Category: review

Rightfully considered the first true blockbuster of 2008, Iron Man was released this past weekend and already raked in over $100 million in ticket sales. As per usual, when a Marvel superhero movie comes out, I had to go see it! It was even worth the 35 minute drive to Chesterfield to go see it on the Mega Screen… And overall, I thought it was pretty damned awesome…

The story centers around billionaire Tony Stark, who runs the weapons developer/manufacturer Stark Industries. While in Afghanistan giving a demo of his new missile to the U.S. military, he gets kidnapped by terrorists that want him to build the missile for them in a cave. During the course of the kidnapping, he gets some shrapnel caught in his body that will kill him once it reaches his heart (eh?) – he then develops a mini electromagnet to prevent this from occurring and save his life. In order to escape from the terrorists, he builds an iron suit from left-over missile parts, powered by the generator now in his chest. After escaping, he realizes the error of his ways and decides to do good for humanity, mostly buy building an even better generator and an even better suit to help combat evil around the globe.

The acting by Robert Downey, Jr. is excellent. As many other reviewers have said, and as I thought when his casting was first announced, Downey was born to play Tony Stark. It’s one of those things where there is no one else alive who could possibly play this role. Besides him, the acting amongst the other players was pretty good, but it all pretty much relied on his portrayal of Stark…and he succeeded admirably. The effects, of course, were also top-notch (as should be expected from the first true blockbuster of the year). It was good enough that you knew it was mostly computer generated, but it wasn’t all that easy to tell when Downey was in the suit, or whether the suit was actually CGI.

The thing that gets me about this movie, however, is the story… When I look back on movies like “Spider-man” and “X-men,” you can point to the “origin” aspects of the story, and then the “villain” part of the story. In the case of “Spider-man,” the first half of the movie is spent with Peter Parker figuring out his powers and what he’s going to do with them. The last half has him meeting up with the Green Goblin 3 or 4 times, culminating in a last battle leading to ultimate victory. So far as “X-Men” goes, there wasn’t as much “origin” to the story, but at least there were interactions with Magneto throughout the entire film, making that last scene where he’s defeated much more intense…

“Iron Man,” however, seems to follow the “Fantastic Four” formula of relying mostly on origin story, and then finally having a “boss battle” at the end of the movie…with no real interaction between the protagonist and ultimate antagonist until the very end (by “ultimate,” I mean the guy Iron Man eventually battles…even though he interacts with the villain throughout the movie). “Fantastic Four” was similar in that they coped with their powers for most of the movie, and finally fought Dr. Doom in the last scene…which made me dislike “Four” to an extent.

I think “Iron Man” does a better job of bridging the gap between “origin” and “villain” relatively well, but not as well as “Spider-man” did. So, to that end, I don’t think “Iron Man” is as good a movie, but I still think it was really good and I’ll grab the DVD…

…mostly because “Iron Man 2” has already been green-lit… 😛

So, I was a big fan of Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle. It wasn’t reviewed terribly well, but it was arguably the funniest comedy I’d seen in years. As in, I’ll usually go to a comedy and chuckle a bit, or maybe laugh out loud some…but White Castle was to the point where I couldn’t breathe for half the movie. (No Mom, you wouldn’t find it funny…not your kind of humor… :-P)

Therefore, we went and saw the second iteration, Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay this weekend, which picks up right as the previous film lets off. The basic premise is that, at the end of “White Castle,” Harold finally kisses the girl of his dreams, but promptly finds out that she’s off to Amsterdam. So…Harold and Kumar, being the stoners that they are, are all about getting on a plane and heading off…

Well, the crazy old white lady on the plane sees our Indian (read: Al Qaeda) and Korean (read: North Korean) protagonists, gets freaked out, comedy ensues, and the Air Marshalls send the two off to Guantanamo. After a brief stay (as in, like, 2 minutes), they escape and make it to Florida with a boat of Cubans. Anyway, the pair go through all kinds of shenanigans as they make their way to Texas to clear their names…

In all honesty, I’m glad I saw the movie, but it wasn’t as good as the first one. It still had breathless funny moments, but it wasn’t quite half the movie…maybe a quarter, this time. The cameos alone are hilarious, as Ed Helms, Rob Corddry, David Krumholtz, Beverly D’Angelo, Christopher Meloni, Jon Reep (of “Last Comic Standing” fame), George W. Bush (yeah…that George W. Bush…) and, of course Neil Patrick Harris.

This isn’t the kind of movie you see for the acting (which was good, of course), or the special effects (there weren’t any), but it was quite funny and worth the money…especially if you liked the first one.

And yeah…watching a George W. look-a-like smoke weed and speak ill of his parents isn’t funny…I don’t know what is…

‘Tis fitting, perhaps, that my 50th review on this so-called “blog” be for “Cloverfield,” a movie by J.J. Abrams, who is also doing the new “Star Trek” movie opening on Christmas Day, 2008….but more on that later…

The idea is that Abrams, on a visit to Japan with his kid, noticed that Godzilla is a major part of Japanese culture, but America doesn’t really have a “Godzilla”… “King Kong” was kinda close, but not the same… Abrams set out to make his own “Godzilla” movie, and certainly in his own way.

The film is set during a party for Rob, who’s leaving for Japan for his new job. Hud is charged with videotaping people’s “farewell” wishes for Rob. Suddenly, the party-goers feel what they think is an earthquake, but soon find out that “something” is attacking New York City, only a few blocks from where they stand.

The movie goes on from there, with a small group from that party setting out to get off the island and save their friends that are still trapped. The entire movie is told from the perspective of this group, and visualized through this “handicam”. It looks very much like “The Blair Witch Project,” except that this movie is a). better financed, and b). actually good. So, as such, those of you that get a little queesy with the “shaky cam” views during movies may have some difficulty, but the movie sure seemed to be a bit more steady than “Blair Witch” was.

I thought it was really good, and provided more suspense than I expected walking into it. Considering that the movie is told entirely from this small group’s perspective, you wouldn’t expect to get good views of this giant monster attacking the city (and initially you don’t!), but Abrams and his director (Matt Reeves) cleverly allow the audience to catch glimpses, and then a full-on view at the climax. The effects were quite good and, most surprisingly, the sound was awesome. Frequently in sci-fi movies, you’ll have surround sound, but not like this! Since you were seeing the movie through the eyes of this camera, that also means that you heard everything that the camera heard, meaning that you feel like you were the one holding the camera the whole time. Thus, if you hear something behind you, the camera has to turn around and look. Since you don’t have that 3rd person view (ever!), you (the viewer) are more likely to identify with Hud, the guy holding the camera.

The other neat part is that the story unfolds for this group wandering through Manhattan, so you never really know what the “creature” is, why it’s there, where it came from, etc…and honestly, you don’t care. You identify with the characters (completely unknown actors, all of which do a great job) and find things out as they do. Sure, there are questions at the end, but nothing that really must be answered. If you see it, however, pay attention at the very beginning to the text on the screen – there were some idiots in the theater that didn’t read it at the beginning and were surprised at the ending.

So yeah, the movie was good. If you don’t get queesy watching the “shaky cam” for 1.5 hours (and it isn’t all shaky!), then this is worth your time.

Edit: Apparently, in the very last shot of the movie (Rob and Beth on a ferris wheel), there’s something in the water behind them…likely kinda hard to see… If you see the movie, watch for that and tell me what it is! I didn’t know about this when I saw the movie, and thus wasn’t watching for it…grrr…

On a side-note, the teaser trailer for “Star Trek XI” precedes the movie…and believe you me, I won’t mind bypassing my presents on Xmas morning to make sure I’m in line for the first showing… The teaser is awesome and it’ll be up here as soon as a good copy of it is available (YouTube has a really crappy quality version right now…).

It’s a good year to be a geek 🙂

Brooke, with her occasionally odd taste in movies (“No Country For Old Men,” anyone?) decided she wanted to see Tim Burton‘s “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street,” starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter. In actuality, I think she wanted to see it mostly because it was featured prominently in Kevin Smith‘s “Jersey Girl,” which she enjoyed quite a bit.

In all honesty, I kinda wanted to see it, too. I very much liked “Sleepy Hollow” a few years back, also by Burton and starring Depp, and a). reviews were quite good for it, and b). who knew Depp could sing? Well, he can…and surprisingly well.

The movie centers upon one Benjamin Barker, a skilled barber, who is wrongfully imprisoned by a corrupt judge (Alan Rickman) that fancies Barker’s wife. Barker returns 15 years later to find his wife dead, his young daughter now grown up and being raised by the judge, and he wants revenge. He begins to cut hair (and throats) in the old building he used to work in, now owned by Carter’s character, Mrs. Lovett.

Now, this is not your typical musical. The score is beautiful, yet haunting. The characters sing to each other, but there are no dancing choruses in the background. Brooke tells me, from what she’s heard, the musical numbers were changed rather dramatically from the stage version, yet the this one has the blessing of its author, Steven Sondheim. (note: if you find that article, Brooke, post that for the folks…) So yeah, the singing is prominent, yet not as in other musicals. The singing is almost spoken, in some ways, but there’s definite melody to each song. Kinda hard to explain…you’ll just have to watch… 😛

I thought it was pretty good, in the end. It had a few twists and turns, and quite a few…”quirky”…moments (as per other Tim Burton films…), the acting was solid, and the cast did surprisingly well with their singing. It was kinda hard for me to understand the words in some of the earlier songs (with the thick olde English accents…), but once they got into their groove, it was very easy to follow.

I will warn you, however, that it was quite bloody. Not really “gore,” per se…more like fountains of red… I’m sure this aspect is similar to the stage version(s), but Tim Burton likes to be “over the top” with such things. It was also rather disturbing to listen to the woman sitting behind us laughing every time Johnny Depp killed someone and dropped their bodies down to the sewers…

It’s worth seeing, especially if you like Tim Burton/Johnny Depp movies… Otherwise, it’s a nice change-of-pace from your typical fare out this time of year. Depp will likely be nominated for Best Actor awards for this one…and it’s easy to see why…

We went ahead and saw “Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem” today, fully knowing it probably wouldn’t live up to its predecessor, “Alien vs Predator” (which is saying a lot, as the first one wasn’t all that good, anyway…). This one picks up where the previous left off, with a “Predalien” (Predator/Alien hybrid) taking over the ship, causing it to crash-land on Earth in Colorado. Then, as one could surmise…the Aliens and Predators fight it out and a lot of people die with lots of explosions…

The acting was better than to be expected, and the effects were decent. In all honesty, I would have preferred more elaborate fight scenes. Much like the previous iterations, the action took place in darkness, so any fighting was somewhat difficult to see.

Overall, the movie was decent, and about as good as the previous one. That, and the “Predalien” was pretty badass… 😉 If you liked the other one, this one’s likely worth your time. If you are expecting the thrills and chills of better fare, such as “Alien,” “Aliens” and “Predator,” you may want to rent the DVD(s).

We went and saw “National Treasure: Book of Secrets” in Columbia this weekend, as Brooke and I both wanted to see it, and so did the rest of the family.

This one picks up awhile after the previous movie, and after briefly explaining what essentially transpired between the two films, this one jumps into the idea that the ancestor of Ben Gates (played by Nicholas Cage), Thomas Gates, was a co-conspirator in the Lincoln assassination. As a result, Ben enlists his father (Jon Voigt), his friend, ex-girlfriend (or is she?) and mother (Helen Mirren) in tracking down the crucial evidence to return honor to the Gates family name.

Now, I thought the first one was surprisingly good, despite what reviewers had to say about it. The puzzles were pretty engaging, the chemistry between actors was convincing, and the story was surprisingly fun to follow. Personally, I don’t think this one was quite as good, but if you liked the first one, you’ll still like this one. The puzzles presented were a bit “too easy,” especially as compared with the previous one. While the original film seemed to focus a bit more on the search within our nation’s history for certain artifacts, with clues left in the craziest of places (i.e. the $1 bill, the Declaration of Independence, etc…), this one did the same…but with greater ease to allow for more interaction between the multitude of great actors (Ed Harris was the bad guy in this one, but Harvey Keitel was still around in a supporting role).

In short, the movie was good and worth seeing, especially if you liked the original. Personally, I would have liked to see more “history” (which, admittedly, is not quite accurate…) and a little less focus on the interaction between the main characters, but it was still fun with plenty of laugh-out-loud moments and suspenseful sequences. It had significantly less depth than the previous iteration, but then again, if you want a fun time at the movies in the holiday season…does it really matter how much “depth” is there?

“I Am Legend” is (loosely?) based on a book written by Richard Matheson in 1954. According to the Wikipedia article, the book is essentially written about the daily life of Robert Neville (in the year 1976) as he deals with his daily activities, which consist of “mak[ing] repairs to his house, boarding up windows, stringing and hanging garlic, disposing of vampires’ corpses on his lawn and going out to gather any additional supplies needed for hunting and killing more vampires.”

In the book, a bacterial strain unleashed a pandemic on the world population, leaving Neville alone as the apparent “last man on Earth.” The bacteria induced vampire-like symptoms, and it were these effects that Neville sought to understand (i.e. why don’t they like garlic or sunlight?) and hopefully cure.

You can read through the Wikipedia article if you want, but the book, apparently, is pretty dissimilar from the 2007 movie (there are other movies based on the book, including 1964’s “The Last Man on Earth” and 1971’s “Omega Man“). Apparently, none of the movies have really hit the points that Matheson did in his book, but oh well…

In this version, Will Smith plays Dr. Robert Neville, a military scientist that stayed behind in New York City, “ground zero” for a newly airborne virus that was originally designed to cure cancer. After the virus spreads, it has a 90% kill rate: 1% are immune (including Smith) and the other 9% take on vampire-like symptoms…that then go on to eat the other 1%… He’s working to cure the disease, while at the same time trying to find out if he is really the last human alive. He spends his days hunting deer in New York City (and driving around a nice Shelby Mustang GT500…) and capturing vampires to test his treatments on, frequently with little success.

The movie itself is pretty good, I thought. It was an hour and forty minutes long, which was perfect…didn’t drag on too long (kinda like “Cast Away” seemed to, sometimes? Will Smith doesn’t have many people to talk to in this movie…) and had some truly suspenseful moments throughout. His performance was rather stellar, and he kinda carries the movie in that regard. The effects were interesting as well… The animals (e.g. deer, lions, vampire dogs…) were all CGI…and you could tell…but, they filmed parts of the movie in New York City with no people around. How exactly they faked grass growing in the cracks of concrete along the streets (CGI or plastic?), I’ll never know…but it looked really good…

My one complaint goes with the story, though… I read the Wikipedia article before seeing the movie, which perhaps was a mistake. There are certain plot elements in the book with regards to the vampires and how similar they are to humans that are pretty integral to the story, yet the movie touches on them briefly…and so briefly as to make me think they shouldn’t have been brought up at all. They mention these aspects fleetingly and you kinda wish that they’d develop them a little further…or not even mention it… One or the other…

Anyway, I thought it was pretty good. I won’t be buying the DVD, as I’m not sure it has much replay value, but it’s very much worth seeing. If you’re looking for a decent movie to see in the theaters this Winter Break, I’d consider checking it out…

First of all, let me piss off a few people: I wasn’t all that impressed with “Fargo” or “The Big Lebowski.” Much like the Smashing Pumpkins are for music, while I can appreciate the artistry and interesting stories, I just didn’t think they were as awesome as everyone else thought they were.

That said, Brooke, the Molitor brothers and I went to see the new Coen Brothers film, “No Country for Old Men,” based on the 2005 novel by Cormac McCarthy. The film centers generally on Llewelyn (Josh Brolin), who stumbles upon $2+ million and tries to keep it. The guys who lost it in a drug deal gone bad want it back, so the hunter chases after the hunted. Tommy Lee Jones is peripherally involved, one step behind Brolin and his hunter, Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem). The rest of the supporting cast is rounded out by Woody Harrelson, Stephen Root and Barry Corbin.

Brooke wanted to see the movie because she’d read it was something of a modern western, and indeed it was. It takes place in 1980, but all the elements of classic western films were there. The bad guy dressed in black, the good guy(s) with white cowboy hats, etc. In all, it was a well-acted, well-made movie…but…

…I didn’t “get it.” Brooke liked it, and I believe Adam liked it (unsure about Matt…), but I’m not sure. I can’t really explain why I feel this way, as doing so would give away the ending of the movie (note: don’t read the Wikipedia article on the movie unless you want to read spoilers about it). I think Brooke got a little annoyed with me as we talked about the film because I was trying to find meaning in it all. I think I simply missed the point, or perhaps there wasn’t a point. It makes me wonder what the book was about, and/or how faithful the Coens were to its pages. It’s in limited release, I think, so if any of you see it, lemme know what you thought…

On the Wikipedia article regarding the movie, however, I did find a few critical opinions that have helped me out, and I’ll leave you with those:

“Like McCarthy, the Coens are markedly less interested in who (if anyone) gets away with the loot than in the primal forces that urge the characters forward… [I]n the end, everyone in No Country for Old Men is both hunter and hunted, members of some endangered species trying to forestall their extinction.”
— Scott Foundas, The Village Voice

“The movie demonstrates how pitiful ordinary human feelings are in the face of implacable injustice.”
— Roger Ebert, the Chicago Sun-Times

Dang, I haven’t been to the movie theater in a loooooooong time… Needless to say, I’ve been studying a lot recently and took this opportunity to escape the confines of my little room upstairs and went to see “Beowulf,” the new Robert Zemeckis film based on the classic epic poem.

Now, when I say “classic,” I mean it… At least according to the Wikipedia article, it dates back as the oldest written manuscript in the English language (AD 1010) and, as Mrs. Rahm and Mrs. Grupe in 10th grade were kind enough to point out, it holds nearly all the elements that we modern folk consider as “the hero story.” A hero that comes to save the people of the land from giant beasts when others can’t, and does it for glory. Also, and perhaps more important to Rahm and Grupe, the Beowulf character also included a “fatal flaw,” something that translates into nearly every modern hero tale. Every hero has his/her weakness.

I guess what I’m saying is that this is, perhaps, the original “hero” story…unless you count Gilgamesh, but who can read Cuneiform script, anyway? (…besides Liz, of course…) 😛

Anyway, so the movie was decent… In all honesty, watching the movie, I thought they added stuff to the end that wasn’t in the originally epic poem, but according to Wikipedia, it was in there and I just forgot…oh well… Either way, the effects were borderline spectacular – there were instances where I forgot I was watching a pseudo-animated movie. Some things, like galloping horses, could have been done a bit better, but for the most part the movie was a wonder to behold. The acting was pretty strong, overall, and of course, the story included most elements of the epic poem. There were certainly some liberties taken with certain details, but it made for an entertaining movie…

Something about it didn’t sit well with me, however…and I sadly can’t figure out what it is… I think I expected a little more action than I actually saw. They played up the “hero” character beautifully and stayed true to the story, but seeing as the movie was being compared with “300,” maybe I thought it’d have a few more action scenes. Don’t get me wrong, there was action in there, but the only “WOW” action sequences were at the end between Beowulf and the dragon. The movie was just about 2 hrs long, which was perfect…I didn’t look at my watch until the very end (usually a good sign), so I wasn’t bored, per se…but I still felt like something was missing… Maybe if any of you see it, you can enlighten me…

Regardless, you can’t fault the story. Any story that’s lasted 1000 years has got to have some merit…and considering that nearly every super-hero movie/comic/etc. is based in large part on Beowulf, you’ve gotta respect it. I still have a lingering feeling that I wanted something more, but oh well… It’s at least worth the rental, if not the theater visit…