Eagle Eye (Dvd) - Both

Computers are terribly dangerous. They can do some crazy stuff that you don’t even know about, like change traffic lights, operate cranes, blow the airbag in a truck, anything and everything you think a computer can do – it can. Plus computers hate humans. They find us dangerous. They believe that we are a hindrance to ourselves and to the world. Thus every time a movie imagines a world where computers think, they kick our ass. As long as we can maintain our dominance over conscious thought we’re good, but if they ever gain even semi-conscious thought . . .

Well, Shia Laboof lives in that world.

Shit.

The computers are going to get us. Not only does the computer in this movie hate humans, but it hates humans on the basis that we don’t follow a largely philosophical document that states our desires for our nation.

Wow.

This computer can think, hate and interpret the documents our forefathers wrote. We are in trouble.

The rogue sister of HAL believes that the president has broken a law and thus he needs to be eliminated along with the entire executive branch. The computer then devises an insanely complicated plot involving a trumpet and a diamond necklace to pull off the assassination.

Hell, man. Computers are amazing.

Now, why wouldn’t the computer simply take control of a plane and bomb the white off the executive branch – I don’t’ know. During the course of the movie we see that computers can do that sort of thing. But, I guess, our computer has a flare for the dramatic. Trumpet and diamond necklace – that’s the ticket.

Oh, computers, you are a dangerous match that humans love to play with. When will we actually get burnt?

Shia stumbles through his dialog as he does his fame and drags the film down a notch or two, but with a ridiculous plot like this, I’m not sure this ever had a chance of being good anyways. There are car chases, there are guns, and there is an individual who gets shot, but survives – it’s your basic action movie.

I largely don’t go for these types of movies, and neither does Jennie, but this film seemed to garner some praise, all be it a small amount, and I can’t, for the life of me, figure out why. The bland plot that mixed any action film with 2001: a space odyssey was straight from the latest airplane novel sitting in the tiny Barns & Nobles. I don’t get it. Where did any praise come from?

3 out of 10: I wouldn’t waste my time. This fil[ERROR] JRun Servlet [ERROR](SecModConnectionPool.java:705)[ERROR] THIS MOVIE WAS GREAT \nl GO WATCH IT NOW

Ghost Town (Dvd) - Both

I watched Ricky Gervais earlier this month on Inside the Actor’s Studio he stated that some of the best comedians did one thing, and they did it really well, he named Abbot and Costello as prime examples. They also had a lovable loser thing going on, because according to Gervais confidence aint funny. This, I’m assuming, was said to combat the critics who call Gervais a one trick pony. I tend to agree with the critics but I can see where Gervais is coming from as well.

In Ghost World Gervias remains true to his ideal stated to James Lipton and plays a largely anti-social extrovert whose near death experience leaves him with the unintended side effect of being able to speak with the dead. Since he is incredibly anti-social this irks him a great deal as now he has even more people crowding his world. In an attempt to get rid of them he finds love.

Yes, this is a romcom staring Ricky Gervais. This, in my mind, is as bad of a casting call as Ellen DeGeneres in Mr. Wrong (1996). I’m not sure who thought he would be a good lead in a romcom but I don’t have the big Hollywood pockets.

This film has a heart to it – that’s undisputable. Gervais is given the chance to help the dead move on from what is keeping them trapped in limbo. In these acts of good will and kindness the lovable loser that Gervais plays finds that the closed world he has been living in his whole life is somewhat meaningless and vapid. This is not a horribly surprising message, but Gervais plays the emotions well, and I genuinely felt good when he helped people.

The scant hour and maybe thirty minutes that this movie takes to tell its tale is a bit short, but I wouldn’t have wanted them to spend any more time on the ghosts, nor would I have wanted any more riffing from Gervais, so I guess win win.

4 out of 10 – Gervais plays Gervias once again, but this time with emotion.

Wanted (Dvd)

I would figure a Matrix (1999) rip-off would have been made a little earlier, I mean isn’t this about 5 years late? And when I say rip-off I don’t mean like Heathcliff v. Garfield, I’m talking plagiarism right down to the pseudo-attractive female that kicks ass. This film is the Matrix without computers. I can actually picture the Hollywood heads using that exact phrase, “Matrix without computers,” to describe what this was and how it was going to make money.

The hero is starts in a cubicle where he is picked on by his “best” friend and boss and is ignored by the office hottie.

Oh man, what a set up.

His girlfriend is cheating on him with his “best” friend from the office though she isn’t nice to him anyways. This cardboard situation isn’t developed in anyway though so when his estranged dad turns out to be in a secret group of assassins it seems like a great deal for the main character Wesley “Neo” Gibson. Eventually, this group of assassins needs to show this nobody that he is a somebody by teaching him the ways of his father so that he can track down his father’s killer who just so happens to be the best assassin ever.

I can’t tell you how many Matrix type situations and characters are in this film and as it turns out the graphic novel this film was adapted from was published in 2003 so I think we all know where Mark Miller got is inspiration. And though the plot was a direct rip-off of a better work it is actually a pretty universal plot, so you would think that the audience could get behind this loser with a destiny plot. But the action and actors seem so clichéd and flat it felt like watching an hour and a half commercial for some hot new cell phone, caffeine drink or at least some other product that the kids like. There was absolutely no weight to the characters.

The one character I found that they gave at least an attempt at fleshing out is big-lips herself, Mrs. Angelina Jolie – shudder. I dislike her. I don’t think she is a good actress, and I don’t know why. I won’t watch Changeling (2008) though I have heard great things about, because she is the central actor. She is like the female Vince Vaughn, always adding her sleek “sexiness” to every character she plays. Her back story here involves a clichéd rough childhood, and, I guess, that means she can kick ass.

Yeah.

There is a betrayal, what we thought was true wasn’t – and, finally, a twist a Romcom fan could see coming a mile away - oh, and a huge scene with ass kicking. Ho-hum. There is room for a sequel, of course, but if this is a mediocre Matrix, and the Matrix sequels were horrible, then the amount of suck that a Wanted sequel would create would be monumental.

3 out of 10 – Just rewatch the Matrix.

Snow Angels (Dvd) - Matt Suggestion

I’m not sure what is more surprising – the idea that this film hasn’t had any praise whatsoever in a lackluster year for award movies, or that this film was directed by the same individual who directed Pineapple Express (2008). You choose.

The film is a sparse drama set in a snow fallen small town that while showing the cycle of relationships reflects on the pain and loss that can be born from mediocrity in effort. Sam Rockwell, brilliant as always, plays Glenn Marchand, a recently divorced recently born again Christian who skirts the line of worthlessness and significance as he attempts to regain the life he once had. His ex, Annie, played against type by Kate Beckinsale, is obviously done with any relationship that the two could possibly produce and is self-destructive with her other relationships in the small town. The two stumble through their parental duties until the rising action of the film when the here-to-for pawn in their relationship embodied by the little girl goes missing.

Backinsale’s character works in a shabby Chinese restaurant the type you know is about as Chinese as a fortune cookie, while Rockwell works as a wholesale carpet dealer attempting to parlay his newfound religion into sales and advancement. The town’s high school band plays a soulless and mournful version of Peter Gabriel’s Sledgehammer while the band leader screams for them to feel it. Meaning – the tangible qualities of the town are additions to the morose feelings the jilted relationship emanates, it’s all rather depressing.

There are four central relationships that this film attempts to portray that displays four distinct stages in relationships in general: birth (young love), angst (a couple who is being torn apart by infidelity), acceptance (a couple divorcing due to infidelity), and death (a couple destroying their relationship and each other). Rockwell and Beckinsale play the latter of the four who are falling deep into a gulch of self loathing and after the loss of their daughter Rockwell’s character is sunk. It’s all rather depressing.

My biggest complaint in this film lies with its youngest actors and the writing done for them. They are given poor dialog and seemingly worse motivation. Their relationship seems born of confidence and a mutual attraction both of which are hard to come by in high school. This isn’t to say it is impossible, but with the characters, I find it to be against the grain.

But overall this film is a well done yet miserable. Despite the young love flub the relationships are stark and realistic. Accolades are deserved all around, but I fear none will come, which is all rather depressing.

7 out of 10 – a great film that should be seen, but I would never want to watch it again thus it loses a point.

Step Brothers (Dvd) - Ashleigh

Will Ferrell hasn’t been hitting them out of the park with his last couple of efforts. Semi-Pro (2008), Blades of Glory (2007), Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (2006) – this list reads like a sad memoir of an ex-SNL cast member trying to make it in the real world without the watchful eye of Lorne Michaels. This somewhat depressing fate was thought to have escaped Ferrell, but if he keeps tossing out these bombs I’m not sure what else we can do for him.

As this Ferrell/McKay film was presented with a little bit more meat with it, Jennie and I figured we would give it a shot. After all, this isn’t some bland sports movie with a yards of footage of Ferrell riffing. I can’t say we were fully rewarded for our efforts, but this is certainly his best film since Stranger Than Fiction (2005).

The premise is comedy gold, as Kenny Bania would have said. The alarming fact that someone at that age is still living with his parents is wrought with landmines of laughter. And to have two individuals who are in the same situation thrown together by their parent’s nuptials is an amazing concept. I liken this idea, a purely great comedic situation, to Idiocracy (2006). How can it not win?

And though Step Brothers does surpass Idiocracy, in that it uses its ingenious concept to create some great comedic moment, I can’t help but think the loose feeling that McKay’s films seem to generate is this films downfall. John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell were made to play these roles. There is just the right amount of tension and lunacy to create some amazingly funny moments. I loved Reilly’s reaction to Ferrell using his drums, I laughed out loud when Ferrell and Reilly instantly became friends over a shared love of John Stamos, and to watch the pair play “Time to Say Goodbye” was a moment from my life I didn’t know I was missing.

But let’s get back to McKay’s inability to restrain his actors. I know it is the in-thing in comedy to let the cameras roll – pick up enough footage and you will make a hilarious film. At least, I think that is the idea. But without some tightly written jokes and scenarios the film as a whole feels like a riff. Missing are the details and thought behind well written comedy. It is hard to make a call back when you forget what the hell is going into the film in the first place. Also with this method you create a slew of miscues that can be fixed but create an aura of disbelief. If the actors don’t know what is ‘real’ to them then how are they to keep that world intact.

Ultimately, though, I really did enjoy this film. I thought its concept certainly worked along with its principle actors, and they were genuinely funny. But, McKay’s loose construct makes for a somewhat bumpy ride.

4 out of 10 – Ferrell/Reilly/McKay present a great concept and garnish it with a few purely comical moments, but the whole structure is too loose for my taste.

Sex and the City (Dvd) - Both

Well, I have my first repeat movie! I’m not entirely sure what to do with a repeat, but I think I will simply give a short review on how it held up. I will also link to the first review for those that missed it.

Jennie and I purchased this DVD. Pause for dramatic effect. It is the first DVD purchase we have made since… Oh, man. I think, the Ghostbusters two pack over two years ago. We don’t really watch that many movies twice, and thus we never buy them. Though technically isn’t this a TV on DVD kind of thing? I don’t know, you be the judge. Jennie and I certainly buy a lot of TV on DVD so maybe this counts as that.

Anyway, how did the further tales of the Manhattan four stand up, you ask? Not bad actually. I liked the film when it came out, and I still enjoyed it on the second watch. This certainly held up to the standards of the show, unlike some television to movies, and I enjoyed the return to the characters.

I will agree with Matthew’s comments on the original post. Louise, played by Jennifer Hudson, did feel tacked on the second go round. She was there in six scenes tops and then goes off to marry some dude without affecting the lives of anyone. I think I initially liked her because if she had stayed on she would have been a great fifth female to follow. Oh, well.

We purchased the Blu-Ray extended edition, our first Blu-Ray purchase. This contained the added scenes which would have made the movie a lengthy 3 hours. And, not one of the added scenes were that interesting. One or two of them involved Miranda’s mundane actions after Steve told of his infidelity. There was a scene that gave Charlotte a little emotional meat to her movie character which in the previous review I lamented was wafer thin. But over all they were good cuts.

The one scene I might have kept, if it hadn’t had been for the somewhat racially awkward moments, would have been the Goldenblatt's trick-or-treating with Carrie. In this scene we see Charlotte dressed as a cow, Harry dressed as Uncle Fester, and Charlotte’s child dressed as a princess, with a white girl princess mask (very awkward). This mask later plays a role in the scene as Carrie must hide herself from the Halloween parents who recognize her from her messy nuptials. But, I can easily tell you the white princess mask was the reason this scene got dropped. I mean really, did you think it was a good idea to put a white girl mask on a little Asian child? Not sure what they were thinking there.

Will I watch this again? Yes. Well I watch it as often as I watch the show? No, probably not. It is a great translation of the show to screen – a very hard feat. And in this I praise its efforts.

6 out of 10 – A solid watch. Though the only reason I go back is my love for the characters.

The Simpsons Movie (Dvd)

The Simpsons film has come and gone, and with it the small amount of fanfare that had been built up. Left now are the bitter ashes of a film found on a five dollar call out shelf at Target.

When this originally came out I was excited to see it. The marathon that the Simpsons have participated in has been a grueling testament to Groening’s ability to disregard quality. This is coming from a man who still has a season pass of the Simpsons on his DVR, and willingly watches each episode. I feel like a pig that has been shot from the sewers as Homer yells after me, “It’s still good. It’s still good.”

I wanted the movie to be great. I wanted it to hearken back to those heady days when the tale of Nelson Muntz and his bosom chum Martin Prince were told, when Homer choose crab juice over Mountain Dew, or even Homer’s disastrous turn as a sugar salesman. I wanted something that couldn’t be delivered.

The story was big enough for the movies, the box-office takings were high enough, and everyone claimed that despite the resent turn the show had taken that the movie was good. But as I popped in the dvd and waited for the choir to sing, “The Simspons” I felt deflated.

This isn’t the feeling I get when I go rewatch “Bart Sells His Soul”, “The PTA Disbands”, or even “Bart on the Road”. These episodes I could watch right now and have myself an enjoyable 22 minutes of solid entertainment. But upon my second airing of the Simpsons Movie I found myself waiting for the end to release me. I didn’t want to stick around.

The story line was grandiose on a ridiculous scale. Some of my favorite moments in the Simpsons are simple and sweet while being humorous. When Bart gets medically turned into a nerd in “The Last Temptation of Homer” the gag isn’t monumental, the world doesn’t change, but the human emotion of not fitting in is universal. They didn’t need Springfield to be cupped in a large dome; they played off of real life. This has been the key to Simpsons connecting to everyone, something I feel they have stopped doing in the last couple of seasons and in this movie.

They also played with continuity. I know that is a stupid fanboy annoyance, but come on. You are dealing with an historical series here, get it right. Homer and Marge were married by themselves, no family with them! Bah!

While I laughed and enjoyed my second viewing of this film I won’t say I loved it. I won’t say the Simpsons Movie is a success – it isn’t. It is the continuation of the degradation of the brand name, and I will continue to purchase your wares no matter what…

4 out of 10: Where are your roots, friend? Find them.

The Fall (Dvd) - Ashleigh

The Fall is a gorgeous film that goes nowhere. The plot is a simple story within a story which is told by an injured stuntman to an injured girl, both of whom are recovering from unrelated falls in the depression era. The little girl is an immigrant who fell while picking oranges while the stuntman had an on the job accident which paralyzed him from the waist down.

This film came to my attention when I was perusing Spike Jonze’s latest films. How is it possible that he and David Fincher where involved in a film and I knew nothing of it. Compounding my interest was the actor who portrayed the injured stuntman, one Lee Pace of Pushing Daisies fame.

Oh, wait, Spike Jonze and David Fincher are only presenting this film. (Whatever the hell that means.) One thing I’m sure that means is that they had nothing to do with the production of this film. Shoot.

Lee Pace’s character Roy tells a grand story of five heroes who vow to kill a man named Odious for one reason or another. Roy’s story is told on an epic scale spanning, the back of the box says, 4 continents as these five men track Odious to his country. The back of the box also informs me that it took four years to craft this film. A fact which leads me to believe they should have spent some of that time on plot/character development.

Roy injects himself and the little girl into the story and will only continue the tale each day if the little girl retrieves medicine for him. Her repeated attempts to follow Roy’s orders quickly show that Roy wants the medicine for more than just pain relief. He is looking to kill himself.

The story Roy tells becomes increasingly dark as Roy’s depression sinks lower, but the relationship between Roy and the girl seems genuine and well constructed, and as the narration slips back to Roy’s hyper color hero tale the construction of character development falls apart.

These brief stints into the imagination of Roy’s tale are scene of great cinematic beauty. I truly believe they shot the film on four different continents, and as the camera angles arc and the focus blurs the line between art and film the eye is presented with a magnificent presentation of the filmmaker’s imagination. But while the scene are saturated eye popping wonders the plot is a dull knife serrating the film’s beauty.

Lee Pace’s skills are truly on display in this film and this is exciting. I feared, while watching Pushing Daisies, that his charm and impish idealism wasn’t true acting and maybe Pace was simply that optimistic. But the juxtaposition of Roy with the pie maker shows that Pace has true range – an exciting proposition for the actor’s future.

Ultimately the tale Pace weaves is the downfall of the entire film as it is not very interesting and often drags. I can’t help but think Tarsem Singh needs to find new writers to work with. His only other film, 2000’s The Cell, was similar to The Fall in that it was beautifully shot but the plot was horrible.

3 out of 10: superb visuals and quality acting are betrayed by the horribly slow and mind numbing plot.

Speed Racer (Dvd) - Asheligh

My expectations of this movie were somewhat low. When it opened in May of this year it was berated by the critics and nobody went to see it, how far the Wachoski siblings have fallen. However, I quite enjoyed this film. The plot was tight, the action was only a little bit gratuitous, and the characters where enjoyable.

The recent influx of movies that attempt to be like comic books is an interesting concept. They take an image directly from the source material and attempt to recreate that scene on film in exactly the same way it was drawn. 300 (2007), Sin City (2005), and even the Wachoski siblings directing the Matrix trilogy are examples that use this technique. Speed Racer is loosely related to this because it is attempting to make a Japanese style animation cartoon into a feature film and while doing this they employee some of the same techniques that style of animation is known for. As this is the case we are presented with an over-saturated, sometimes vaudevillian, piece of cinema that works most of the time.

If you go into this film wanting anything other than a cartoon brought to life I can imagine disappointment. This isn’t to say it was perfectly executed – far from it. The beginning hour seemed to drag like a speedster with a flat tire. The viewer didn’t need to see Speed as a little boy in school. The moments establishing his relationship with his brother would have been enough. Also, I would fear for an epileptic to watch this film as its bright colors and flashy special effects sometimes overwhelmed the action. But, our hero was given his plot, as the forty-five minute mark rolled around, and from there the movie picked up its pace.

The plot was actually somewhat complicated as emotions were shouldered and details of financial intrigue forced the characters through their evolutions. I would find it hard to believe that a child could understand what was going on. But, I enjoyed how detailed the plot was. It made me work to understand the motivations of the characters and for a children’s film to do this is unique.

I will not recommend this movie as I’m not sure many would like it. Hell, Jennie fell asleep. But, if you were at all interested in it when you saw it in theatres, take a chance. Just, make it past the first hour.

5 out of 10: when it failed it did so monumentally, but the successes were there as well.

Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (Dvd) - Ashleigh

Who knows why the first Harold and Kumar movie was decent? Was the concept of a movie about two guys going to White Castle just that great? Was Neil Patrick Harris’ cameo/comeback that unexpected? Was it the cheetah ride? I don’t know. But I do know Harold and Kumar’s second adventure fails in just as many ways as their first escapade succeeds.

The film begins just as the first film ends. Harold is about to follow his crush to Amsterdam so that he can profess his love for her, and score some legal weed while there. The pair pack and get to the airport. While on the plane Kumar lights up a unique bong, which is confused for a bomb and they turn the plane around. Robert Corddry plays a hot headed idiot who works for the government in some capacity and thinks Harold and Kumar are out to get the U. S. of A. Corddry then sends them to Gitmo as terror suspects. In an entirely idiotic and repugnant scene the two see a pair of detainees eat a “cockmeat sandwich” (b.j.) while doing so the detainees bite the guards penis off and run for the exit. Harold and Kumar see their escape and make for the United States. There story then zigzags in and out of ridiculous situation after ridiculous situation. In this montage they run into NPH again, an incestuous couple, and Christopher Meloni. Nothing new, really. They get out of the trouble they are in when they smoke a marijuana cigarette with George Bush and he decides they are “cool”. And they all live happily ever after.

I think one of the reasons the first film worked was its scope was unusually small. The saga took place in one night that just had a lot of crazy things going on while in route to a local White Castle. The sequel, on the other hand, was a cross country affair ending in Texas that took the better part of a week. The scale just seemed idiotically big. Also, some of the racial humor was sophomoric to the point that it lost any laughs. This was the case in a scene where Ed Helms interpreted for Robert Corddry between Harold’s parents, who spoke perfectly good English, and Corddy. As they shouted at the idiot in English Helms’ character claimed they were speaking gibberish. My last complaint was just the sheer volume of previously used material. There was even a sex scene with a giant bag of mary jane! Are their no new ideas?

3 out 10 – So reminiscent of the first film that it begs the question – “Why make a sequel?”

Drillbit Taylor (Dvd) - Ashleigh

After seeing the trailer for this movie I had no desire to partake in Owen Wilson playing Owen Wilson with a bunch of kids. However, after a conversation with bosom chum and fellow blogger, Travis, I decided to take a chance. During said conversation Travis informed me that this movie was actually quite good, and that I should give it a try. I now curse his name for wasting precious hours of my life that I could have spent finding album artwork online for my Ipod!

First of all, I hate Owen Wilson. I’m not sure I have ever found the butterscotch stallion appealing in anything, with his “chill” vibe and broken nose looks he is the poor man’s Matthew McConaughey. I’ve never thought he could carry a film, and Drillbit is certainly not new territory for the golden haired jester.

The film’s story centers around three kids who are starting high school and are ruthlessly picked on by a bully who randomly chooses them as his punching bag. This bully is ridiculously brutal and Jennie and I found ourselves constantly guffawing at his unlikely antics. He made the boys pee on themselves, shoves them in lockers (does this actually happen to anyone?), and in one insane scene of gratuitous shenanigans he attempts to murder them by running them down in his car. They decide to hire a bodyguard and after some interviews they choose Drillbit. He follows the well trod road of the Hans Solo storyline as he uses the boys for cash at first, they find out – get pissed off, then Drillbit decides he should help them after all, and saves the day when the boys had given up hope.

There is very little to laugh at in this movie. It was difficult even getting through it. I feel a little bit betrayed by Seth Rogan, who helped write this, and Judd Apatow, who produced this. Couldn’t they tell this was a stinker? I ask this, but then notice that Apatow’s name appears in the credits of Will Ferrell’s bomb Kicking & Screaming (1995) which has a similar amount of stink in it. Apatow and crew really need to stay away from children. They seem to fail miserably when they try to make a non R rated film.

2 out of 10 – Owen Wilson fails… again.

Back to the Future Part III (Dvd) - Both

See Back to the Future (Dvd) - Both for full review

6 out of 10: a rather episodic adventure for Marty and the Doc, but retains the feeling of the previous films.

Back to the Future Part II (Dvd) - Both

See Back to the Future (Dvd) - Both for full review

7 out of 10: a relatively interesting look at the future with some heady time travel to keep the fun going

Back to the Future (Dvd) - Both

In the world of movie trilogies I believe, for most people, Back to the Future (BttF) ranks somewhere in the middle. For me it ranks somewhere near the top. I was the perfect age for this to blow my young mind when I first watched it and to this day it holds a place in my heart as being the first set of movies I really could not wait to see as each installment came out. Granted I believe I watched the first one on VHS and caught the last two in the theatre, but still. Jennie had never seen these films so to catch her up on great eighties flicks we watched this on our bored Sunday afternoon. Ghostbusters is next!

The first BttF film still holds up with few glaring eighties moments. These don’t necessarily take away from the enjoyment of the film, but they do date the film. The story holds up as a unique and imaginative plot that reflects the creative decade in which it was made. The intricacies of time travel are dealt with in a theoretically logical way and an attempt at an explanation of time travel allows this movie the latitude to hold my disbelief. While the fact that Marty is lusted after and stalked by his mother may have been a risky plot device, the relationship is played with such delicate humor and innocent teenage angst by Lea Thompson that it is impossible to get too dirty with it. The tightrope that Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis, the writers, walk is awe-inspiring compared with the clunky work of today’s blockbuster scribes.

By not taking the visual effects root and having time travel be an instantaneous blip the movie’s look and feel is only dated by Michael J. Fox’s hair and colloquialisms. The DeLorean still looks like a very cool way to travel through time, and overall the film is as exciting and fun as I had remembered it to be. This is an example of a good story with thoroughly imagined characters being able to hold up against time.

The saga continues with back to back sequels produced and written at the same time. Bob Gale sets up a myriad of dominos to topple as the series completes itself and finds satisfying ways in which to end the tale. I remember as a child liking the second film better than the third film as the second film actually went to the future. Doc explains at one point in time that he has always wanted to explore the future to see where mankind takes itself. This is in fact, why I would want to visit the future and thus my bias is reveled.

Now that I have seen it again I believe the second film is still my favorite but for an entirely different reason. The film has a relatively convoluted plot that twists in and out of itself and even into the first film. The second film holds to the trilogy doctrine as it is the darkest of the three, and this twisted dark tale is satisfying because of its refusal to take the easy road and be The Time Traveling Adventure of Marty and Doc. The third film, while entertaining certainly feels like just such an episode.

The future that is displayed in part two is a bright happy place with a color palette of extreme hues and synthetic clothing. While most of the technologies displayed in this vision are impossible and impractical I found the most glaring inaccuracy to be the clothing. Though I can’t help but think that is simply due to the hyper colors of the late eighties and early nineties bleeding into the clothing designer’s consciousness.

The third film seems to be a self contained adventure that features Doc and Marty in the old west. This isn’t to say that I would have enjoyed another film with Marty fixing 1955, so I guess this is the best that could have been, but I still find it somewhat episodic in nature. There are some lovely call backs to the previous films, some of which are glaring, while others are subtle. One that I feel I missed the first time round was in dark 1985 in which Biff rules Hill Valley as a casino lord he is seen watching a movie in which Clint Eastwood saves his life with a bulletproof vest in an old west shoot out. Tannen loves this at the time but his relative is then fooled in the third film by the very same trick when Marty defeats Buford Tannen. These subtle call backs are what really make this film fantastic as it feels like the adventure is truly a continuation.

I believe this trilogy stands the test of time relatively unscathed. Jennie seemed to really enjoy her first viewing and that is saying a lot as Jennie usually hates older movies (read older than 1995). I myself was completely entertained and was left wanting more as I feel all good movies do. I am glad they have yet to tarnish the honor by making a sequel recently as they have with Indiana Jones, but I anticipate somewhere in Hollywood is a young scribe who is penning the continued adventures of Doc and Marty as I write this, or, hush my mouth, a remake!

Back to the Future - 7 out of 10: still a great film that contains the fun and excitiment I still look for in my blockbusters

Back to the Future Part II - 7 out of 10: a relatively interesting look at the future with some heady time travel to keep the fun going

Back to the Future Part III - 6 out of 10: a rather episodic adventure for Marty and the Doc, but retains the feeling of the previous films.

Enchanted (Dvd) - Jennifer, Natania

Jennie and I had already seen this movie when it came out in theatres last year, but since my sister and her four year old daughter were coming to visit we decided to rent this with them. So, this will be a short review.

This movie was originally brought to Disney as an R rated film that poked fun at its history. Obviously Disney didn’t like that, but thought the overarching themes were smart enough. The next couple of years brought revisions and cast changes until you get the homogenized version that they released as a vehicle to get the young girls to spend money on princess merchandise. Giselle isn’t really a princess, but the idea is floated about with a quick marriage to a prince, but she never actually marries him.

The songs in this film do remind me of the golden era of Disney musicals (i.e. Beauty and the Beast (1991), Aladdin (1992), Lion King (1994), etc.). They even retain some of the jabs that I’m assuming the R rated version was full of: as Giselle begins “That’s How You Know” Patrick Dempsey’s character questions how both singers know the song when in fact he has never heard the song before in his life, and Giselle, seemingly, has never met the man she is singing with. This sort of irreverent humor gives this movie its best moments, but they are few and far between.

The film has a paper thin girl empowerment message which seems forced. The Disney princesses aren’t really role models in any since of the word. They all seem to find trouble and need to be rescued by a man. With Giselle, Disney rectifies this idea by having her save Patrick Dempsey all while in a lovely purple evening gown. A girl has to look her best. And despite the anti-love message of the first half of the film they all live happily ever after in perfect marital bliss. I can only imagine how the R rated version ended.

5 out of 10: Disney is finally able to capture the magic of its previous musicals, but as always melts it down till there is only a shadow of originality.

Fool's Gold (Dvd)

In our continued effort to see all the Blu-ray DVDs blockbuster has to offer I bring you Fool’s Gold. This mundane film wastes an hour and a half of your time by combining How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days (2003) and National Treasure (2004). McConaughey and Hudson just seem to be here to get a paycheck, and why not? If I couldn’t spend a month in the Bahamas flirting and swimming I would. There is some inexplicable violence. There are some inexplicable boobs. McConaughey inexplicably can’t keep his shirt on for more then ten minutes.
I’m not sure what draws studios to make films like these, but I have a feeling they turn a fair amount of profit in that they can’t take a lot of money to make, and I’m sure you get some kind of return on your investment.
I just looked this up and they made 100 million off this movie, and that aint countin’ the DVD sales/rentals, so there is your answer.
If I were to compare this to something like 30 Dresses (2008) I would say this was pretty good. But that is setting the measuring stick pretty low. Hudson and McConaughey’s character’s motivations seemed interesting and diverse enough, but the other two main character’s motivations, played by Donald Sutherland and some unknown tart, were thoroughly confusing. They paid for an expedition to search for gold, with only McConaughey and Hudson’s word for it. Why would an affluent man do this? I’m sure he didn’t make his money by throwing it at harebrained schemes. And the tart, at first, seemed motivated by the thought of the shirtless McConaughey, who, as always, was playing himself. But by the end of the film Hudson and McConaughey were together while her motivation evaporated into thin air. So, while motivations were confusing at points the playful banter between McConaughey and Hudson were what kept this film afloat. I’m sure we shall be seeing this combo again, soon enough.

3 out of 10 – Not the worst Romcom I’ve ever seen… though that aint sayin’ much.

National Treasure (Dvd) - Jennie

This should be brief. Jennie and I watched Nation Treasure 2 (2007) with her brother on Christmas break. She really enjoyed the story and the movie overall so I suggested that she would probably enjoy the original, and, since she had never seen it, we should probably check out Indiana Jones, as it is about a treasure hunting historian as well. As you know we watched the latest Indy flick and we weren’t too impressed with it, which inclined me to believe that perhaps I only loved Indy for nostalgia’s sake. This I have yet to confirm, though perhaps later this summer we will rent the earlier Indy flicks and cement my views.

As for National Treasure it was as good as I remembered it to be, which was only partially good. The film runs at a brisk pace till Gates is captured, but it quickly regains its footing after this slight tumble. The puzzles are somewhat fun and interesting, though somewhat historically inaccurate. I won’t argue with a film about a hidden revolutionary war era treasure though. Jennie enjoyed it a lot more than the recent Indy flick, and I have to whole-heartedly agree. This is what I wanted, or remembered, Indiana Jones to be: realistic, no aliens, no Mutt - fun. Maybe I remember Indiana Jones incorrectly, but as for recent adventures I choose Ben Gates over Indy anytime.

4 out of 10: A perfectly run of the mill adventure. Subtract one for Nick Cage being Nick Cage.

The Mist (Dvd) - Both

This is the forth Steven King adaptation for Frank Darabont. His previous works include The Shawshank Redemption (1994) and The Green Mile (1999). This leads me to believe he just found out that Steven King actually writes horror novels, but better late than never I guess. Darabont does a pretty good job with his first horror film allowing the horror to be human drama and not just blood and guts, which most horror films rely on these days. He also altered King’s original ending opting for a much grimmer finale.

This film quickly gets to the point. Ten minutes in and we are at our main set piece, a grocery store, and paranoia is brewing. The film is set in a small Maine town where a mist is quickly approaching after a particularly bad thunderstorm. At this ten minute mark a man runs into the grocery store alerting the principle actors to an unknown danger in the mist. The crowded store huddles in fear as the mist surrounds the now barricaded building. There is no further explanation as to why anyone should be afraid of this mist, but everyone buys into it and we begin our standoff. The group realizes, through deadly trial and error, that inhuman beasts inhabit the mist and any attempt to leave the store results in mutilation. The hysteria builds as a religious zealot claims the end is nigh, and converts soon begin to follow her. The level heads begin to plot an escape and while doing so find out that the beasts in the mist are inter-dimensional beings brought to earth through a dimensional-door opened by the military. This sounds ridiculous, but, frankly, I didn’t care. I went along for the ride, and was happy I did so. (On a side note: Turn off your brain sometimes and you will be pleasently surprised.) Eventually a group tries to escape the store and drive hoping they may find an end to the mist. The gas runs out and the survivors, realizing a horrible death awaits if they leave the car, take the quick way out. Since they only have four bullets and five individuals the male lead quickly murders the rest and exits the car screaming for the beasts to come.

This particularly grim ending is just one of the fantastic choices Darabont makes in this adaptation. King’s story ends with the survivors hearing one word out of the scrambled car radio, “Hartford.” They then head towards Hartford and the story ends. Darabont’s ending feels more realistic as it is missing the glimmer of hope. Darabont’s design crew also does an amazing job of making the fantastic creatures that inhabit the mist. My favorite shot in the movie happens as the band of survivors drive towards the unknown and a massive beast the size of a 10 story building walks out of the mist ignoring the small vehicle at its massive feet. On the flip side of the fantastic coin is Darabont’s ability to focus on the drama and horror of mob mentality. The religious zealot is able to be just as horrific and diabolical as the inter-dimensional beasts that rip people limb from limb. This isn’t to say Darbont’s film is perfect. The religious zealot is verbose and boarders on annoying at times. The mob seems all to willing to turn emotionally on a dime. And while the designs for the creatures were intense the effects crew did a particularly crude job in their execution of said designs. As a fan of Sci-Fi take my recommendation with a grain of salt. If you can’t believe in the fantastic don’t bother with this.

6 out of 10 – A satisfying Sci-Fi horror film that uses both human and inhuman horrors to tweak your nerves.

Untraceable (Dvd)

Three to five years ago this would have stared Ashley Judd, but she has moved on to bigger and better things (like Bug (2006), I guess). So Diane Lane fills her sassy cop loafers to put away this particular bad guy, and this leads me to a discussion of the fate of 40+ actresses. They seem to be segregated to the waste bin of movies, left to play menopausal newly single mothers who need to learn to date again, over sexed fashionistas, or, as in this case, hard nosed cops. Other than the occasional role as Queen Elizabeth (any of them), or the portrayal of a mental disorder, the meaty roles are nowhere to be found. Hell, Cate Blanchett got nominated this year by playing a man! I posit this question, is it that no one wants to write these films? Or is it that no one sees these films? Or, is it something else?

Leaving that lofty question in the air I bring you down to this waste of marquee space. If you watched the trailer I’m sure you already know the entire plot sans one or two details. You already know Colin Hanks character dies, in what is an emotionally tough loss for the already frazzled Jennifer, played by Diane Lane. I’m sure you know that the killer is caught by his own hubris. I’m also sure you know that her family is somehow threatened, but ultimately o.k. This film is nothing new or even relatively interesting.

Why did we pick this up from Blockbuster then? Well, my wonderful wife got me a Playstation 3 for my birthday. If you are not familiar with these behemoths they are both a gaming system and a Blu-ray DVD player. When we went to the Blockbuster to pick out a movie this was one of the only ones in the meager selection of movies that we hadn’t watched in that format, and I wanted to see what the new system could do. Simply put, it can waste our afternoon with crystal clarity.

To continue, I also have a hatred for internet/computer films. I’m sure all professionals who see films about their professions think this, but they never get it right and end up sounding incredibly stupid.
“Oh no, the criminal hacked the kernel and concatenated hidden bits on the end of each program counter so the instruction cycle would print out to an IO and he would eventually be able to take over the assembly language!”
Guh. The writer of this script must have grabbed the latest copy of Interwebs For Dummies to type up this dialog. The movie going public doesn’t care; they wouldn’t know what you were talking about anyway. The only people that would know what you are talking about will hate you for failing to even get it close. On that note, the film also displayed a distinct hatred for the internet. It tried to make it look like a dark alley where predators stalk any who venture in.

I recommend that you quickly close this browser and shut down your computer. This movie thinks the web will kill you.

2 out of 10 – Thankfully, no one wants to watch this, so I don’t feel obligated to discourage you from watching it.

The Orphanage (Dvd) - Both

I had heard very little about this film. I just knew it was a horror film and had been out around Lansing playing somewhere at some point in time. Being that Jennie is a horror buff I figured we would give this a shot. By the time I popped it in the DVD player I found out that Guillermo del Toro was presenting this film (I’ve never been sure what that even means) and that it was Spanish language film. So my hopes had reason from interested to anticipatory.

I was greatly disappointed. The film is about a family who moves into a now defunct orphanage. Laura, the mother, was previously a resident of this orphanage and the first scene depicts her as a child playing with her orphan chums. After she is adopted the movie jumps thirty years to when she arrives at the house with her husband and child. She has adopted a son who has a group of invisible friends and a secret. He unknowingly has aids, a secret his mother keeps from him. I only point this out because the movie initially makes a big deal about this in the first twenty minutes or so, but then drops it all together after the boy finds out about it. The purpose of the young child having this disease was lost on me.

I’m sure you can figure out what happens simply by hearing this set up, but I’ll give you the nickle tour anyways. One of the boy’s invisible friends actually ends up being the ghost of one of the Laura’s orphan friends. This ghost friend supposedly kidnaps the boy and the mother is then forced to search for her lost son. After six months the father gives up looking while the mother swears ghosts have her child. In her search she finds out that right after she left the orphanage after being adopted the orphans accidentally killed one of their own. In an act of vengeance a worker at the orphanage kills all of the remaining orphans (the original murdered orphan was her child – I ask, then why was he at an orphanage? Who knows.). And, in my opinion, Laura surely would have heard of this massacre when she purchased the old orphanage but she seems unaware of it. Laura solves the decades old murder case and is then given the key to finding her lost son by the now happy ghosts.

I can’t tell you how much I hate this style of horror film. Do dead children always come back to have other people help solve their murder cases? There are so many movies out their like this, The Others (2001), Stir of Echoes (1999), the Ring (2002), must I go on? I figured since this was a foreign film this might be different. Maybe outside of America there is some originality.

3 out of 10 – Nothing here is original, it isn’t even that frightening. Though if your child is murdered fear not, he or she will eventually help solve their own murder case.