great action director, forming grand set pieces that could indeed only be dreamt of.

In other words, Inception is a miraculous and harmonious blend of plot and action, something that is rarely seen.

As for weaknesses, well there are a few, generally in the acting category. Don't get me wrong the performances are solid, but just not up to snuff with the perfection of the rest of the film.

Of course, Leo's work is great as usual. Marion Cotillard plays his wife and brings a wonderful nostalgic bent to her scenes. I could see either of them getting Oscar nods.

I have never liked Ellen Page since Juno so perhaps I am biased but I never really cared for her character or her portrayal. Ariadne serves mostly as a vessel for much needed exposition though so I have to thank her for that.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Arthur was awkward and underused in the first act, but by the end he was my favorite character. His scenes in the hotel were just amazing, my favorite part of the entire film.

Underlooked will be Cillian Murphy, who stands out in his supporting role as Fischer, the target of "inception".


The film ended and my friends and I looked at each other, agape and/or grinning huge grins. Stephanie didn't like it quite as much as we, but still did enjoy it, less for the plot than for the action and effects.

Overall, the night was perfect save for the poor turn out. Word of mouth is going to make Inception huge, I predict. And I intend to do my part, so....

DO YOUR UNDERUSED BRAIN A FAVOR!!! GO SEE INCEPTION!! RIGHT NOW!! SERIOUSLY, STOP READING AND GO!


Attendance: 2/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 1/5
Crowd Response: 4/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 5/5
Action: 5/5
Plot: 5/5
Time on the edge of your seat: About 80 minutes, ironically starting when the "fasten seatbelt" light goes off.

Overall: 10/10

Despicable Me

I'd like to start this review off with a special belated happy birthday for my good friend Emily, who came along with Stephanie and me to Thursday night's premiere of Despicable Me. It was her first time at a midnight movie and hopefully a good kickoff to her day.

Now, on to the main attraction: Despicable Me.

The choice everyone has to make these days seemingly, 2D or 3D, was unanimous as Emily Stephanie and I all agreed that we enjoy 2D more. (editor's note: I hate 3D)

However, I can honestly say that this movie made me want to see it again... in 3D no less.

How you ask? Well, for starters, it is a good movie, which I will get to in a moment. But there are many instances in the film that you could tell were designed solely to play with the 3D (further proof that the trend is, in fact, a gimmick). This playfulness is something that has been missing from most 3D movies, especially the ones that were post-converted to 3D, not originally shot in 3D. I have heard terrible things about Clash of the Titans and The Last Airbender.

As for the overall quality, Despicable Me is a charming, if not overly innovative, animated flick. It lacks the substance of Pixar's work but still has its heart in the right place.

The main character is "super" villain Gru, a humanized version of Wile E. Coyote. He has schemes to spare but is lacking in execution. He and his band of minions (hybrid Oompa Loompa/ Twinkie the Kid cross breeds) set out to pull the greatest act of villainy the world has ever seen.




A wrench is thrown into Gru's dastardly plans as three girls he initially adopts to aid him end up as more of a distraction than he had bargained for (the littlest girl Agnes is cute to the point where it is incomprehensible that she had not yet been adopted).


Then there is Vector, the weaselly, sea-life obsessed rival to Gru's enterprises. I never really bought him as a threatening character, but he does do a good job serving as the roadrunner to Gru's coyote. He has all the cool gadgets, the spiffy ultra modern fortress, and an impressive stolen monument cleverly disguised in his back yard.

Gru must make a decision: is his quest for the ultimate act of villainy getting in the way of his relationship with the girls, or the other way around?

Naturally mistakes are made, lessons are learned, and we are sent home happy. But the plot really isn't the selling point of Despicable Me. Rather, that would be the spectacles and the laughs.

The animation is vibrant and the humor is ever-present, with plenty of physical gags for the kids and slightly more sophisticated laughs for the parents. The voice acting too is top notch, Gru is characterized so well that I forgot that Steve Carell was even involved. And Russell Brand did an amazing job in his part (I didn't even realize who he played until getting on the imdb page).

Despicable Me is a good film, hopefully it has the staying power of such franchises as Shrek and Ice Age.


Attendance: 4/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 1/5
Crowd Response: 4/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Animation: 4/5
Humor: 4/5
Agnes Cuteness Quotient: 9/5

Overall: 8/10

Eclipse

When I got to the theater at 5:30 to purchase my Eclipse tickets, a small line of pre-teen girls in Twilight shirts had already formed in the lobby, evidence that the night was going to be an interesting one regardless of the quality of the movie. I amended my plan to arrive at the theater at 10:45, so instead Stephanie and I got there at 9:30.

The line was already stretched outside the theater doors.

In the line I met Tammy, a 50 year old Twilight super fan. On first glance she looked to be an ordinary middle aged female, but a minute of conversation revealed her to be a lunatic. She professed to having read all 4 Twilight books 12 times, watched the first movie in theaters 39 times, and the second 35. She also has won several Twilight trivia contests.

Talking with this woman made the first hour of waiting in line go by amazingly fast. At 10:45, the time I initially planned to get there, the line was roughly 300 yards long, stretching all the way past the parking lot to the bus stop.

At long last, (11:15) the line began to move, and the Twilighters were divided up into four (FOUR!) large theaters. The movie started about a half hour late because people were still being seated until the bitter end. Crazy!

As for the film, well, it is a Twilight movie, and that's about all there is to say. Admittedly, it is an improvement on the first two, which I felt took themselves a little too seriously for movies about mopey teenaged vampires. This one had more of a sense of humor (although having recently seeing Grown Ups, perhaps my own sense of humor is tainted now). The acting performances from the three leads had already improved from "god-awful" to "dreadful" from the first to second film, and I am happy to report they have been upgraded again to "wooden". Perhaps by the fifth and final Twilight film one of them will win an Oscar? (HAHAHA)

As for the story, this one suffers from the same problem as the second, namely, it is an intermediary plot, driving the overall story forward to the ultimate climax in the last book. So, nothing really that spectacular happens. The characters all just develop a little bit more. I understand though that this problem is inherent in any series. The character development I appreciated the most is the back stories of some of Mopey Teenaged Vampire's siblings, those stories are by far more interesting than what is going on in Forks, WA, present day.

On the plus side, I must admit that this film isn't really half bad. The direction by David Slade, newcomer to the series, is a lot more focused than the earlier films. Rather than scenes just happening, then ending, then something else randomly happening, each scene in Eclipse leads into the next much more smoothly. And none of the plot points felt as rushed as some did in the earlier films.

Ultimately, I can't say that I enjoyed Eclipse, because I didn't. But I never rolled my eyes. It is a solid film, just not directed at my sort of audience. If you love Twilight, you will love it. If you hate Twilight, you will hate it. No minds are going to be changed this late in the game.

The theater I was in was 100% full, as were the three others (apparently). Everyone was super into it, predictably, and Jacob got lots of hoots and hollers. Before the film started a theater employee ran a basic scream-survey, Jacob vs. Edward. I think it was about 70-30 in favor of Team Jacob. The film ended to thunderous applause and lots of teenaged girls screaming (also predictably).


Attendance: 5/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 5/5
Crowd Response: 5/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 4/5
Acting Performances: 2/5
Plot: 2/5
Sulking: Down 20% from the last film

Overall: 5/10

Knight and Day vs. Grown Ups: Fight!

As promised, I watched both new releases this week, since there was a deadlock in voting. Here is a review for each film.

Knight and Day


Unfortunately, I had a prior commitment that kept me from seeing the Wednesday premiere of Knight and Day (Young Frankenstein at the Buell! It was awesome). Besides, this movie never should have opened on a Wednesday. Anyway, the screening I went to was moderately attended, considering it was a weekday afternoon.

Lets not kid ourselves, Knight and Day is not going to be in the running for any Oscars. But I was somewhat surprised at how many hits the film scored. For what it is- a summertime popcorn action flick- it does a good job. Basically, you take a tried and true premise (ditzy attractive woman reluctantly teams up with rugged action hero- see Romancing the Stone), throw in a couple of A list stars, and bingo, surefire hit.

The plot, at least what there is of it, concerns Roy Miller, a Rogue Agent (or is he? or isn't he? The movie never really decides) who becomes tasked with protecting a world-changing invention from his evil ex-partner. Along the way, Cameron Diaz's June Havens stumbles across his path, and he has to take her along, or something.

Naturally, there is a fair bit of action in the film. But as any action-film fan will tell you, the best part of any action scene is the climactic ending, where the heroes valiantly escape and move on to their next challenge. However, the film weasels out of this with an initially clever but ultimately frustrating device. Whenever the going gets tough, Miller knocks Havens out (drugs, sleeper hold, etc.) and... well we don't know what happens next. She goes unconscious, and then wakes up somewhere else. Miller bravely and boldly kicked ass and killed everyone, and they escaped, which is awesome and all, but WE DIDN'T SEE HIM DO IT. It was very annoying, by the eighth or ninth time it happened (ok, it wasn't that many but still, come on now).

So really, there was only one action sequence that was worth the price of admission, that being the climactic motorcycle chase through the streets of Seville- including the Pampalona running of the bulls (wait what?)- leading up to the showdown between Miller and the main baddie. In any normal action film, this would be a disappointment, but Knight and Day has enough "moments", mostly of humor, to keep the train limping into the station. Cruise's performance as the overly friendly secret agent makes me somewhat nostalgic for his pre-couch hopping, Jerry Maguire days.


Attendance: 3/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 3/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 3/5
Action: 3/5
Tom Cruise: Is still weird

Overall: 6/10



Grown Ups


How best to sum up this film in two words... Hell I'll give you one word: "FAIL".

If you prefer two words, I can think of any number of things to say. But since quite a few of you inexplicably voted for this movie, I will give you a full review (sigh).

If you had told me the premise of Grown Ups maybe a year ago, I would have been stoked... "Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Rob Schneider, David Spade and Chris Rock, hanging out in a lake house, cracking wise at each other for two hours? Sign me up! Whats the plot? Wait that IS the plot? You mean they just hang out and insult each other? Ok ok, still somewhat excited, it will be R rated right? No? Hmm."

That would have been my reaction a year ago. However, I first heard about this film recently, so I fortunately didn't have any time to build my expectations for it above "first day of school" levels of dread. Even so, I was disappointed. Grown Ups is a horrible thing that has been unleashed on the movie-going world.

I guess maybe I'm not giving this film any credit. There is a plot; seems the five aforementioned stars used to play Middle School basketball together. The coach of their championship team dies, and THAT'S why they all get together at the lake house. Sorry if its hard to follow but if so then maybe you will like this movie.

What follows is an odd collection of tender family moments interspersed with fart jokes, nut shots, and fat people (Kevin James) or short people (Rob Schneider) getting hurt. Oh and did I mention the barrage of one-liners? Basically, the entire script is one big wry joke after another. I guess the writers realized nothing they could come up with was particularly funny, so they should go for quantity over quality. There are also several running gags (the not-yet-weaned four year old, the dog barking a lot, Kevin James is fat, etc. etc. ad nauseum). This might have worked, if even 25% of the jokes were actually funny.

sample of actual dialogue:
(wayward basketball knocks beer out of womans hand)
Woman: Hey! You spilled my beer!
Husband: Why does everything have to be about you?
Woman: Why do you have to be such a DICK?
hahahahaha! funny right? no? anyone?

Problem is I laughed maybe three times, and I'm being generous here, throughout the whole movie. The phrase "one-joke-premise", used disparagingly for many films, would be an accolade for Grown Ups. Oh and lets talk about casting; I appreciate the filmmaker's decision to help make up for their lack of skill by putting as much eye candy on screen as possible (Rob Schneider's daughters especially). But am I really supposed to believe Kevin James is married to Maria Bello? I didn't believe it with Leah Remini in King of Queens, I'm not going to buy it now. And Sandler with Salma Hayek? That one was only plausible because they made his character filthy rich.

I could probably rant about this film for a few more paragraphs, but I digress. You get the point by now I hope.


Attendance: 3/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 0/5
Crowd Response: 1/5

-----------------------------------------------------

Production Value: 3/5
Humor: 1/5
Plot: 1/5
Pee Jokes: are NOT funny

Overall: 3/10

Moral of this week: If you want to see a new film in the coming days, see Knight and Day! It has enough action to satisfy, and it is much funnier than Grown Ups.

Toy Story 3

I know I said this already, but thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for sending me to Toy Story 3. I went into the theater with high expectations, and they were equaled halfway through the film, and easily exceeded by the end. Pixar continues its amazing streak of great films.

I arrived at the Old Town 14 at 11:10. There was a modest line in the lobby, maybe a dozen people in front of me and my mom, another Pixar fan. We got right in, fearing that maybe there wouldn't be a big crowd. Fortunately by the time the film started the theater was probably 90% full at least, not bad for a G movie at midnight. The crowd was mostly made up of 16-18 year olds who, like myself, grew up with the Toy Story boy Andy. I was on the lookout for avid fans dressed like toys, but came up more or less empty handed. There was a 3 or 4 year old boy in Buzz Lightyear pj's holding a Woody doll though. I wanted to take a picture with him but decided his parents might be somewhat suspicious of me.

Like all Pixar films, this one opens with a short. Day & Night is the most unusual Pixar short you will see, but it is very clever in its technique and the message is good as well. 7/10

Now on to the feature; Toy Story 3 is really, really good. I'm not going to call it brilliant as it is a sequel, but it is damn near perfect. The amazing thing for me is how Pixar managed to keep the same feel of the first two films, the last of which came out more than ten years ago. Despite the advances in computer animation since then, this still feels like the same world as the other two films. Bringing back all of the voice actors was another triumph (except Jim "Slinky Dog" Varney, RIP). Even the voice of now 17 year old Andy is played by the same actor from the earlier films. Impressive.

Technical aspects aside, the story is great on its own. All your old favorite characters are back, along with a few new ones that are keepers if there is a Toy Story 4 (Michael Keaton is a highlight as an overly fashionable Ken doll). Pixar injects the film with its usual blend of humor, action, and tender moments. there's really nothing left to say. The film builds on Pixar's already impressive oeuvre.

The film ended to a large round of applause. Most of the large crowd stayed through the credits as Pixar included a little epilogue, and clapped again when that ended too. Definitely a good sign. Overall, it was a great night, and I am planning on seeing this in theaters again.

Attendance: 4/5
Crazy Fan Boy Factor: 1/5
Crowd Response: 5/5
-----------------------------------------------------
Production Value: 5/5
Humor: 4/5
Plot: 5/5
Nostalgia: Through the roof (for this reviewer)

Overall: 10/10