'X-Men: The Last Crap'
When it was originally announced that Bryan Singer was leaving the X-Men films to go do Superman, I was not only surprised but worried. Who could make and finish the trilogy of X-men films that I loved so much with the first two? Unlike most fans, when Brett Ratner was announced after Matthew Vaughn dropped the gig, I was actually excited. I mean, sure his resume isn't decorated with any amazing cinematic movies or high-minded tales. But I loved watching Rush Hour 1 and 2 and even Money Talks. I thought he knew how to tell a story competently and was very good at drawing out chemistry among actors to provide an entertaining event. What else would you need for a X-Men film? Well, apparently a lot more.
X-men 3 is a mixed bag as the plot is not only rushed but terribly executed. The idea of a cure being found falls under the same themes as the first two movies. The fact that the cure is offered as a possibility to those who want it and isn't being forced is also great. I love that mutants have become integrated into the politics in Washington and are now recognized as the mutant population, a voting force and that the general public are still wary and scared. Great setup. However, there are hints of some sort of underlying reason why the cure is made and why Angel is the first to be tested, which is never explained. The setup of the rise of The Phoenix is lame as is the ridiculous meeting hall. I'm sorry. But Ian McKellan knows how to give rousing speeches, I've seen him give exhilarating ones. So when his speech seems eh? at best, I can't believe that hordes of mutants would consider following him. The truth is that Ratner does his best to try and make giant demolition sequences and special effects cover up the crap that is known as the script. The use of giving everyone more screentime is a bad idea as no characters are asked to be invested in since their screentime comes and goes at will. Then there is the performances...grrr.
A lot of death in this film...a lot of it. James Marsden does his best job yet as the tortured Cyclops. Kelsey Grammar is exceptional as Beast and anyone who thought it could have been done better is a fool. Patrick Stewart does pretty good as always. Famke Jannsen is excellent as Jean Grey despite the lame backstory for her awesome powers. Now let me say this, besides these standout performances, there are several performances that slip significantly...looking at you Wolvie. Hugh Jackman seems to have lost a lot of what makes Wolverine Wolverine. He has lost the crazy tough fighter attitude and most of the film is more of a tragic romance for him than anything else. Sure there are some fight sequences like the awesome one in the woods with the guy who throws wooden stakes. But I mean off the battlefield...he seems tame. Then Ian McKellan doesn't seem as up to snuff as he always does in everything else. This might be the weakest I've ever seen him in a role. Halle Berry, well, the split screentime is a bad idea as she is painful to watch. Spike looks cool but what a lame ability and Calisto is well, ridiculous. A lot of the film feels so contrived and stupid you can't help but either clap giddily waiting for the next confrontation or be upset at the lack of good story. I'm not going to lie, the lack of Rogue fighting and of Nightcrawler even showing up is hurtful. With Xavier dead, yes he dies, but its the best scene in the movie anyway, and for Nightcrawler to have even visited or to have helped in the growing conflict against Magneto attempt to kill the humans seems ridiculous. Just as it seems stupid for Rogue to have not left the line for the cure to help save her friends. Although I did like the battle between Pyro and Iceman, there are few things to like in this film besides the CG moments like when Magneto is tossing cars aside or when Mystique loses her mutant abilities. Multiple Man is used well though and I think he's quite a good cameo. But like I said earlier, the best scene in the entire film is the scene at Jean's house when Xavier dies. It's great. I also like the grudging respect and admiration of Xavier by Magneto shown after the fact, but that's different.
Conclusion:
The script needed a butt-load of more work. The actors needed some better direction at times. The cinematography is bleh usually with a few exceptional scenes shining throughout. And the majority of the film is populated with ridiculous over-the-top sequences (I'm sorry but did he need to use a bridge? Really? And is throwing flaming cars that much more scary than throwing non-flaming cars?). If you have no real feelings toward the characters from the first two and just want to see some good old throwdowns, then you should see this film. If what I hear is correct though in that they are slowly planning a 4th x-men movie after the Magneto and Wolverine spinoff films...here's to hoping it isn't directed by Brett Ratner! Oh yea, and here's to Rush Hour 3 being great!
2.0 out of 5
Wannabe
Monday, June 18, 2007
Night At The Museum
'Dammit'
Alright, here's the deal with the subtitle. I wanted to hate this movie. I really did. I dislike Ben Stiller's normal acting style and then when you put him and Owen Wilson together you usually get the biggest pile of cheesy schlock imaginable. If you love Zoolander then do me a favor and never breathe again. However, as much as I didn't want to see it, I have been pleasantly surprised in the past by these two. Starsky & Hutch and Meet the Parents were good movies. I even liked the two Wilson and Jackie Chan movies and The Wedding Crashers. Somehow, despite their mediocre talents in these films the directing and story encompasses them into it and they aren't as painful to watch. So, when everyone around the world watched this movie and several people told me it was a good one, I doubted and hopped back and forth on my feet until my wife had to watch something "brainless" as she calls it. And unfortunately, everyone was right. It's a good movie...now Stiller, go use your acting talents again in something uncomedic please?
Night At The Museum is an excellent movie and its premise isn't entirely new...I just don't think I've ever seen it done in this way. Usually these type of films where the location comes to life is more often than not a horror film. In this case, its been turned into a family comedy. Sure there are a few bad words here or there, but they are few and far between and won't be noticed. The best part about the film is the characterization. With such a wide array of characters to choose from, Shawn Levy does a great job of knowing how and when to use CG. The T-rex is a great one as is the slapping Capuchin monkey. Hah! I looked it up! Not only is the CG done well, but the casting is phenomenal. Steve Coogan as the Roman General figurine Octavius and Owen Wilson as the cowboy figurine Jedidiah are hilarious. Yes, yes, I said it...hilarious...I give all the credit to Coogan. Then Robin Williams does an excellent impression of Teddy Roosevelt. Ricky Gervais from the original British The Office and Extras is funny funny as the museum curator. Plus, the movie has Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney, and Bill Cobbs!!! What else could you ask for? I won't give away the plot or anything because I do believe people should see it, especially families, but I will say this. The only bit of casting that doesn't seem to fit is the casting of Ahkmenrah. He's too...underwhelming? He's not quite the character you would expect of a ridiculously old mummy. The plot stinks by the way. I mean, it works okay but it follows the same tradition of old school family movies where the ending doesn't really make sense but you don't really think about it or care at the time. It drives me crazy but it's not unheard of.
The nice part about the film is that it seems to symbolize a changing of the guard. It's no coincidence that the outgoing watchguards are old famous television comediens who had their own following and were considered the funnymen of their day and that the rest of the cast is filled out with comedians. I don't know if Ben Stiller is really the guy who will carry on the tradition of guarding the greats like Robin Williams, but the original idea is nice. Which is why the plot twist is kind of annoying to me but its fun. I could definately see Gervais as the curator of such a place though. Damn that man is funny.
Conclusion:
The movie is very family friendly, with a simple story and good guys and bad guys and great lessons through out and full of laughs. A symbolic changing of the comedic guard and some great performances from some of today's leading comedians. Shawn Levy has created a brilliant film and I look forward to his next directorial effort. Stiller proves he knows how to be funny. Cinematography and lighting are excellent with lots of shadows when needed. Now, someone just needs to write this review on the subway wall in ancient caveman paintings and maybe people will see it.
4.6 out of 5
Wannabe
Alright, here's the deal with the subtitle. I wanted to hate this movie. I really did. I dislike Ben Stiller's normal acting style and then when you put him and Owen Wilson together you usually get the biggest pile of cheesy schlock imaginable. If you love Zoolander then do me a favor and never breathe again. However, as much as I didn't want to see it, I have been pleasantly surprised in the past by these two. Starsky & Hutch and Meet the Parents were good movies. I even liked the two Wilson and Jackie Chan movies and The Wedding Crashers. Somehow, despite their mediocre talents in these films the directing and story encompasses them into it and they aren't as painful to watch. So, when everyone around the world watched this movie and several people told me it was a good one, I doubted and hopped back and forth on my feet until my wife had to watch something "brainless" as she calls it. And unfortunately, everyone was right. It's a good movie...now Stiller, go use your acting talents again in something uncomedic please?
Night At The Museum is an excellent movie and its premise isn't entirely new...I just don't think I've ever seen it done in this way. Usually these type of films where the location comes to life is more often than not a horror film. In this case, its been turned into a family comedy. Sure there are a few bad words here or there, but they are few and far between and won't be noticed. The best part about the film is the characterization. With such a wide array of characters to choose from, Shawn Levy does a great job of knowing how and when to use CG. The T-rex is a great one as is the slapping Capuchin monkey. Hah! I looked it up! Not only is the CG done well, but the casting is phenomenal. Steve Coogan as the Roman General figurine Octavius and Owen Wilson as the cowboy figurine Jedidiah are hilarious. Yes, yes, I said it...hilarious...I give all the credit to Coogan. Then Robin Williams does an excellent impression of Teddy Roosevelt. Ricky Gervais from the original British The Office and Extras is funny funny as the museum curator. Plus, the movie has Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney, and Bill Cobbs!!! What else could you ask for? I won't give away the plot or anything because I do believe people should see it, especially families, but I will say this. The only bit of casting that doesn't seem to fit is the casting of Ahkmenrah. He's too...underwhelming? He's not quite the character you would expect of a ridiculously old mummy. The plot stinks by the way. I mean, it works okay but it follows the same tradition of old school family movies where the ending doesn't really make sense but you don't really think about it or care at the time. It drives me crazy but it's not unheard of.
The nice part about the film is that it seems to symbolize a changing of the guard. It's no coincidence that the outgoing watchguards are old famous television comediens who had their own following and were considered the funnymen of their day and that the rest of the cast is filled out with comedians. I don't know if Ben Stiller is really the guy who will carry on the tradition of guarding the greats like Robin Williams, but the original idea is nice. Which is why the plot twist is kind of annoying to me but its fun. I could definately see Gervais as the curator of such a place though. Damn that man is funny.
Conclusion:
The movie is very family friendly, with a simple story and good guys and bad guys and great lessons through out and full of laughs. A symbolic changing of the comedic guard and some great performances from some of today's leading comedians. Shawn Levy has created a brilliant film and I look forward to his next directorial effort. Stiller proves he knows how to be funny. Cinematography and lighting are excellent with lots of shadows when needed. Now, someone just needs to write this review on the subway wall in ancient caveman paintings and maybe people will see it.
4.6 out of 5
Wannabe
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End
'At Wits End'
In the previous review I mentioned how happy I was with the second film and its inclusion of all pirate lore. Well, this film steps up the mythology and world of pirates a bit by including literally pirates from around the globe. I'm sad that the Kraken is now dead because the admiral Becket became fearful and had Davy Jones kill it...which I might have been the only one who caught because it was a passing reference. Although this film goes out of its way to broaden the view of pirates and who they are and the world they live in. A world outside of reason and control by direct means. It really goes to pieces in terms of plot.
In the third film they travel off the planet and there are some cool effects and I won't lie, but I got the feeling that Verbinski might watch Terry Gilliam films a bit much and to understand what I mean, I highly recommend the fascinating The Adventures of Baron Munchausen to those who don't know it. With that being said, the CGI is perfectly in place and it makes sense why these two films cost so much to make when you see the effects. The makeup and costuming is spectacular and exotic as always and the trip is a fun ride. However, the reason for bringing back Barbossa is still nebulous at best and makes little sense. There is a new plotline involving some pirate brethren meeting because of the pieces of 8...? Oh yea, and they introduce Calypso as a sea god bound by the pirates and Davy Jones years ago into the black Barbados woman. Now, Barbossa wants to free her from her mortal shackles in exchange she'll leave him alone and wipe out Davy Jones and the English. This is what stuck in my craw. After all the buildup and having a crazy black woman grow to be taller than the ship and everything...her powers blow. So she made a suction in the ocean and made it rain...big friggin deal. Why doesn't she just wipe out Davy Jones? For that matter, why doesn't she just wipe out everyone except Barbossa's ship? The reason is then it would deprive people of a good grand pirate hoe down and the ensuing satisfaction of seeing Becket lose his nerve...what crap. Calypso feels like such a letdown that everything after it just doesn't matter. It made me wonder why the pirates felt they had to trap her in the first place, she seems ridiculously harmless and pathetic as a God. I feared the mortal version more. Then there is the obligatory Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann love strife crap and them both trying to do what they think is right. Whatever. I'm glad the ending happened as it did in some ways and I won't tell you what it is that happens. Because now, it would seem that all adventures with Turner and Swann are over. Thank God. On Depp's side of things, he gets to have more fun in this film by apparently going even more insane and having tons of scenes where he is talking to himself. Nothing is more satisfying than simply seeing him by himself in Davy Jones locker messing with all of his other selves.
Interestingly, as much as I approve of this film, it is much much darker than the last two. Commodore Norrington bites it as does Swann's kindly old father...that's pretty harsh in a kid's movie. In a pirate movie though...that should have been the first 5 seconds yarrr. So the tone is darker, the stakes higher, and the idea of the fighting the power, of portraying the pirates as a protector of the legends and lore and imagination of the sea is really played out in this film as Becket now controls Davy Jones and a ridiculous fleet against the pirates few ships. And as always, we want to root for the underdog. Oh yea, and those two clowns that were in the first movie as British soldiers are back in this film. Along with Chow Yun Fat as a pirate lord from Asia. By the way, the opening to this film, is absolute crap as is the whole plotline of Elizabeth being Calypso or whatever. It kind of is a badly sketched plot to just make her a pirate lord. Blah. The opening makes little to no sense in terms of where we are after the second one. The same problem the second film had when compared to the first. The plot is weaker and it really hurts this film. However, if nothing else, it is well worth it to see Keith Richards as Johnny Depp's father Captain Teague and I love that he is the keeper of the Pirate Codex. Hell, I'd be up for another movie just about the relationship between these two as they are both very interesting to watch.
Potential sequels. Well, I highly doubt we'll see Bloom or Knightly for a while. Swann's father and Norrington are dead as is Davy Jones. Bootstrap Bill is still on the Flying Dutchman. So what's left to do? The answer is that Barbosa is still alive and he and Jack are always at each other's throat. Plus the movie ends with the idea that once again the two will face off as they go after eternity one more time by seeking the fountain of youth. Well, Verbinski is reportedly sick of pirates so I wouldn't expect to see him or his incredible eye for camerawork anytime soon. If I didn't say so earlier, the set design and the cinematography for these films has been beyond amazing and really make the rest of Verbinski's work pale in comparison. And Bruckheimer is not one to shy away from sequels to anything he can get his hands on and corrupt. Depp is supposedly up for more turns as Sparrow. Rush might do it but who knows, he's Geoffrey Rush and he does what he wants. The best possibility is that they will make another movie focused more solely on Jack Sparrow and his travails but it will be for a much smaller budget as Pirates 3 is currently underperforming magnificently at the box office when compared to the amount spent on it. But in the end of the day, I think the Pirates trilogy is perhaps the best epic trilogy next to the Lord of the Rings. Sorry Matrix, but you really blew it. And...well, there aren't many others besides that.
3.7 out of 5
Wannabe
In the previous review I mentioned how happy I was with the second film and its inclusion of all pirate lore. Well, this film steps up the mythology and world of pirates a bit by including literally pirates from around the globe. I'm sad that the Kraken is now dead because the admiral Becket became fearful and had Davy Jones kill it...which I might have been the only one who caught because it was a passing reference. Although this film goes out of its way to broaden the view of pirates and who they are and the world they live in. A world outside of reason and control by direct means. It really goes to pieces in terms of plot.
In the third film they travel off the planet and there are some cool effects and I won't lie, but I got the feeling that Verbinski might watch Terry Gilliam films a bit much and to understand what I mean, I highly recommend the fascinating The Adventures of Baron Munchausen to those who don't know it. With that being said, the CGI is perfectly in place and it makes sense why these two films cost so much to make when you see the effects. The makeup and costuming is spectacular and exotic as always and the trip is a fun ride. However, the reason for bringing back Barbossa is still nebulous at best and makes little sense. There is a new plotline involving some pirate brethren meeting because of the pieces of 8...? Oh yea, and they introduce Calypso as a sea god bound by the pirates and Davy Jones years ago into the black Barbados woman. Now, Barbossa wants to free her from her mortal shackles in exchange she'll leave him alone and wipe out Davy Jones and the English. This is what stuck in my craw. After all the buildup and having a crazy black woman grow to be taller than the ship and everything...her powers blow. So she made a suction in the ocean and made it rain...big friggin deal. Why doesn't she just wipe out Davy Jones? For that matter, why doesn't she just wipe out everyone except Barbossa's ship? The reason is then it would deprive people of a good grand pirate hoe down and the ensuing satisfaction of seeing Becket lose his nerve...what crap. Calypso feels like such a letdown that everything after it just doesn't matter. It made me wonder why the pirates felt they had to trap her in the first place, she seems ridiculously harmless and pathetic as a God. I feared the mortal version more. Then there is the obligatory Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann love strife crap and them both trying to do what they think is right. Whatever. I'm glad the ending happened as it did in some ways and I won't tell you what it is that happens. Because now, it would seem that all adventures with Turner and Swann are over. Thank God. On Depp's side of things, he gets to have more fun in this film by apparently going even more insane and having tons of scenes where he is talking to himself. Nothing is more satisfying than simply seeing him by himself in Davy Jones locker messing with all of his other selves.
Interestingly, as much as I approve of this film, it is much much darker than the last two. Commodore Norrington bites it as does Swann's kindly old father...that's pretty harsh in a kid's movie. In a pirate movie though...that should have been the first 5 seconds yarrr. So the tone is darker, the stakes higher, and the idea of the fighting the power, of portraying the pirates as a protector of the legends and lore and imagination of the sea is really played out in this film as Becket now controls Davy Jones and a ridiculous fleet against the pirates few ships. And as always, we want to root for the underdog. Oh yea, and those two clowns that were in the first movie as British soldiers are back in this film. Along with Chow Yun Fat as a pirate lord from Asia. By the way, the opening to this film, is absolute crap as is the whole plotline of Elizabeth being Calypso or whatever. It kind of is a badly sketched plot to just make her a pirate lord. Blah. The opening makes little to no sense in terms of where we are after the second one. The same problem the second film had when compared to the first. The plot is weaker and it really hurts this film. However, if nothing else, it is well worth it to see Keith Richards as Johnny Depp's father Captain Teague and I love that he is the keeper of the Pirate Codex. Hell, I'd be up for another movie just about the relationship between these two as they are both very interesting to watch.
Potential sequels. Well, I highly doubt we'll see Bloom or Knightly for a while. Swann's father and Norrington are dead as is Davy Jones. Bootstrap Bill is still on the Flying Dutchman. So what's left to do? The answer is that Barbosa is still alive and he and Jack are always at each other's throat. Plus the movie ends with the idea that once again the two will face off as they go after eternity one more time by seeking the fountain of youth. Well, Verbinski is reportedly sick of pirates so I wouldn't expect to see him or his incredible eye for camerawork anytime soon. If I didn't say so earlier, the set design and the cinematography for these films has been beyond amazing and really make the rest of Verbinski's work pale in comparison. And Bruckheimer is not one to shy away from sequels to anything he can get his hands on and corrupt. Depp is supposedly up for more turns as Sparrow. Rush might do it but who knows, he's Geoffrey Rush and he does what he wants. The best possibility is that they will make another movie focused more solely on Jack Sparrow and his travails but it will be for a much smaller budget as Pirates 3 is currently underperforming magnificently at the box office when compared to the amount spent on it. But in the end of the day, I think the Pirates trilogy is perhaps the best epic trilogy next to the Lord of the Rings. Sorry Matrix, but you really blew it. And...well, there aren't many others besides that.
3.7 out of 5
Wannabe
Indie League Update
Okay fellas,
well the weekend saw several new releases and here is a list of everybody's slates. Remember, if there is a $ beside a title's name that means it has already been released and the numbers are the numbers for it so far, not its predictions.
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 RATATOUILLE 225 8 16 7.9
2 $PAPRIKA 0.2 4 0 8
3 NO RESERVATIONS 38 0 1 6
4 SIMPSONS 100 4 9 6.9
5 $DAY WATCH 0.1 1 0 7.1
6 $BUG 6.9 0 2 6.9
7 $ONCE 1.7 8 0 8.6
8 EAGLE VS. SHARK 13.3 6 0 6.9
GoS
1 TRANSFORMERS 240 10 16 7.1
2 EVENING 23 7 0 7.7
3 $OCEAN'S 13 36.1 4 5 7.5
4 NANCY DREW 48.5 1 2 6.1
5 $GOLDEN DOOR 0.1 6 0 7.3
6 $YOU'RE GONNA MISS ME 0.001 0 0 8.4
7 YOU KILL ME 2 3 0 6.9
8 $EVEN MONEY 0.06 0 0 5.9
WANNABE
1 $KNOCKED UP 65.9 8 7 8.4
2 $SURF'S UP 17.6 0 2 7.1
3 FF4 160 8 13 5.7
4 BLACK SHEEP 1.1 1 0 6.3
5 DEATH AT A FUNERAL 11.5 0 0 5.3
6 I NOW PRONOUNCE YOU CHUCK AND LARRY 125 6 9 6.9
7 SICKO 65 5 4 7
8 FIDO 16 0 2 6.6
WILLO
1 EVAN ALMIGHTY 135 5 10 6.6
2 HP5 230 9 13 7.6
3 HAIRSPRAY 60 2 4 5.9
4 LIVE FREE OF DIE HARD 73 3 6 5.9
5 $HOSTEL II 8.2 0 0 5.7
6 $SEVERANCE 0.1 0 0 6.9
7 CAPTIVITY 12.9 0 0 4.9
8 $MR. BROOKS 18.6 0 2 7.6
Next up are the rankings for each individual category.
BO RANKINGS
WILLO 537.8 4
WANNABE 462.1 3
CASTLE 385.2 2
GOS 349.761 1
PTA RANKINGS
CASTLE 31 4
GOS 31 3
WANNABE 28 2
WILLO 19 1
TOP 5
WANNABE 37 4
WILLO 35 3
CASTLE 28 2
GOS 23 1
IMDB
CASTLE 7.2875 4
GOS 7.1125 3
WANNABE 6.6625 2
WILLO 6.3875 1
Then the final standings as they are right now.
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 3.5 2 4 11.5 1
GOS 1 3.5 1 3 8.5 4
WANNABE 3 2 4 2 11 2
WILLO 4 1 3 1 9 3
Well, Gentlemen, I feel great about my standing now. It seems my new purchase manager knows how to do his job right. And as such, I highly suggest some of you scramble to change some things up in order to improve your rank. Let the rabble rousing begin!
Wannabe
well the weekend saw several new releases and here is a list of everybody's slates. Remember, if there is a $ beside a title's name that means it has already been released and the numbers are the numbers for it so far, not its predictions.
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 RATATOUILLE 225 8 16 7.9
2 $PAPRIKA 0.2 4 0 8
3 NO RESERVATIONS 38 0 1 6
4 SIMPSONS 100 4 9 6.9
5 $DAY WATCH 0.1 1 0 7.1
6 $BUG 6.9 0 2 6.9
7 $ONCE 1.7 8 0 8.6
8 EAGLE VS. SHARK 13.3 6 0 6.9
GoS
1 TRANSFORMERS 240 10 16 7.1
2 EVENING 23 7 0 7.7
3 $OCEAN'S 13 36.1 4 5 7.5
4 NANCY DREW 48.5 1 2 6.1
5 $GOLDEN DOOR 0.1 6 0 7.3
6 $YOU'RE GONNA MISS ME 0.001 0 0 8.4
7 YOU KILL ME 2 3 0 6.9
8 $EVEN MONEY 0.06 0 0 5.9
WANNABE
1 $KNOCKED UP 65.9 8 7 8.4
2 $SURF'S UP 17.6 0 2 7.1
3 FF4 160 8 13 5.7
4 BLACK SHEEP 1.1 1 0 6.3
5 DEATH AT A FUNERAL 11.5 0 0 5.3
6 I NOW PRONOUNCE YOU CHUCK AND LARRY 125 6 9 6.9
7 SICKO 65 5 4 7
8 FIDO 16 0 2 6.6
WILLO
1 EVAN ALMIGHTY 135 5 10 6.6
2 HP5 230 9 13 7.6
3 HAIRSPRAY 60 2 4 5.9
4 LIVE FREE OF DIE HARD 73 3 6 5.9
5 $HOSTEL II 8.2 0 0 5.7
6 $SEVERANCE 0.1 0 0 6.9
7 CAPTIVITY 12.9 0 0 4.9
8 $MR. BROOKS 18.6 0 2 7.6
Next up are the rankings for each individual category.
BO RANKINGS
WILLO 537.8 4
WANNABE 462.1 3
CASTLE 385.2 2
GOS 349.761 1
PTA RANKINGS
CASTLE 31 4
GOS 31 3
WANNABE 28 2
WILLO 19 1
TOP 5
WANNABE 37 4
WILLO 35 3
CASTLE 28 2
GOS 23 1
IMDB
CASTLE 7.2875 4
GOS 7.1125 3
WANNABE 6.6625 2
WILLO 6.3875 1
Then the final standings as they are right now.
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 3.5 2 4 11.5 1
GOS 1 3.5 1 3 8.5 4
WANNABE 3 2 4 2 11 2
WILLO 4 1 3 1 9 3
Well, Gentlemen, I feel great about my standing now. It seems my new purchase manager knows how to do his job right. And as such, I highly suggest some of you scramble to change some things up in order to improve your rank. Let the rabble rousing begin!
Wannabe
Monday, June 11, 2007
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
'Pirate Man's Treasure'
Everyone I know despises this movie and detests it, so with that in mind I realize that this will probably be the review where people stop listening to me. I loved it. Seriously, the first movie, The Black Pearl seemed more like an exercise in egotism basing a bad plotline off of a Disney ride. In this movie though, Gore Verbinski defies the odds of a Bruckheimer film and actually makes a good pirate film. Let me explain...
In the first movie, yes it had some amusing funny bits and it was a Disney movie for kids etc etc. The only truly outstanding part of the first movie was Johnny Depp's characterization of Jack Sparrow. Well, Jack Sparrow has drawn everyone back to the box office and is no longer a welcome surprise. He is still loved by all, but his acting is no longer a surprise and is expected to be this good. The big difference this voyage out is that Verbinski makes this movie about something and it is no longer suitable for children...well it is, but not really. Then there is the fact that it engulfs as much pirate lore as possible with everything from Kraken to the black spot tradition. Sure, some of the traditions are altered, and the plot does kind of get wonky sometimes, but for the most part it recreates a mythology of pirates that has been perpetuated by film, literature, and even by sailor journals over time. I find this aspect of the movie totally fascinating and I love seeing Davy Jones as a pirate. Now the whole Flying Dutchman thing is kind of annoying because The Black Pearl in the first movie was obviously based off of the Flying Dutchman, but oh well. I feel that the exotic nature of the film with the Barbados woman and fun islands and locales mixed with the dearth of pirate lore and legend creates a fascinating adventure worthy of a blockbuster hit. It was fun. The real problem comes with some of the actors and the annoying plot points that are never explained well.
When polling most people as to why they disliked the movie, the majority said it was too complex with too many plot points and it didn't make sense. Plus they felt that the overwhelming amount of stuff was bad and just too much of an attempt to try and earn some cash for Disney. Then there was the attacks on the actors with Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightely being called hacks. Some complained because it wasn't a children's movie anymore which I found highly amusing since these weren't children complaining. Then there was the most popular hatred focused on the ending of the film. People apparently HATE it when movies just end without tying up plot points just because they have already made or are working on a sequel to fill it in. The one exception is Lord of The Rings where most of the people who accepted it did so because they realized that each installment was part of an elongated trilogy that were intricately tied together. There were no popular book trilogies to support The Matrix films nor the Pirates of the Caribbean films. And while I can understand that perception, people should try to be a bit more understanding of what is trying to be done. I would have liked to see a six hour film instead of two individual films but each film has its own flavor and things happening in it as will be obvious once I review the third film. This film's focus was on the world of piracy and the adventures of Jack Sparrow. I think most people disliked this film because of a messup in expectations. They went in expecting it to be an entire movie devoted to Jack Sparrow with a ridiculously easy plot to follow and instead found a movie about pirates, requiring knowledge of pirate lore just to understand what was happening and very complex multiple storylines involving almost every character from the first movie. Also, it doesn't wrap up and end...this is my guess as to why people despise this film.
As for what this film is about, it's about the loss of mythology and magic in a world where everything is mapped, charted, and found. It's about the pirates versus those who would make everything normal and boring again with cruise ships and the like. It's the first half of an incredibly long film about the world as it was when it was becoming less interesting and more "civilized" with the bad guy Becket representing the evil side of "civilization". If you go and watch these films, you learn this fairly quick. It is much more obvious in the third film, but it is still present in the second. As for plot though, well...it has hiccups. The beginning of the movie starts with some sort of deal between Davy Jones and Jack Sparrow that no one from the first film ever knew or heard of, so it is kind of irksome and out of left field. But if you can just sort of muscle through the premise which makes little to no sense compared to the ending of the first movie, then you can follow along with the winding tale of treachery and pirate backstabbing that is the second film. I especially enjoy the dichotomy of former Commodore Norrington's character. Sure, you have to pay close attention because some details get explained away in quick flippant lines, but the explanations are all their and the movie does a decent job of reiterating what has happened several times in an attempt to help out the younger ones. Although the most baffling part to me is that of the undead monkey...i thought that was fixed in the first film? The biggest fault between these movies is that Gore and the writers do a terrible job of explaining what happened in between stories. The ending is also really rough as Sparrow dies in an epic fight with the Kraken and then Barbosa is re-introduced...and not really explained. Although I did enjoy the meeting and explanation of Bootstrap Bill. The plot is so huge and epic that it fits the crazyness of the lore and pirate world in which the movie is thrust. The problem comes in that of the lovers. I'm sorry, but Bloom and Knightly rarely ever make me think they have any talent. They show that they can play the Romeo & Juliet bits well as the star crossed lovers who are destined to never get a moments rest...but really, they need to learn to add some interest to their characters outside of the story arcs twists and turns. God knows Depp did by simply leaning and waving about in an effete manner. Also, the ridiculous lengths to which the script goes to keep certain characters from the first film involved is kind of bizarre, but oh well. It's a Bruckheimer produced film. It's lucky that he even allowed Verbinski to make it about something.
Conclusion:
The acting is eh except for Depp and Nighy as Davy Jones. The story is massive and complex but a lot of fun if you are a fan of pirate mythology and lore. It's too bad it doesn't have a suitable resolution to help this film stand on its own. The CGI is impressive and the exoticism makes this film a very fun ride indeed. It's a little more adult oriented as a pirate film should be and there are still several great laugh moments. My real concern is that this time out the entire crew seems to have a wink in their eye everytime a joke occurs, especially that guy who plays the first mate for Depp's character. It's a bit hammy sir, just a bit. Besides that I congratulate Mr. Verbinski on making a fairly fun and enjoyable pirate movie for intelligent beings that would also like to see a blockbuster occassionally without feeling talked down to.
4.4 out of 5
Wannabe
Everyone I know despises this movie and detests it, so with that in mind I realize that this will probably be the review where people stop listening to me. I loved it. Seriously, the first movie, The Black Pearl seemed more like an exercise in egotism basing a bad plotline off of a Disney ride. In this movie though, Gore Verbinski defies the odds of a Bruckheimer film and actually makes a good pirate film. Let me explain...
In the first movie, yes it had some amusing funny bits and it was a Disney movie for kids etc etc. The only truly outstanding part of the first movie was Johnny Depp's characterization of Jack Sparrow. Well, Jack Sparrow has drawn everyone back to the box office and is no longer a welcome surprise. He is still loved by all, but his acting is no longer a surprise and is expected to be this good. The big difference this voyage out is that Verbinski makes this movie about something and it is no longer suitable for children...well it is, but not really. Then there is the fact that it engulfs as much pirate lore as possible with everything from Kraken to the black spot tradition. Sure, some of the traditions are altered, and the plot does kind of get wonky sometimes, but for the most part it recreates a mythology of pirates that has been perpetuated by film, literature, and even by sailor journals over time. I find this aspect of the movie totally fascinating and I love seeing Davy Jones as a pirate. Now the whole Flying Dutchman thing is kind of annoying because The Black Pearl in the first movie was obviously based off of the Flying Dutchman, but oh well. I feel that the exotic nature of the film with the Barbados woman and fun islands and locales mixed with the dearth of pirate lore and legend creates a fascinating adventure worthy of a blockbuster hit. It was fun. The real problem comes with some of the actors and the annoying plot points that are never explained well.
When polling most people as to why they disliked the movie, the majority said it was too complex with too many plot points and it didn't make sense. Plus they felt that the overwhelming amount of stuff was bad and just too much of an attempt to try and earn some cash for Disney. Then there was the attacks on the actors with Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightely being called hacks. Some complained because it wasn't a children's movie anymore which I found highly amusing since these weren't children complaining. Then there was the most popular hatred focused on the ending of the film. People apparently HATE it when movies just end without tying up plot points just because they have already made or are working on a sequel to fill it in. The one exception is Lord of The Rings where most of the people who accepted it did so because they realized that each installment was part of an elongated trilogy that were intricately tied together. There were no popular book trilogies to support The Matrix films nor the Pirates of the Caribbean films. And while I can understand that perception, people should try to be a bit more understanding of what is trying to be done. I would have liked to see a six hour film instead of two individual films but each film has its own flavor and things happening in it as will be obvious once I review the third film. This film's focus was on the world of piracy and the adventures of Jack Sparrow. I think most people disliked this film because of a messup in expectations. They went in expecting it to be an entire movie devoted to Jack Sparrow with a ridiculously easy plot to follow and instead found a movie about pirates, requiring knowledge of pirate lore just to understand what was happening and very complex multiple storylines involving almost every character from the first movie. Also, it doesn't wrap up and end...this is my guess as to why people despise this film.
As for what this film is about, it's about the loss of mythology and magic in a world where everything is mapped, charted, and found. It's about the pirates versus those who would make everything normal and boring again with cruise ships and the like. It's the first half of an incredibly long film about the world as it was when it was becoming less interesting and more "civilized" with the bad guy Becket representing the evil side of "civilization". If you go and watch these films, you learn this fairly quick. It is much more obvious in the third film, but it is still present in the second. As for plot though, well...it has hiccups. The beginning of the movie starts with some sort of deal between Davy Jones and Jack Sparrow that no one from the first film ever knew or heard of, so it is kind of irksome and out of left field. But if you can just sort of muscle through the premise which makes little to no sense compared to the ending of the first movie, then you can follow along with the winding tale of treachery and pirate backstabbing that is the second film. I especially enjoy the dichotomy of former Commodore Norrington's character. Sure, you have to pay close attention because some details get explained away in quick flippant lines, but the explanations are all their and the movie does a decent job of reiterating what has happened several times in an attempt to help out the younger ones. Although the most baffling part to me is that of the undead monkey...i thought that was fixed in the first film? The biggest fault between these movies is that Gore and the writers do a terrible job of explaining what happened in between stories. The ending is also really rough as Sparrow dies in an epic fight with the Kraken and then Barbosa is re-introduced...and not really explained. Although I did enjoy the meeting and explanation of Bootstrap Bill. The plot is so huge and epic that it fits the crazyness of the lore and pirate world in which the movie is thrust. The problem comes in that of the lovers. I'm sorry, but Bloom and Knightly rarely ever make me think they have any talent. They show that they can play the Romeo & Juliet bits well as the star crossed lovers who are destined to never get a moments rest...but really, they need to learn to add some interest to their characters outside of the story arcs twists and turns. God knows Depp did by simply leaning and waving about in an effete manner. Also, the ridiculous lengths to which the script goes to keep certain characters from the first film involved is kind of bizarre, but oh well. It's a Bruckheimer produced film. It's lucky that he even allowed Verbinski to make it about something.
Conclusion:
The acting is eh except for Depp and Nighy as Davy Jones. The story is massive and complex but a lot of fun if you are a fan of pirate mythology and lore. It's too bad it doesn't have a suitable resolution to help this film stand on its own. The CGI is impressive and the exoticism makes this film a very fun ride indeed. It's a little more adult oriented as a pirate film should be and there are still several great laugh moments. My real concern is that this time out the entire crew seems to have a wink in their eye everytime a joke occurs, especially that guy who plays the first mate for Depp's character. It's a bit hammy sir, just a bit. Besides that I congratulate Mr. Verbinski on making a fairly fun and enjoyable pirate movie for intelligent beings that would also like to see a blockbuster occassionally without feeling talked down to.
4.4 out of 5
Wannabe
Friday, June 8, 2007
Shrek the Third
'a short trek for Shrek'
Most people this summer were psyched about the three new releases of Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3 and lastly, Shrek 3. It's definitely a three-quel summer. Well, Spiderman 3 was a let down, especially at the end and it destroyed a lot of what the previous two films worked to build. The Pirates was recently toppled by Knocked Up at the box office and by most accounts is...bad. Then there is Shrek 3 which is probably using its time wisely to gain as much money as possible before any other CGI flicks come out like Ratatouille. However, like the other two movies, it is also receiving lukewarm reviews...and here's why.
Shrek I : Shrek falls in love with a princess and has to overcome his natural ogrishness to get her to fall in love with him.
Shrek II: Shrek meets the parents and tries to impress them while they desperately seek a replacement in the form of Prince Charming who turns out to be a jerk and fool aided by the fairy godmother with magic.
Shrek III: Shrek must go find an heir to the throne and deal with the new issue of being a father.
Now, the main things that have characterized Shrek in the past is its love of satirizing and making comedic interpretations of folklore, fantasy, and fairytale elements while at the same time using these elements as a commentary on the real world...for example, the town of Far Far Away is a mock up of L.A. and Hollywood. The third Shrek film continues the tradition of Fairytale mishmashes and social commentary in its normal comedic tradition...so why so eh?
The reason why is, the film feels like it has less heart. The setup is good with the king dying and Shrek being too afraid to take over since he is an ogre and people hate him. Then you have the whole revenge thing with Prince Charming and Hook and Rumpelstiltskin. Of course, as Shrek leaves he finds out that he is going to be a father and his nightmares set in. Then he finds Arthur who is the social reject of his class and is hated by most and has never known his own father really. This setup is perfect for the heart moments that would be necessary to preparing Shrek for the arduous task of child-raising. Now, remember, there is a revolt and an usurper to the throne. Plus Arthur has to come to terms with whether he wants to be king and somewhere in there is a turn where Shrek lies to save the kids life but in turn hurts the kids feelings. Blah blah blah. The movie is only an hour and a half, a short feature film by most standards and it shows because the triumphs and tribulations necesarry to be won together don't occur. The team doesn't overcome the obstacles necessary to make it believable that Shrek and Arthur like each other and that Shrek has warmed to the idea of being a father. The quick pace and desire to get back to the funny parts while skimping and shortening the story hurts this film drastically in the end by making it an interesting tale but effectively killing most of the commentary and heart that Shrek is known to envelope as a series. That and soem of the jokes were much lamer. Seriously fellas, the movie was decent and maybe that's because Andrew Adamson helped in the writing of it, but he didn't direct this time and I think that he would have known it needed to be longer with more story thrown in and perhaps a bit more of the fairytale parody.
As for voice acting, well there is an interesting bit at the end about Puss in Boots and Donkey getting mixed up. The normal voice actors for their parts do fine. Cameron Diaz for some reason really drew me into her character this time around. Not sure why, can't explain it. Although, when the credits role, my hat goes off to the fine actors who played parts and I had no idea they were even in the movie. Yes, that includes Rupert Everett, Justin Timberlake, and the almighty John Cleese who needs to do more work every day all day....he should just have his own channel, I love that man.
Conclusion:
All in all, the film is well done. The effects budget is improved and the visuals are noticeably nicer than in the first two. Unfortunately, the story is rushed and crunched down into a really small box when simply by its premise and what it tries to do it needs more room to breathe and accomplish its goals. Its frustrating because it isn't a bad movie, but it is nowhere near as good as the others and you want it to be because it is easy to recognize that it could be if given more time. Perhaps the only time I will complain about the time for a movie.
3.1 out of 5
Wannabe
Most people this summer were psyched about the three new releases of Spiderman 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3 and lastly, Shrek 3. It's definitely a three-quel summer. Well, Spiderman 3 was a let down, especially at the end and it destroyed a lot of what the previous two films worked to build. The Pirates was recently toppled by Knocked Up at the box office and by most accounts is...bad. Then there is Shrek 3 which is probably using its time wisely to gain as much money as possible before any other CGI flicks come out like Ratatouille. However, like the other two movies, it is also receiving lukewarm reviews...and here's why.
Shrek I : Shrek falls in love with a princess and has to overcome his natural ogrishness to get her to fall in love with him.
Shrek II: Shrek meets the parents and tries to impress them while they desperately seek a replacement in the form of Prince Charming who turns out to be a jerk and fool aided by the fairy godmother with magic.
Shrek III: Shrek must go find an heir to the throne and deal with the new issue of being a father.
Now, the main things that have characterized Shrek in the past is its love of satirizing and making comedic interpretations of folklore, fantasy, and fairytale elements while at the same time using these elements as a commentary on the real world...for example, the town of Far Far Away is a mock up of L.A. and Hollywood. The third Shrek film continues the tradition of Fairytale mishmashes and social commentary in its normal comedic tradition...so why so eh?
The reason why is, the film feels like it has less heart. The setup is good with the king dying and Shrek being too afraid to take over since he is an ogre and people hate him. Then you have the whole revenge thing with Prince Charming and Hook and Rumpelstiltskin. Of course, as Shrek leaves he finds out that he is going to be a father and his nightmares set in. Then he finds Arthur who is the social reject of his class and is hated by most and has never known his own father really. This setup is perfect for the heart moments that would be necessary to preparing Shrek for the arduous task of child-raising. Now, remember, there is a revolt and an usurper to the throne. Plus Arthur has to come to terms with whether he wants to be king and somewhere in there is a turn where Shrek lies to save the kids life but in turn hurts the kids feelings. Blah blah blah. The movie is only an hour and a half, a short feature film by most standards and it shows because the triumphs and tribulations necesarry to be won together don't occur. The team doesn't overcome the obstacles necessary to make it believable that Shrek and Arthur like each other and that Shrek has warmed to the idea of being a father. The quick pace and desire to get back to the funny parts while skimping and shortening the story hurts this film drastically in the end by making it an interesting tale but effectively killing most of the commentary and heart that Shrek is known to envelope as a series. That and soem of the jokes were much lamer. Seriously fellas, the movie was decent and maybe that's because Andrew Adamson helped in the writing of it, but he didn't direct this time and I think that he would have known it needed to be longer with more story thrown in and perhaps a bit more of the fairytale parody.
As for voice acting, well there is an interesting bit at the end about Puss in Boots and Donkey getting mixed up. The normal voice actors for their parts do fine. Cameron Diaz for some reason really drew me into her character this time around. Not sure why, can't explain it. Although, when the credits role, my hat goes off to the fine actors who played parts and I had no idea they were even in the movie. Yes, that includes Rupert Everett, Justin Timberlake, and the almighty John Cleese who needs to do more work every day all day....he should just have his own channel, I love that man.
Conclusion:
All in all, the film is well done. The effects budget is improved and the visuals are noticeably nicer than in the first two. Unfortunately, the story is rushed and crunched down into a really small box when simply by its premise and what it tries to do it needs more room to breathe and accomplish its goals. Its frustrating because it isn't a bad movie, but it is nowhere near as good as the others and you want it to be because it is easy to recognize that it could be if given more time. Perhaps the only time I will complain about the time for a movie.
3.1 out of 5
Wannabe
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Hot Fuzz
I have been collecting several reviews for this film. So first here are two reviews by other people.
1. Hi, Wannabe,
Couldn't wait until tomorrow to tell you we went to see Hot Fuzz. What a great spoof! Have you gotten to see it yet? The British humor is so much fun. We're trying to decide whether your wife would like it or not because of the blood... but it's so... British!! Did you say it had been at one of the film festivals? An Indie win, or something? We think our friend who has been studying forensics and is now teaching a college class in it, would really laugh a lot. He and his wife (our attorney who loves to read and watch British mysteries) are talking about taking a group of college students to London next May on a "Legal/Criminal Justice" tour.
The man, however, after seeing the movie, is afraid that with our quirks, we might get caught in some small village and have a hard time getting away.
Thanks for the (crazy) recommendation!
The Rents
2. Hehe...now after that quick jotted review, here's one from one of our other contributors, Castle.
Hot Fuzz
"Book ‘em dann'o, we got our front page"
It seems that I’ve fallen in love with the triumphant return of the unlikely duo of crime fighters... and no I’m not talking about Chip and Dale's Rescue Rangers but bonus points if you were thinking that. Hot Fuzz shows that between the collaboration of director and actors and editors, this team knows how to make a bang on parody film. Using the same type of structure as the Shaun of the Dead Writer/Director Edgar Wright and Writer/Actor Simon Pegg create a buddy cop film that draws upon TONS of movies including (but certainly not limited to) Bad Boys II, He Man and the Masters of the Universe, Chinatown, Lethal Weapon and (of course) Shaun of the Dead. I think I even caught a reference to the fight between Andre the Giant and Prince Wesley from The Princess Bride... The film follows super cop Nick Angel (played by Simon Pegg) as he is taken out of London and placed in small town Sandford where he has to deal with annoying coworkers and a supposedly tranquil community. To complete the pair there is the delightfully goofy Nick Frost who plays Pegg’s right hand man, Danny Butterman, the dundering, malaprop-laden officer who follows Angel around like an eager puppy. The fact that Frost and Pegg are good friends comes through again to create a delightful ease to their chemistry and allow their scenes to sparkle with the sheen of great British humor. The rest of the cast hold their own and create one of the most bizarre and hilarious, two-faced British communities that I’ve seen.
While the chemistry and comic timing might be impressive enough by themselves, I found that the true strength of the film shows through the success of the editing and unity in design. Every shot fired and car chased was done in such a sexy, fast paced way that just fits perfectly into the goal of the movie. Hell, even drinking cranberry juice seemed hardcore. The music and sounds of the movie are equally fitting: a bunch of obscure, quirky, funny and well thought-out songs that compliment each scene they inhabit. . The shots were in interesting and well-done angles and lighting was just as complimentary. There were only a few blood spurts that seemed a little cheaply done but I’ll forgive them for a few “boo boos.”
Now I was a little taken back at first because this movie didn’t have the pace that I expected (no thanks to the trailers). They toyed with the audience’s sense of pace to comic effect but I was able to truly enjoy the film once I realized that this was not supposed to be 2 hours of a badass fight sequence (which was well waiting for and did not feel pushed aside at all). The only caution I give to viewers is that if you’ve seen Shaun of the Dead and were only a so-so fan of the film, you might find yourself caught in the “this movie’s just the same thing” trap. They do use the device of cyclical scenes and dialogue that can come across as predictable at times. I adored these moments. My advice, look beyond the similarities between their films. This is not the time to try and judge similarities between films like you would for Shrek/Spiderman/Pirates 1-3. Now if only the movie had a longer run in theatres and I didn’t have to wait for the DVD to release to see it again…
Conclusion:
See this film. It has great actors, over-the-top british cop themed humor, smart dialogue, and some truly kickass action sequences that I have come to expect from this creative team. There is a definite appeal to the teen-young adult male audience but I think that a wide variety of people can enjoy it just as well. This will be another film to quote and share with friends, who enjoy things like humor, guns, beer, and swans. Hurrah to good collaboration and I can’t wait to see what these guys have up their sleeves for the next one!
4.6 out of 5
Castle
Okay, now that you have had a chance to read these two previous glowing reviews, I'm going to write a lukewarm one and be hated for comparing it to Shaun of the Dead.
The recent film Hot Fuzz by Edgar Wright is absolutely hilarious and you should see the film for the awesome fight scene at the end and for the great role played by previous Mr. Bond, Timothy Dalton. My God he's great! And while the film delivers on the promise set by Shaun of the Dead by having numerous fun movie references and lots of comedy...it also fails to achieve its greatness due to overfulfilling the promise of creating a homage to buddy cop films...and slasher films, and thrillers, and Godzilla, and etc. This movie has been hotly anticipated for some time now and while I approve the idea of creating a homage parody of buddy cop films, somewhere along the way this film loses its focus and begins to be an homage to any film the creating team loved at some point in time, creating a hodge podge movie that doesn't attempt to make itself work better for teh audience. For example, the film is a comedy, a british comedy at the end of the day with some aspects of buddy cop right? So what is going on with the over the top gruesome deaths? The spire at the church tower comes to mind. And what is up with the Godzilla reference and scream lookalike and the Shyamalan twist? Although the story ties together and the build up for the awesome fight sequence at the end is paid off in full with constant shots at Bad Boys and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid . The problem is that the tonal mix of the various genres they try to emulate creates a very confused film that they don't try to fix. Also, they stick to closely to the story elements of the traditional Michael Bay flick. Sure the action is cool and the cinematography rocks, but the story and characterizations of everyone in the film is no better than a sketch and they seem to be tone deaf as they prefer mastering one-note. Plus, a lot of the characters don't fit too well. The police chief is eh and even Pegg annoyed me when he tried to do his "I-m a badass" voice and yes its quite noticeable. The other problem I had was that the film tends to "preview" its jokes. The Keanu Reeves moment is a great one as is the over use of only so-so running gags and return jokes. Now truth be told, the film is still funny and a blast to watch as you get to see all of the highjinks and try to find the movie references. I can only imagine that this film becomes instantly better when seen in bigger groups. Its sad because when compared to its previous soul film Shaun of the Dead, Shaun didn't have any 2-d characters. Everyone had a third dimension to them and the jokes were smart and fierce and it stayed true to parodying only one genre which focused the energy and creativity more and resulted in a more powerful and funnier film. All that said, this is still a great funny film and I highly recommend it to anyone, except my wife who can't stand blood.
4.1 out of 5
Wannabe
1. Hi, Wannabe,
Couldn't wait until tomorrow to tell you we went to see Hot Fuzz. What a great spoof! Have you gotten to see it yet? The British humor is so much fun. We're trying to decide whether your wife would like it or not because of the blood... but it's so... British!! Did you say it had been at one of the film festivals? An Indie win, or something? We think our friend who has been studying forensics and is now teaching a college class in it, would really laugh a lot. He and his wife (our attorney who loves to read and watch British mysteries) are talking about taking a group of college students to London next May on a "Legal/Criminal Justice" tour.
The man, however, after seeing the movie, is afraid that with our quirks, we might get caught in some small village and have a hard time getting away.
Thanks for the (crazy) recommendation!
The Rents
2. Hehe...now after that quick jotted review, here's one from one of our other contributors, Castle.
Hot Fuzz
"Book ‘em dann'o, we got our front page"
It seems that I’ve fallen in love with the triumphant return of the unlikely duo of crime fighters... and no I’m not talking about Chip and Dale's Rescue Rangers but bonus points if you were thinking that. Hot Fuzz shows that between the collaboration of director and actors and editors, this team knows how to make a bang on parody film. Using the same type of structure as the Shaun of the Dead Writer/Director Edgar Wright and Writer/Actor Simon Pegg create a buddy cop film that draws upon TONS of movies including (but certainly not limited to) Bad Boys II, He Man and the Masters of the Universe, Chinatown, Lethal Weapon and (of course) Shaun of the Dead. I think I even caught a reference to the fight between Andre the Giant and Prince Wesley from The Princess Bride... The film follows super cop Nick Angel (played by Simon Pegg) as he is taken out of London and placed in small town Sandford where he has to deal with annoying coworkers and a supposedly tranquil community. To complete the pair there is the delightfully goofy Nick Frost who plays Pegg’s right hand man, Danny Butterman, the dundering, malaprop-laden officer who follows Angel around like an eager puppy. The fact that Frost and Pegg are good friends comes through again to create a delightful ease to their chemistry and allow their scenes to sparkle with the sheen of great British humor. The rest of the cast hold their own and create one of the most bizarre and hilarious, two-faced British communities that I’ve seen.
While the chemistry and comic timing might be impressive enough by themselves, I found that the true strength of the film shows through the success of the editing and unity in design. Every shot fired and car chased was done in such a sexy, fast paced way that just fits perfectly into the goal of the movie. Hell, even drinking cranberry juice seemed hardcore. The music and sounds of the movie are equally fitting: a bunch of obscure, quirky, funny and well thought-out songs that compliment each scene they inhabit. . The shots were in interesting and well-done angles and lighting was just as complimentary. There were only a few blood spurts that seemed a little cheaply done but I’ll forgive them for a few “boo boos.”
Now I was a little taken back at first because this movie didn’t have the pace that I expected (no thanks to the trailers). They toyed with the audience’s sense of pace to comic effect but I was able to truly enjoy the film once I realized that this was not supposed to be 2 hours of a badass fight sequence (which was well waiting for and did not feel pushed aside at all). The only caution I give to viewers is that if you’ve seen Shaun of the Dead and were only a so-so fan of the film, you might find yourself caught in the “this movie’s just the same thing” trap. They do use the device of cyclical scenes and dialogue that can come across as predictable at times. I adored these moments. My advice, look beyond the similarities between their films. This is not the time to try and judge similarities between films like you would for Shrek/Spiderman/Pirates 1-3. Now if only the movie had a longer run in theatres and I didn’t have to wait for the DVD to release to see it again…
Conclusion:
See this film. It has great actors, over-the-top british cop themed humor, smart dialogue, and some truly kickass action sequences that I have come to expect from this creative team. There is a definite appeal to the teen-young adult male audience but I think that a wide variety of people can enjoy it just as well. This will be another film to quote and share with friends, who enjoy things like humor, guns, beer, and swans. Hurrah to good collaboration and I can’t wait to see what these guys have up their sleeves for the next one!
4.6 out of 5
Castle
Okay, now that you have had a chance to read these two previous glowing reviews, I'm going to write a lukewarm one and be hated for comparing it to Shaun of the Dead.
The recent film Hot Fuzz by Edgar Wright is absolutely hilarious and you should see the film for the awesome fight scene at the end and for the great role played by previous Mr. Bond, Timothy Dalton. My God he's great! And while the film delivers on the promise set by Shaun of the Dead by having numerous fun movie references and lots of comedy...it also fails to achieve its greatness due to overfulfilling the promise of creating a homage to buddy cop films...and slasher films, and thrillers, and Godzilla, and etc. This movie has been hotly anticipated for some time now and while I approve the idea of creating a homage parody of buddy cop films, somewhere along the way this film loses its focus and begins to be an homage to any film the creating team loved at some point in time, creating a hodge podge movie that doesn't attempt to make itself work better for teh audience. For example, the film is a comedy, a british comedy at the end of the day with some aspects of buddy cop right? So what is going on with the over the top gruesome deaths? The spire at the church tower comes to mind. And what is up with the Godzilla reference and scream lookalike and the Shyamalan twist? Although the story ties together and the build up for the awesome fight sequence at the end is paid off in full with constant shots at Bad Boys and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid . The problem is that the tonal mix of the various genres they try to emulate creates a very confused film that they don't try to fix. Also, they stick to closely to the story elements of the traditional Michael Bay flick. Sure the action is cool and the cinematography rocks, but the story and characterizations of everyone in the film is no better than a sketch and they seem to be tone deaf as they prefer mastering one-note. Plus, a lot of the characters don't fit too well. The police chief is eh and even Pegg annoyed me when he tried to do his "I-m a badass" voice and yes its quite noticeable. The other problem I had was that the film tends to "preview" its jokes. The Keanu Reeves moment is a great one as is the over use of only so-so running gags and return jokes. Now truth be told, the film is still funny and a blast to watch as you get to see all of the highjinks and try to find the movie references. I can only imagine that this film becomes instantly better when seen in bigger groups. Its sad because when compared to its previous soul film Shaun of the Dead, Shaun didn't have any 2-d characters. Everyone had a third dimension to them and the jokes were smart and fierce and it stayed true to parodying only one genre which focused the energy and creativity more and resulted in a more powerful and funnier film. All that said, this is still a great funny film and I highly recommend it to anyone, except my wife who can't stand blood.
4.1 out of 5
Wannabe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
