This is one of those films that is so middle of the road that it'll be tough to review. I didn't hate the film, but I didn't particularly like it either. It was mildly diverting in an non-insulting manner, but also completely forgettable. Which makes it tough to write about because I didn't form a lot of opinions while I was watching it.
Mostly War wasn't the film I was expecting. From the trailers it looked like a non-stop action film, full of kung-fu and gun fights. Which there are elements of, but not as much as I hoped for. With Jason Statham, the star of the Transporter and Jet Li, one of the greatest kung-fu stars ever, and a title like War, I was expecting 90 minutes of over-the-top battles. But there's a lot of story-development, which isn't usually a bad thing, but honestly there's too much for a film of this type. I don't want to watch Statham and Li talk out their problems.
Statham plays a rogue FBI agent, is there any other kind in these films? Who's after the master-assassin, Jet Li, who killed his partner at the beginning of the film. The funny thing is that Li starts to play the Yakuzas against the Triads, two mafia clans, who Statham has been trying to take down on his own. He begins to question what's really going on, while also trying to catch Li. They're both so busy with the mafia battles, that they don't get a chance to face off until the final scene of the film. Which is what's to be expected, but I thought there would be some warm up fights as well.
I actually didn't see the final twist coming, which was done pretty well, but the film wasn't entertaining enough up to that point to keep my full attention, so that I honestly didn't care by the end. If they're going to sell a film as an all-out-action film, they better be able to back it up. But the film, while having a couple of decently done scenes, has too much story and talking, that isn't done well enough to care about. They hardly have Jet Li do any kung-fu fighting, he uses his guns far more than his fists. I was hoping for a lot more battles between Statham and Li, their final fight scene is fun, but it takes far too long to get there. War is not bad, not good, a completely forgettable action flick without enough action. - Grade: C
I meant to review Hearts of Darkness a couple months back, but it got lost among all my other postponed reviews somewhere. It's been too long for me to remember it with enough detail to review it fully. It's an excellent documentary, whether you care about the making of Apocalypse Now or not. It's a fascinating insight into Francis Ford Coppola's creative process and the great depths, emotionally and psychically, that he goes to achieve his lofty goals. There's great insider footage of Francis, Martin Sheen, Lawrence Fishburne, Dennis Hopper and Robert Duvall, among others. And some good interviews with Francis' film-making buddies, George Lucas and John Milius.A truly excellent film. - Grade: A
I've written about this before (Black Sheep & Severance), but horror-comedy is my favorite genre of films, although I believe they're extremely tough to do well, just the right tone has to be created. I was a bit excited to sit down with The Mad, which came recommended, 4 stars, from Netflix. The film is a zombie-comedy, or uh, zomedy; and I have a weird thing for zombies, I'll never get sick of them. Another bonus was Billy Zane, I've always liked him and I think he got a bit of a raw deal from Hollywood. He deserves to be seen in more films, in this film he gets a rare lead role. He's fun to watch, the rest of the film, not so much.
It takes a little while to get going, too much step-mom/daughter drama, but the film lulled me into a false state of hope, with a well made, equally funny and gory first half. Topping it off with the best scene in the film. From here the film takes a sharp turn downwards, and devolves into a real mess, relying way too much on some horrible comedy routines and flaking out on the "zombie" action.
The Mad is about a family on a road trip together, stopping in at small town diner for a meal of famous organic hamburgers. Unknown to everyone, is the local farmer, who supplies the beef, has had a bit of mad-cow disease problem at his ranch, and decides to sell the meat anyways. While waiting for their meal, it's fun to watch as two customers behind them enjoy the burgers then quickly change into raging "zombies", and before you know it the step-mom gets a knife to the head and is being chomped on like something from the menu. Things quickly get nuts, as the entire restaurant is turned into a human slaughterhouse. Soon Billy Zane, his daughter, her boyfriend, the chef, and the cute-bad-ass waitress are the only ones left alive.
Billy Zane plays a great reluctant hero, showing a true flair for physical comedy. He manages to kill a ton of "zombies", but each time sort of bungling his way through it with a scared look on his face, eventually towards the end it's second nature. When the group decides to leave the diner to make their way to the farm, to stop the beef from getting any further, the film really starts to get bad. It turns on a dime, from well made, witty gruesome-humor, to poorly executed scenes of slapstick, with the "zombies" playing the fall guys. In one particularly bad scene, Zane and his daughter talk over their family issues while fighting off "zombies" like they were nothing more than bothersome flies. Even in the ridiculous world that the film has created, it was too far out of reality.
I keep writing "zombies", because these aren't zombies, much in the same way that the "zombies" of 28 Days Later aren't zombies; they are in fact infected humans, with zombie like qualities. To truly qualify for zombie status, you must come back from the dead. These people never died, they changed, and once they're dead, they stay dead. The film doesn't claim they're zombies, in the scene I mentioned before, they pontificate on what they're truly dealing with. I simply get annoyed when the film's marketers and other reviewers insist on calling them zombies. Just like when most everyone claims that 28 Days Later was the first film to have running-zombies, when Return of the Living Dead had it beat by nearly two-decades. See, I told you I had a weird thing about zombie flicks. I'm getting off tangent.
If you're a horror fan, there are enough redeeming qualities to make The Mad worth seeing. The first half is some well made fun, and Billy Zane remains pretty great throughout, despite the ridiculous things the filmmakers have him doing. The rest of the cast is okay, I didn't particularly care for the actress playing his daughter, but the tough-waitress chick mostly makes up for her. I wish the film had kept the tone they had set in the first half, it could have been a much better film, and potentially gone down as a minor cult-classic. As it is, it's too big of a mess to be considered anywhere near a good film. - Grade: C-
If you're looking for a good zomedy, with true zombies in it, check out the far superior: Fido
It's incredible how far technology has come, I'm old enough to remember a time before VHS, when you had to watch whatever the few channels were playing. For this film, I laid in bed with my laptop and played it online via Netflix. Now there are sites like Hulu.com, where you can watch hundreds of movies and TV shows for free, instantly. The overwhelming amount of choices can drive me nuts sometimes, that's why I still prefer to watch movies "the old fashion way" on DVD on my TV. But knowing those choices are there, make me happy. This has absolutely nothing to do with The Orphanage, it was the first time I'd watched an entire film online, I wanted to see the film badly, my queue said "very long wait", they had it available online, so there I was. On to the review...
Over the last decade I've really started to appreciate foreign horror films, I think many countries filmmakers have a better grasp on how to actually scare you, than most American filmmakers. Japanese films in particular get to me. I remember the first time I saw Ringu aka The Ring, when that girl crawled out of the TV, my body nearly crawled out of my skin. The Spanish also seem to have a good idea of how to scare people, so when Guillermo del Toro presents, a highly praised ghost film, I'm there. Rare is the film that can actually scare me these days, and for some twisted reason I relish those movies. It brings me back to the sleepless nights of my youth, imagining all kinds of horrific things crawling through the dark to get me. It's a safe way to experience a taste of death.
The Orphanage, has some wonderfully creepy moments. For the average viewer, I think it'll work wonders. It gave me a couple of chills, but I was hoping for more. In all honesty, I wouldn't necessarily call this a horror film. It certainly has the right elements, and in a lesser filmmaker's hands that's all it would be, but the film is so beautifully crafted, that it comes across as more of a tragedy-drama.
Laura, played perfectly by actress Belén Rueda, is a young mother, who has ambitions to open a home for children with special needs. Along with her husband, they buy a large house near the sea, where she once lived as an orphan. On the day they open the house to the children and their families, her young son Simón goes missing. Before this happens, Simón had been talking too what his parents considered his imaginary friends.
After Simón disappears, the imaginary friends start to prove themselves real. They begin to reach out to Laura, asking her for help, and trying to show her the way back to her son. There's one particularly creepy kid, who wears a bag over his head, painted up to look like a face. He gets most of the chills in the film. But ultimately the ghost kids aren't that scary to Laura, her pain of losing Simón is far worse than anything they can dish out, and eventually she begins to understand what they're telling her.
The moment Laura stops being scared, it loses a lot of effect for the audience, if the characters aren't scared, then why should we be? That's not a detriment to the film. The Orphanage still has a few moments of terror, but it's Laura's soul-crushing pain that drives the film. There's a mystery surrounding the orphanage and what happened to the orphans, that she believes will lead her to her son, she doesn't care what poltergeists stand in her way.
It's an incredibly powerful film, beautifully crafted in every way; great performances, wonderful photography, and perfectly directed. Director Juan Antonio Bayona, proves to be an incredible talent. No matter the genre, I can't wait to see what he does next. - Grade: A
I believe I have a good sense for what a film-maker's intentions are for their film. And it's often based on that belief that I will judge a film. If I think they're trying to make an important film, but it comes across as preachy and pretentious, I won't like it. If they're simply trying to entertain, and they do that, despite some flaws in the film, I appreciate that. In the case of Drive Thru, I believe that first time writer/director duo Brendan Cowles & Shane Kuhn, were trying to make a cult-classic horror-comedy. Which they don't quite achieve, despite their best efforts. I give them points for trying, but have to subtract some for aiming too high their first time out.
Drive Thru is about a group of kids getting knocked off by a psycho fast food mascot, called Horny the Clown. They desperately want this guy to become the next Freddy Krueger. He never stops talking, constantly popping off one-liners while chasing his victims; some of them work, a lot of them don't. None of the kids are that memorable, most of them are terrible actors, their characters little more than cliche's from other horror films. The goody-two-shoes, virgin-girl is the hero, then there's her sexually frustrated boyfriend, their slutty friend, her boyfriend, and the goth-chick. The lead girl is particularly annoying, I don't think I bought more than a 10th of her lines. They needed a much stronger performance, someone with some charisma to carry the film, while the killer clown isn't in the scene.
The kids do the ultimate horror movie no-no and play with a Ouji Board in the beginning moments of the film. There are some other-worldly consequences, not in the traditional unleashing of, because he's already killed somebody at this point. They tie into the killer in a strange way, by acting a spiritual guide to who the killer is, which never seems convincing. If you've seen Nightmare on Elm Street, it's fairly obvious as to why the killer is doing what he's doing, yet the film treats it like some grand mystery.
Besides the kids there are a pair of cops on the case, one is a no-nonsense tough-girl, her partner is real jackass, constantly doing or saying the wrong thing. Actor Larry Joe Campbell, really over plays this guy, no one is this dumb, especially a detective. Lola Glaudini, who you may remember from her recurring role on The Sopranos, is the best actor in the film, unfortunately they don't give her enough to do, besides be annoyed by her partner and brood over the case. It might have worked better if she was more of a bad-ass. Morgan Spurlock, of Supersize Me fame, has an extended cameo as a fast food manager, and gets a few laughs, before being dispatched.
Make no mistake, Horny the Clown is the star of the film. They did a good job in creating his look; a devilish ceramic face, with a speaker-box for a mouth, and a leather jump-suit with flames on it. The film is the most fun when he's around, and I can easily see them cranking out a few sequels, simply for his involvement. Some of his kills are creative, I especially liked the bit where he chops a guy's head in half and his tongue starts wagging around. The microwave death is also a bit inspired, but doesn't fully work because of some bad special effects. He has that innate ability to be all places at once, and know exactly where his victims will run to, which grows tired and ruins any suspense. They spend too much time on developing his back-story, and the mystery surrounding it, when it's fairly obvious to who he is by anyone that enjoys horror films. Too many of his one-liners fall flat and quite a few of the deaths are sub-par, but ultimately he's a very memorable villain.
Despite all it's faults, this film will have devoted fans. Any film with over-the-top gore and comedy, with a killer clown in a psychedelic mask will gain attention somewhere. And that's what I liked about this film, but I think they were reachng for Evil Dead territory, when they don't quite have the talent to do so. Their shooting and editing style is trying to live on the edge, but it doesn't quite get there. They try to make the gore really unique and disgusting, but the effects aren't done well enough to make you completely buy them. They have their characters spouting off a lot of comic dialogue, but the actors don't have the chops to pull them off; so it becomes unintentionally lame, instead of intentionally cheesy. Maybe with a bit more time, money or skill, they could have created something special, it's not quite there. If you're a horror fan, it's worth giving it a shot. - Grade: C+
After feeling like I saw the Oscar winning Mystic River, a kidnap-thriller, taking place in Boston, based on a Dennis Lehane novel, not too long ago; Gone Baby Gone didn't seem appealing. It looked like pretty much the same thing, only it was directed by Ben Affleck, not Clint Eastwood, who I consider a bit of a film-making genius. Affleck, who after busting out on the scene, writing and starring in Good Will Hunting, had devolved into stumbling his way through some horrible big budget action flicks, then took a break for a few years. I didn't have much faith in his directing abilities based on that resume. But after receiving mostly rave reviews, I decided I should see it for myself.
The film is extremely similar to Mystic River, they shot in the same neighborhoods, featuring the same kind of characters. Only instead of seeing a kidnapping from the point-of-view of the father, we're seeing it from the investigator's. Casey Affleck, in possibly the performance of his life, plays Patrick Kenzie, a Southie-local with a knack for snooping. When the missing girl's parents hire him as a private investigator, he gets full access to the case and cooperation from the police, which they're initially not happy about. He has a checkered past, which helps him get information from the local lowlifes that won't talk to the cops. Along for the ride is his partner and girlfriend, played by Michelle Monagahan. They catch the scent of a trail and follow it to a local drug-dealer, who from the evidence they've collected, appears to be the kidnapper.
Just about when you think they have it all figured out, the film does a complete 180, leaving the viewer and the characters fully confused. It picks up a few months later, and they're no closer to the truth. They've been told to leave the case, but he's obsessed with figuring out what happened. Starting to respect him for his ruthlessness are a couple of cops, played by Ed Harris and character actor John Ashton. They bring him in on some other cases that may be involved with the kidnapping, where he gets into a few nasty situations, but finds some new clues and new suspects, leading him down a completely different path than before. This being a mystery-thriller, of course not all the characters are telling the truth, which leads to a bit of a surprise ending, and some major moral choices for Patrick.
After having some reservations about seeing this film, because of it's extreme similarities to Mystic River, I believe that Gone Baby Gone, is the superior film. The acting in both films is extremely well done, top-notch performances from everyone involved. But I think Gone, is a better focused, more entertaining film. Affleck's intimate knowledge of Boston, helps give the film a more of an insider's perspective, where Eastwood's seemed more stand-offish. They're both excellent films, you really couldn't go wrong with either one, and if you're into a depressing night with Boston, you could have a hell of a double feature. What makes the difference is, that I don't think I'll ever revisit Mystic River, but I can see giving Gone Baby Gone another viewing. Most of all, the film stands as an impressive directing debut for Ben Affleck, and I'm highly interested in seeing what film he does next. - Grade: B+
I saw this in the theater and really loved it. Read my original review. My opinion of it didn't really change when I watched it a second time on DVD with my wife. The singing grew on me a bit, because I was expecting the overwhelming amount. For fun, here's my favorite song from the film: A Little Priest
I'm a huge Seinfeld fan, in my book, it goes The Simpsons, then Seinfeld as my all-time favorite TV shows. So I was a little excited when I heard he was finally creating something new, even if it was another computer-animated family film about insects. The film does have some of that Seinfeld humor, but it also has a lot of standard, family style jokes that don't really stand out. The film is the same way, a few stand out moments, a lot of average, forgettable bits. It has the standard kid movie plot of a character figuring out who they are.
Seinfeld plays Barry B. Benson, who has just graduated from Bee college, and is about to go into the only business available to him, Honex, where they make honey. He gets only one real choice in life, which job he wants; he can stir the honey, clean the honey, take care of the drips, and a hundred other things, all revolving around honey. After he makes that decision, he's stuck with it until he dies. While it's nothing for every bee around him, for some reason he can't bring himself to make the choice. He wants to try live more first, but mostly he wants out of the hive, to see the world.
His chance comes, when some of the pollen jocks take a liking to him and decide to take him out with them. After some close calls with a tennis ball, rain and a boot, his whole world changes when he meets a human woman Vanessa, ho after the initial shock of talking to a bee, they form a fast friendship. Through her, he learns about the world conspiracy of humans stealing bee's honey for their own use. He discovers what he believes is his life's mission, to take back what is rightfully theirs; and he sues the entire human race to get the honey back. Of course there is more too it than that, and through it he discovers the true meaning of his life and begins to value his bee community.
Bee Movie has a nice message about finding yourself and your place in the world, without beating you over the head with it. What they do beat to death is the bee jokes, they're constantly throwing them at you, everything from Barry's name, to his wardrobe, to the constant honey references. It's the obvious thing to do, and instead of using them in the right situation to get the biggest laughs out of them, the use them up within 5 minutes and after that get very tired, very quickly. The Seinfeld humor, the simple observations of everyday life, are the best thing about the film, but there's not enough of it; I was disappointed in his script, the film doesn't feel fresh, uses way too many old or obvious jokes that have been seen a hundred times before.
The animation is good enough, it doesn't distract you, but doesn't blow you away either. The voice work by Jerry Seinfeld is fun, Rene Zellweger is fine as Vanessa, though I don't think she's done anything totally worthwhile since the first Bridget Jones Diary. Chris Rock does some really funny work as a crazy mosquito, Patrick Warburton and his deep voice, shows up in about his 10th animated film in as many years, and does his typical reliable thing. There's a few cameo's that work and don't, did we really need another Larry King appearance, might as well have had Jay Leno show up again, the Ray Liotta cameo was a bit more inspired, but the joke will fly over any kid's head, since they won't have a clue who he is in real life. Bee Movie might be worth checking out if you have kids, just to see something new, and it's not too bad of a film, and a lot of the humor is aimed at the adults. But it's not very good either, if you don't have kids, and aren't a big Seinfeld fan or animation buff, I can't see a reason to bother with it. - Grade: C+
Nobody can build a thrilling scene like Brian De Palma. He creates an incredible mix of photography, music and editing, that builds unbelievable tension. At the beginning of his career, critics claimed he didn't do much more than rip-off Hitchcock. (If you're going to steal from someone, you might as well steal from the best.) If you take Hitchcock's perfect sense of terror, add in a dash of over-the-top violence and sex, you get a good De Palma film. He was at the top of his game in the late 70's, early 80's, creating such classics as Carrie, Dressed to Kill and Scarface. In the middle of these films, he directed Blow Out, a film that never received the sort of attention these others did. After seeing it for the first time, I understand why.
A very young John Travolta, plays a sound engineer for a low-budget horror producer. He's out one night recording ambient sound effects, when he witnesses a car crash over a bridge. He jumps into the river, saving a girl from the back of the limo. Dying in the accident, was a senator, who had ambitions to become president. Soon Travolta is contacted by the secret service, and told to keep the girl's involvement under wraps. He begins to dig into what really happened. Through his sound recordings and photos taken of the accident he begins to unravel a much larger conspiracy.
Helping him along the way is the girl, a prostitute, played by De Palma go-to girl, Nancy Allen. She feels guilty for the senator's death, she thought it was a simple blackmail job, her partner, played as greasily as possibly by Dennis Franz, was to take photos of them together in compromising positions, nothing more. Unknown to them, a killer is chasing her; a professional hit-man, John Lithgow with a maniacal glint. He takes a bit too much pleasure in killing, more a serial killer than a pro, is on their tracks to wipe out any evidence linking her to the truth about the murder. The best scene in the film is when it all comes to a head during a 4th of July celebration in downtown Philadelphia. It's a classically built bit of De Palma suspense.
The rest of the film doesn't live up to the ending, and Blow Out is certainly one of the lesser De Palma films, especially when he was at the height of his skills. It's not a total waste, it has a couple of well built scenes, I can think of no other film-maker that will show you the same scene multiple times, from a few different angles, so on each viewing you learn something more about what really happened. It's a fascinating skill, but there are better uses of it, in better films. - Grade: C
Instead of Blow Out, and many of his classic films, I'll recommend another of his lesser films, at least by other's standards, for a lesson in how he puts his unique vision to work: Body Double. It's a better made film, keeping you intrigued throughout the film, full of sex, violence and the suspense he's known for.
I hate what spoof movies have become in the last decade. All the "something" Movie's, have been terrible, little more than a thousand badly done pop-culture jokes loosely strung together. They never ever bother to stay within the genre they're supposed to be spoofing. Something like Hot Shots, which I always considered a lesser-spoof, looks like a classic compared to these films, it remains in genre, actually develops the characters and tells a bit of a story. Airplane, the king of spoof films, is as funny today as it was almost 30 years ago, and it will always be funny. While something like Epic Movie feels out of date by the time it gets to DVD. So I was happy to see the trailer for Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, it looked more like the classic spoofs, and was made by people with some talent.
Produced and written by Judd Apatow, who's been on a hit comedy roll for the past few years. Co-written and directed by Jake Kasdan, who directed episodes of Apatow's TV shows Freaks and Geeks and Undeclared, along with some good films, including 2006's The TV Set. Anyways, the fairly high pedigree for this film, got my expectations up pretty high. Walk Hard, didn't quite meet those expectations, but the film is much better than the other spoof comedies of this era. And I think it's one of those films that'll grow on me over time.
Walk Hard, keeps within the rock n' roll biography, mainly spoofing Ray and Walk the Line, but touching on other films, such as The Doors and Great Balls of Fire. The great thing about it is, they take Dewey Cox through just about every genre of of music from the past 50 years. He starts off as a country-rock musician, playing shows with Elvis, a great cameo by Jack White of the White Stripes, has a spiritual awakening with the Beatles, goes through a Bob Dylan faze, moving through disco and pop, before going back to his roots. The songs are all very well written and produced, they believably sound like the songs they're mocking, while being very funny at the same time. The songs are the highlight of the film.
The performances are also very good, they give the goofy jokes a reality. Dewey was the role John C. Reilly was born to play, his charisma sells the idea of him being a huge rock star, while also selling the jokes, without being too cheesy about it. The Office's Jenna Fischer, is really wonderful as Darlene, Dewey's muse and co-singer. Tim Meadows gets a chance to shine as a member of Dewey's band, I particularly liked the scene where he tells Dewey not to try pot. Raymond J. Barry, a character actor who's usually dead serious, made me laugh every time he was on screen as Dewey's dad, even though he only had one real line: "The wrong son died!" - Repeating the same line over and over, is a gag that usually doesn't work, but he has a gravitas that sells it.
The film is well made, with great photography, editing, direction and acting, much better than the other spoofs of this era. So when all the films like Epic Movie, Date Movie and 300 Spartans, are long forgotten, I believe that Walk Hard will live on. It's not a classic, but it is a consistently funny film, that is worth seeing. - Grade: B
This movie is going to be tough for me to review. I've been creating a film with a very similar plot in my head for over 5 years. If I ever get a chance to make that film, it will turn out very different from The Good Night, but I don't want anyone thinking that I stole the core idea from this film. Being selfish about my idea, I hope that this film never gets wide exposure, but it's an interesting film that deserves to be seen, so I also have to recommend it.
The Good Night is about Gary, a deeply unhappy man. He's a musician who's sold out his artistic sensibilities to create music for commercials. He lives with his girlfriend Dora; in the opening scene you get a good sense of their relationship, they're simply brushing their teeth together, but instantly you can tell there's tension in their relationship, she's irritated by him standing in front of the sinking, he's irritated by her pushing her way in just as he's about to spit. When they say "I love you" before turning the lights off, you can tell the words have lost all meaning.
Sleep is Gary's only reprieve. He hates his job, he's miserable at home. His mind begins to build an escape for him through his dreams. Night after night he dreams about the same woman, played by the gorgeous Penélope Cruz, she's the perfect woman, everything he wants that he's not getting in the real world. He becomes obsessed with his sleep, making all sorts of changes to his routine to sleep better. Every time he wakes up, he's completely pissed, he doesn't doesn't want to leave this girl of his dreams. When Dora leaves for an extended trip, he gets far worse, covering his walls with soundproofing, and befriending Mel a lucid dream expert. Mel, played with world-weariness by Danny Devito, teaches him how to better control his dreams.
Things get weirder when he discovers that the girl of his dreams exists in the real world. His best friend, played by the always funny Simon Pegg, an ad executive sets up a meeting for Gary with this girl who's a model in real life. Besides looking exactly alike, the women don't have much in common and things don't turn out the way you might expect. The Good Night, isn't a typical romantic comedy, it's much darker, and besides the out-there premise, much more representative of true relationships.
Written and directed by Jake Paltrow, yes Gwyneth's brother, the film is a great experiment in the reality of dreams. Where do they come from? What do they mean? Martin Freeman, from the British version of The Office and the criminally under-seen Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, plays Gary perfectly, a total sad-sack, but with enough charm and likability that you care about him as a character. Gwyneth, is wonderful in her fairly short screen time as Dora, she too has lost the luster of her life, living with Gary has ruined her, she looks nothing like the movie star playing her. The film has a great look to it, overly colorful, beautiful scenery while he's dreaming, drab and benign when he's in the real world. The Good Night isn't a gut-busting comedy, but if you appreciate some darkness with your laughter, some realistic character relationships, and a unique story; this film is a hidden gem. - Grade: B+
I love werewolves, greatly prefer them too vampires, unfortunately they have a much weaker presence in film. Sadly, The Howling series, seven in all, constitutes a good chunk of the films from the last twenty years. American Werewolf in London remains the best werewolf film ever. I was pleasantly surprised by the fairly recent film Ginger Snaps, its sequels much less so. It had been a long time since I had seen any of the Howling films, and I don't believe I've ever seen Howling II: Your Sister's a Werewolf, so when it showed up on TV, I decided to check it out.
I was completely not expecting this flick. It is extremely surreal. They throw all logic out the window and turn these werewolves into complete sex-fiends, the humans chasing them aren't much more normal. But that's only a sliver of what makes it so weird. The film is edited in an extremely experimental manner, at least for a fairly mainstream film that had a wide theatrical release. The film moves along normally, then they suddenly cut to a random shot from earlier in the film, usually somebody changing into a wolf, but not always. As an editor, I found it refreshing, to see a horror film try something different. It doesn't always work, but it keeps it interesting, as you never know what you're going to see next.
Ben is attending his sister Karen's funeral, who died in the first film, when he's approached by Stefan Crosscoe, a Van Helsing type character, played by the classic Christoper Lee. Crosscoe tells him his sister is in fact a werewolf, and that she'll come back to life that night. Being a rational person, Ben dismisses him as a nut, but decides to make sure later that night. He witness her changing, just before Crosscoe drives a silver stake through her heart, and they're attacked by a gaggle of werewolves. That's it, Ben is pissed. He's ready to travel to Transylvania with Crosscoe to wipe out the monsters that did this to his sister.Ben's new girlfriend, a journalist and friend of his sister, comes along for the ride. They stay in a weird little town, in the heart of werewolf country.
The leader of the werewolves is Stirba, some-kind of 80's sexual goddess, played with full-on gusto by B-movie vixen Sybil Danning. She's by far the most interesting character in the film. Stirba doesn't have a lot to say, but she's either wearing the most outrageous costumes ever, ripping them open to expose her breasts or popping some poor midgets eyes out. She also has some kind of magical powers, and can bend any man or beast's will to do her bidding. I'm not sure what the hell is going on in this scene, but it appears she gets a vampire bat, to inseminate a priests mouth. If it wasn't for Stirba, this film wouldn't be worth watching, the original title of this film was in fact: Howling II: Stirba Werewolf Bitch - A much cooler and appropriate title.
This is in no way a good film, not even close, but it is undeniably entertaining. Sybil Danning's extreme performance as Stirba is the highlight. It's also great to see Christopher Lee in Van Helsing mode, kicking werewolf ass, and in one scene wearing a ridiculous 80's outfit. Actress Annie McEnroe, who plays the girlfriend role, is fun to watch, because she constantly has the expression of "I can't believe I'm in a movie!" It's also entertaining for the film-maker's decision to say"fuck it" and fill the film with weirdness, from the over-the-top gory effects, to the kinky werewolf sex, and random editing, best summed-up in the final credits (see below). If you love strange or bad movies or both, Howling II, should be considered a cult-classic. If you prefer your movies straight-up, stay far away. - As a film: Grade D - As a piece of surreal entertainment: Grade: B
(I'm going to save some time and post a seven-year-old review of Spy Kids from my defunct website: Optimus Prime Films - Mostly as a history lesson for myself, so I can see how my writing has changed over the years. I'll leave it intact. Don't laugh.)
Director Robert Rodriguez most well known for the over-the-top action flick Desperado and the gory horror flick From Dusk till Dawn, makes a kids movie? It's called Spy Kids? That title makes it sound like a straight-to-video flick starring the Olsen Twins. I was thinking he was crazy or a "sell-out" or both. Seeing the trailer didn't do much to quell those thoughts. It looked like a pretty standard kids movie, with the way to obvious jokes and the standard shots of kids beating up adults. Like the hundreds of Home Alone replicas that have come out since that seminal film.
I went into Spy Kids thinking, "Ok I'm going to watch this from a 10-year-olds point-of-view. That's probably about the only way I'm going to enjoy this." Boy was I pleasantly surprised when, only about 20 seconds into the film, I realized I wasn't going to have to do that. That this was a film that adults could have fun watching too.
The film opens simple enough with a mother telling her daughter a bed-time story about the two greatest secret agents to ever live. These two spies fall deeply in love and decide to get married. This is no ordinary wedding, towards the end about 20 heavily armed helicopters show up and shoot up the place, the wedding ends with the couple jumping off a cliff together. Soon they're having kids and retiring from the spy game. Of course this is the story about the parents in this film, played by Carla Gugino (Snake Eyes) and Rodriguez staple Antonio Banderas.(See the scene below.)
After a little introduction to the family's home life, the parents are kidnaped by the maniacal, evil genius Fegan Floop. You know the typical James Bond film, diabolical madman, except this time his genius is focused more on his children's TV show than taking over the world. The weird characters from Floop's show also work as his henchmen. (I especially liked the Thumb-Thumbs.) It is up to the kids to save their parents from this conflicted villain. Character actor Alan Cumming plays Floop with a flamboyant glee; it is the best performance of the film. That's not to say the rest are bad, they're just good enough, both of the kids are quite charismatic. After all this isn't a film about acting.
It is an entertainment piece, pure fluff, but thankfully it's one of the better ones to come out lately. This is a Rodriguez film, he knows how to make fast paced, fun films. And unlike his last film, The Faculty, all of his trademark stuff is here, the outlandish action scenes, the cool camera work, quick zooms, slow-motion, perfectly edited together by Rodriguez himself, all set to some funky guitar riffs. There are a few jokes that fall flat since they're aimed at the kiddies and a bad McDonald's product placement. But otherwise it's fun stuff, a perfect Saturday afternoon matinee film. - Grade: B
(I watched this with my son for the first time in a few years, he seemed to enjoy it, though hasn't asked to re-watch it, the true test. I still feel the same about the film as in this review. As for the writing, it hasn't changed much; same style, maybe a little more developed now, and definitely wordier. Though it's nearly impossible to critique yourself.)
I want to see the movie on the poster to the right, it looks so much cooler than the film I watched. The rats never looked this scary, nor were there any scantily-clad girls getting carried off by them. There were giant rats, yes, but they were either big immobile puppets thrown at the actors, or cute pet rats climbing on miniature sets. The effects are laughably bad throughout Food of the Gods, but they're endearing because the filmmakers try so hard to make them work, despite their limited budget and 70's technology.
Honestly the film is nowhere as near as bad as I thought it would be or hoped for. I was expecting a laughable mess, instead the film is fairly competently made. The effects are very cheesy, but respectably so, not nearly as bad as many films of this era. The acting by the mostly unknown actors isn't terrible, they give good line readings, with the right inflections. The film is decently shot, directed, edited and scored. Which was a bit of a disappointment on one level, because I couldn't laugh at the film-maker's incompetence, and sort of had to take this ridiculous story seriously, which didn't make it as entertaining as I expected. Because the film's not funny, and I obviously can't be scared of it either, because I'm not 10 and living in the 70's, it becomes mearly a mediocre piece of entertainment.
Now don't get me wrong, the effects are humorous, I especially liked the part where our hero Morgan gets attacked by a giant chicken. The scenes of the giant animals are definitely the highlight of the film, but there are too many dead scenes of dialogue, that slow the film down. I was also hoping for more variety in animals, at the very beginning Morgan and his buddies are hunting in the woods, when one of them is attacked and killed by giant wasps. There's some good make-up effects here of the guy gruesomely puffed up. After the funeral, Morgan, a professional football player, heads back into the woods to figure out the mystery of what happened. That's when he comes across the farm with the giant chickens. That night, the farmer is attacked by giant rats. For the rest of the movie only the rats attack, and it got boring seeing the same old puppets. I guess that's all the animals they had in the budget.
There's some kind of magical goo seeping out of the ground on the farmer's land, and any animal that eats it turns gigantic. So by all means, there should have been more, especially of the insect variety. (Writer/Director Bert I. Gordon did the giant insect thing with his next film Empire of the Ants.) The farmers decide to feed it to the chickens, then the rats steal the chickens eggs, and apparently that's where the food chain ends in this world. Anyway, I shouldn't be complaining, three giant animals is three more than most films have to offer. An evil businessman shows up, he wants to buy the goo to use in animal production. In tow, is his cute secretary, who soon falls for Morgan and his manly blond curls. Soon they're all trapped in the farm house with giant rats crawling all over and it's up to Morgan and his NFL buddy to save the day.
They made a lot of these nature-revenge films in the late 70's and early 80's. It all started with The Birds, then became popular with Jaws, which remains far-and-away the best of the bunch. But there was also Day of the Animals, Piranha, Grizzly, Squirm, a personal favorite, and quite a few others. In terms of quality, Food of the Gods lies somewhere in the middle, as it's a fairly well made for a B-movie. But lies in a strange area between good and bad, which makes it unfortunately boring. Watch it for the giant animal scenes, skip the rest. - Grade: C+
I'll admit that Adam Sandler's brand of juvenile humor makes me laugh. I don't watch his films expecting realistic characters, an intriguing story or good film-making, I watch them because Sandler does a lot of stupid things that my inner twelve-year-old finds funny. Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore, both over ten-years-old, continue to be guilty pleasures; and sadly both remain the funniest films of his career. While The Wedding Singer, is his most all-around satisfying film. (I'm talking about films that he and his company developed, not films that he's appeared in as an actor, because Punch-Drunk Love would be my all time favorite.) His last two films, Click and The Longest Yard were both uniformly terrible, with minimal laughs. It was with reluctance that I went into I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry.
I was pretty desperate for a comedy, and with it being out for months on DVD, I figured it was time I got around to it. Another reason I wanted to see it was for Jessica Biel's scene in her panties, which they flaunt in the trailer (and I use in the site's banner, not above selling sex myself), she's a total hottie and it's a scene worth seeing. Even if it's completely unrealistic and unbelievable. The whole movie's like this, Chuck & Larry are the least convincing gay couple ever, I don't think anyone would buy it, especially not New Yorkers, let alone an attorney who specializes in discrimination cases.
I said I don't expect realistic characters in an Sandler flick, but these guys are so out of touch that it remained a distraction throughout. The whole film is pretty offensive to homosexuals, their constant disgust and joking at the thought of touching or kissing each other didn't make me laugh. The worst comes when Rob Schneider puts on the Asian look and accent, he might as well have put on black-face, it was so offensive. At the core of the film, they're trying to teach tolerance, which makes it a mixed message, but I appreciated their intent.
Overall, I liked I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry more than Sandler's last few flicks. I chuckled lightly at times, but no huge laughs; I tried to overlook the offensive bits, and enjoyed seeing Biel in her panties. The film never raises above average, dips below for much of the time. But thanks to the performances of Sandler, Kevin James and an excellent supporting cast, including the always funny Steve Buscemi and a fairly brave performance by Ving Rhames, it managed to keep me slightly entertained throughout. - Grade: C-
Is there anything worse than a horror movie that isn't scary? Or in the case of Crazy Eights, doesn't even want to try? Maybe that's not what the filmmakers were going for, maybe they were trying to create some sort of psychological drama? Which is what it felt like at times, but which in that case, doesn't work either. But silly me, when I watch a movie from the horror series Eight Movies to Die For, I expect to at least have some attempts at horror. And honestly, there are a few moments that have some horror elements, but the filmmakers seem to be trying to create the opposite of suspense. Any time anything even remotely dark or freaky started to happen, they get it over with as quick as possible and cut to the next scene. I'm sorry, but that's not how horror films work.
When I originally heard about the Eight Movies to Die For concept, I was excited. Here were some folks really trying to scare us, or at least that's what they promised. Their intention was to bring us eight films, that we hadn't yet had a chance to see, eight films that supposedly lived on the edge. If they had had their first festival anywhere near me, I would have gone. Luckily, I had to wait till DVD. I believe I watched seven out of eight from the first series. One, The Abandoned, was actually good and somewhat creepy, two or three were okay, like Reincarnation, the rest sucked badly. So it was with trepidation that I went again to the well for their 2007 series, hopefully I started off with the worst one of the bunch, because if they get any worse than Crazy Eights, my confidence has been completely destroyed.
Crazy Eights, is about a group of people brought together for a funeral of a friend. It comes out that they all spent time in a mental institution together when they were children. There's a mystery surrounding their friend's death, so the alive seven make the trek back to the institution to find out what really happened. Their first stop is a time capsule they left for themselves to find, inside they find the bones of a little girl, who was at the institution with them. Being too stupid to call the police, they investigate further. And before you know it they find themselves locked in the basement of this long abandoned institution, with what appears to be the ghost of the little girl stalking them.
They continue to make the stupidest, most cliche´d horror mistakes possible. With each character insisting on setting off on their own, no matter how many of them get knocked off. They're constantly saying things like, "Oh no, that's our 4th friend to die in the last fifteen minutes, I'm going to explore this creepy hallway where I just saw something ghost like moving about in. You guys stay here." These are literally about the dumbest characters you could find in a modern horror film. So you can't possibly care when the obvious happens and they get killed.
The set-up isn't that bad, I can go along with them trying to figure out their past in this crumbling shell of a hospital. The set design is moody, the lighting appropriately dim, they even do a decent job of setting up the ghost. Unfortunately past that, they seem completely clueless on how to scare anyone. As soon as anything creepy starts to happen, they try to get it over with as quickly as possible, a hand jumps out of the dark, they cut to another room and we hear a muffled scream. That's how nearly everyone dies in this sorry excuse for a horror film. There's no drawn out suspense, there aren't even any good deaths. Everyone dies by editing.
By the end I'd lost all interest in the film, I honestly don't remember how it ended, I just didn't care. The acting is all pretty bad. Dina Meyer and Traci Lords are the lead actresses, neither has ever turned in a convincing performance, the filmmakers were simply going for some recognizable faces. They also got Gabrielle Anwar, who has made some decent films in the past, but she's pretty much wasted here, one of the first to die. Frank Whaley does his typical whiny role, he's phoning it in, and still creates the most realistic character. They try to create some drama about the horrible past these friends have gone through, but the writing and acting aren't good enough to pull it off. The little creepiness they have going for them, they almost deliberately avoid. A real waste of a film. - Grade: D-
One of only two films I got the chance to see at the excellent Ashland Film Festival. (Outsourced being the other.) Even though I'm a fan of documentaries, I usually skip them in the theater, I absorb them better at home. And since so many of them are about difficult issues, I don't feel like paying full price to get depressed. This was a different situation, after Taxi to the Dark Side won an Oscar as best documentary, I felt I must see it as soon as possible.
Filmmaker Alex Gibney is quickly proving himself to be one of the best documentary directors around, after this and Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room. His next film Gonzo, about the life of Hunter S. Thompson, looks very entertaining, and takes on a much lighter subject, while also tackling some political issues.
I won't write a long review for this, because if I start writing too much, I'll probably get into some kind of political diatribe that'll leave us all upset. Taxi to the Dark Side covers in great detail the U.S.'s involvement in torture during the Iraq war. From all the photos we're all familiar with from Guantanamo Bay, to Bush's administration changing our countries torture policies. They talk to former prisoners who experienced the torture, they talk to the guys that administered the torture, all the way up to those that developed the methods used. I don't think they left a stone unturned about this issue.
After I felt sick to belong to the human race, and even worse to be a citizen of a country that believes these policies are just. These practices must stop, I believe the film proves that torture does not work. There are more effective ways to gain the necessary information, and not break the laws of the Constitution and Geneva Convention in the process. Taxi to the Dark Side, is extremely well made and informative; ultimately it is not a pleasant experience, but it is a must see. - Grade: B+
I feel very lucky to live in a small town, that has a high quality film festival. They Ashland Film Festival gets great films and filmmakers to come to a small town in Oregon. It's one of my favorite weekends of the year. The only unfortunate thing about it, is that it's so short, only five days long, by the time I'm getting into it, it's over. So this year I only got a chance to see two films. Luckily, I did a little research, i.e. watching online movie trailers (see below), and found a film that I thought my wife and I could enjoy. Outsourced turned out to be even better than advertised.
Todd Anderson works as a manager of a call center for a company that sells cheap Americana knick-knacks. In the very first scene of the film he is told that his entire department is being laid off and being moved to India. If he wants to keep his job, his stock options, his security, his only choice is to move to India to help train the replacements. Being a straight-laced kind of guy, he does what his boss tells him. A classic fish-out-of-water set-up.
From the moment he steps off the plane he's out of his element. The people mean him well, but their customs seem strange. His new underling wants the best for him, so he sets him up at a friend's house, instead of a hotel; which throws him off even more, as he's now forced to live like an Indian. When taken to his new office and employees, the place is a total mess, the computers are outdated, the employees untrained. Even worse his company won't let him leave until he gets the call times down to an average of 5 minutes, they now average over 15. He has a seemingly impossible task in front of him, living in a land that is completely unfamiliar.
It's fairly easy to guess where Outsourced is going to go. Todd learns to love India and its customs and then falls in love with Asha, a girl from his office. But this film is not about the destination, it's the journey. It is an utterly charming film, full of wonderfully crafted scenes, consistently funny, and even educational.
It has great performances by the lead actors. Josh Hamilton is one of those actors that has been around for a long time, you see him in a lot of things, probably most recognizable from the classic 90's flick Kicking and Screaming, but here he gets the rare chance to carry a film and he does it with a ton of charisma. Asha is played by Indian actress Ayesha Dharker, who you might remember from her very small role as the princess who comes after Amidala in Attack of the Clones, again, she gets the rare chance to shine, and proves that she's as talented as she is beautiful.
Writer/Director John Jeffcoat has created a love letter to India. Through Todd's character we get to learn about the beautiful country and people of India. At the opening of the film he's thrown for a loop by a unknown-child sitting on his lap while riding on a crowded train, by the end he's willing to follow a stranger into the slums for an impromptu meal. His turning point comes during the Festival of Color, one of the only days of the year that the Indian people really let loose, throwing bags of paint at each other, it proves to be an opportunity for Todd to finally loosen his tie. The relationship between Todd and Asha feels genuine, and doesn't go exactly how we expect. Outsourced isn't the kind of film that slaps you in the face, it slowly comes over you, and by the end you'll fall in love with it. - Grade: A-
I'm about as a big fan of Donnie Darko you can find. I believe it's about as perfect as a movie can get. I would have bet anything that writer/director Richard Kelly was going to be the next great filmmaker. After watching Southland Tales, I'm not so sure anymore. I still think that he has great potential, but Tales is about as huge a sophomore slump you could name. He's really going to have to knock it out of the park with his third film to get my confidence back.
There was so much fanfare, so many compliments thrown his way after Donnie Darko, that I think it went to his head. He was so confidant that he could do no wrong, that he used every single idea he had in one movie, whether they were good or bad. There are a few good ideas in Tales, but they're completely obscured by the overwhelming number of bad ones. There are far too many plots and characters in this film, it seems that as soon as any one idea starts to develop we're quickly off to another one. We're never given a chance to care.
The film starts with an interesting premise. In 2006 America was hit by another terrorist attack, this time in the form of a nuclear weapon dropped in Texas. The Government seizes upon the opportunity to turn America into a military state, with constant surveillance of all citizens. Really, not that far fetched of an idea. I liked the idea of an alternate present, but Kelly tries to tell the story from every conceivable angle. If he'd kept this grand idea to a smaller scale, focusing on a few characters, the film might have been a lot better.
Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson plays Boxer Santaros an action movie star researching a role as a cop, for a movie he's hoping to produce with his porn-star girlfriend Krysta Now, played by Sarah Michelle Gellar. Seann William Scott is the cop he gets to ride along with, but he's not really a cop, he's an amnesiac taking the place of his twin brother who's being held for unknown reasons by a group of tattoo artists with plans to overthrow the Government. Justin Timberlake plays a Iraq War veteran, who now sits over Venice Beach with a sniper rifle protecting a new power source that sits off shore; he's also the narrator of the film, who somehow knows everything. There are more characters, the tattoo artist/terrorists, the inventor of the new power source, those who work for him, a Government employee who works for a watchdog group, her bosses, a Presidential hopeful and quite a few more. Too many to list, and definitely way too many to care about.
Every single one of them is a recognizable actor, many of them former Saturday Night Live players. I guess Kelly hired a lot of comedians, because he intended Southland Tales to be a comedy. At least he says so in the making-of, but I honestly don't remember laughing once. The only thing that I found funny was the ridiculousness of the scenarios. One moment there's a serious diatribe against the Government, the next a musical-dream sequence. The plot is so convoluted that it's nearly impossible to tell where it's going or what's just happened. There's no neatly tied up explanation at the ending either, if anything it makes it more confusing. What reason could Boxer's wife and mistress possibly have to dance together, I'm not sure, and I don't think Kelly has an explanation either, other than to throw us further down the rabbit's hole.
The film is well made, great photography, good special effects, the way-out-there costume and set design, make it feel like a whole other world, and great choices in music. The acting seems to be intentionally over-the-top, adding to the unnatural feeling of the entire film. It's nearly impossible to feel compassion for any single character in this film, when none of them convince you that they care about themselves. The whole movie feels like it was designed to keep the audience an outside observer, which is an odd feeling. Movies always try to draw you in, even if they don't always succeed.
I think that Kelly was going for a grand artistic expression, but he doesn't quite have the chops to yet pull it off. He should have waited to get a few more films under his belt before swinging for the fences. Southland Tales is a grand failure, that some may come to embrace as a cult-film, because of it's pure ambition and weirdness. I may give it another chance somewhere down the road, maybe gain a new perspective, but I don't think my opinion will change much. - Grade: D
As a filmmaker, amateur critic and all around film buff I watch a lot of movies; about one a day on average. I enjoy all kinds of films, from the latest Hollywood trash, to obscure foreign cinema, to low-budget horror flicks, I watch them all. In 2001 I started keeping track of every single film, writing a little comment on how I felt about the film at that moment in time. I've now turned it into a blog, writing full reviews, including trailers and/or film clips for each.
This is one of those films that is so middle of the road that it'll be tough to review. I didn't hate the film, but I didn't particularly like it either. It was mildly diverting in an non-insulting manner, but also completely forgettable. Which makes it tough to write about because I didn't form a lot of opinions while I was watching it. 
at 8:25 PM Posted by Ross Williams
1 comments