The movie stars Steve Buscemi (Armagddon), Chloe Sevigny (American Psyco), Mark Boone Jr (Last of the Dogmen), Anthony La Paglia (Betsy's Wedding), Elizabeth Bracco (Money for Notrhing), Carol Kane (Scrooged), Daniel Baldwin (Sidekicks), Mimi Rogers (Lost in Space), Debi Mazar (Little Man Tate), and Seymor Cassel (It Could Happen to You).
The movies plots revolves around the bad choices Buscemi (who wrote and directed) and the consequences that come from them. Buscemi is unemployed, his pregnate ex-girlfriend (who may be carrying his child) is dating the boss who he stole money from and fired him, and may of sleeppt with a 17 year old daughter of a friend (I forgot if she is his neice).
I think Jerry Seinfeld says his name buys him about 3 minutes of good will when he does stand up. The cast does the same here but in this case the movie is good enough not to need to trade on all of the good actors in it (maybe because they are in the movie is what makes it so good).
The characters in this movie are not people who I would want to hang around with or ones that I like. But saying that I liked watching there lives unfold. They all seem to be interconnected which I think adds to the over all quality of the movie.
The only thing I did not like about the movie was the scene with the home movie. It goes in between the grainy footage of a VCR tape and the high quality of the film footage. What bothered me was the going back and forth not the bad quality of the home movie. Choose one and go with that for that one scene.
I liked the interaction between the characters in this close nit community. I am rating this movie as a B. Its not a feel good movie. What it is a good character study where the plot is not important. Its a good view of mistakes people make, regret and having to live with what you make out of life.
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Desert Son (2010 NR)
The movie stars John Bain (The Least of These), Erica Hoag (The Legend of Bloody Jack), Nathan Halliday, Bill Oberst Jr (The Shunning, Princess and the Pony), and Elvis Winterbottom.
The plot is after being left in the desert a boy is intergrated into a "family" of two other kids left behind by society. They have to survive by any means necessary which elevates to a breaking point.
The opening was nice wat to visually start a movie. It did take too long to get started. They could of cut some and added more detail or make fewer cuts later in the film. The movie maintains a level just below a point where I would say was good. It was consistant but just did not get to a point where it was good.
The charactrer of Jack is hard for me to get to a point of liking or even relating to. The way he is is beleivable and he did a good job but totally unsympathetic to me. I think that is why I have some reservations about the movie but I can understand why he was written that way.
I could not make out the festivals at the top of the DVD cover. But this movie seems to be just the kind of film that would do well at places like Sundance or Toranto. I dont know if I would say its formulaic but it does seem to have some common charactistics of fims at festivals.
The only line of dialog I did not like too much was towards the end. It was"everything is going to be alright." It seemed like something out of a bad horror movie right before someone gets killed.
Im rating this movie as a C-. If I were recomending it to me I would say to me skip it. But I could see this movie being on top ten lists of critcs. It may be worth your time even thought I did not like it that much.
The plot is after being left in the desert a boy is intergrated into a "family" of two other kids left behind by society. They have to survive by any means necessary which elevates to a breaking point.
The opening was nice wat to visually start a movie. It did take too long to get started. They could of cut some and added more detail or make fewer cuts later in the film. The movie maintains a level just below a point where I would say was good. It was consistant but just did not get to a point where it was good.
The charactrer of Jack is hard for me to get to a point of liking or even relating to. The way he is is beleivable and he did a good job but totally unsympathetic to me. I think that is why I have some reservations about the movie but I can understand why he was written that way.
I could not make out the festivals at the top of the DVD cover. But this movie seems to be just the kind of film that would do well at places like Sundance or Toranto. I dont know if I would say its formulaic but it does seem to have some common charactistics of fims at festivals.
The only line of dialog I did not like too much was towards the end. It was"everything is going to be alright." It seemed like something out of a bad horror movie right before someone gets killed.
Im rating this movie as a C-. If I were recomending it to me I would say to me skip it. But I could see this movie being on top ten lists of critcs. It may be worth your time even thought I did not like it that much.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
I'm Reed Fish (2007 PG 13)
The movie stars Jay Baruchel (The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Tropic Thunder), Alexis Bledel (Gilmore Girls tv, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants), Schuyler Fisk (Snow Day, Orange County), Katey Segal (Married with Children tv, Jack and the Beanstalk), and Victor Rasuk (Stop Loss, The War Brothers).
The plot of the movie is Barchel is a big fish in a small town. He hosts a popular small town radio show, hes ingaged and well respected. His high school comes back into town and life takes a turn to the chaotic. (I did not realize untill the end that they are filming a movie inside the movie (might make the end of the movie a little easier to follow.)
I think this is a comming of age movie and what people want out of life. There is also a scene about trying to live up to other peoples expecations. The point live up to your own expecations it makes life a lot easier.
The opening shots of the house and the music start the movie off very well. If you do not like the movie with in the first 3 to 5 minutes dont watch the rest of the movie,. It stays true to that form through out. If you like the first few minutes you are in for a treat.
The seat belted dog (in the frount seat) was funny. You get a real sence of a small town it adds a lot to the feel of the moive. The zorse, half zebra half horse, scene was nice I had no idea there was such a thing. The awarkard scenes of people havng a two minute conversation after not seeing each other for a few years rings true. Who has not had some of those conversations?
The weird fact of the day is also a theme that works for me. I would like to hear the back story about the bras at the bar durring the talent night? On the assumption that there was some truth in this movie i would like to see if this was based on a real thing. I assumed they had a singing double but it was a nice song nice voice.
The wedding that does take place seems to be polar opposites, based on looks, but they seem to be a good fit on personality.
I'm rating the moive as a B. I think it is worth seeing. That being said I do think you should bail on it if you dont like the first few minutes. If you liked this you may like Small Town Saturday Night (with Chris Pine). Kind of the same movie but I think both are good.
The plot of the movie is Barchel is a big fish in a small town. He hosts a popular small town radio show, hes ingaged and well respected. His high school comes back into town and life takes a turn to the chaotic. (I did not realize untill the end that they are filming a movie inside the movie (might make the end of the movie a little easier to follow.)
I think this is a comming of age movie and what people want out of life. There is also a scene about trying to live up to other peoples expecations. The point live up to your own expecations it makes life a lot easier.
The opening shots of the house and the music start the movie off very well. If you do not like the movie with in the first 3 to 5 minutes dont watch the rest of the movie,. It stays true to that form through out. If you like the first few minutes you are in for a treat.
The seat belted dog (in the frount seat) was funny. You get a real sence of a small town it adds a lot to the feel of the moive. The zorse, half zebra half horse, scene was nice I had no idea there was such a thing. The awarkard scenes of people havng a two minute conversation after not seeing each other for a few years rings true. Who has not had some of those conversations?
The weird fact of the day is also a theme that works for me. I would like to hear the back story about the bras at the bar durring the talent night? On the assumption that there was some truth in this movie i would like to see if this was based on a real thing. I assumed they had a singing double but it was a nice song nice voice.
The wedding that does take place seems to be polar opposites, based on looks, but they seem to be a good fit on personality.
I'm rating the moive as a B. I think it is worth seeing. That being said I do think you should bail on it if you dont like the first few minutes. If you liked this you may like Small Town Saturday Night (with Chris Pine). Kind of the same movie but I think both are good.
X-Men First Class (2011 PG13)
The movie stars James McAvoy (Wanted, The Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe), Michael Fassbender (Inglorius Basterds, Hunger), Jennifer Lawrence (The Beaver, The Poker House), Rose Byrne (Adam, Sunshine), January Jones (We are Marshall. Pirate Radio), Jason Flemyng (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, From Hell), Kevin Bacon (Mystic River, Hollow Man), and Zoe Kravitz (Its Kind of a Funny Story, The Brave One), Hugh Jackman (great one scene cameo), and Michael Ironside (why did he go by M. anybody know?)
The plot of the movie is the early years of the XMen. Its a prequel that starts when some chaeracters are kids. What brings them together and then what drives them into the two camps that was important in the other XMen movies.
The starting scenes of the movie get them off to a good start. They are good scenes in the concentration camp. The scene in Bacons office with Fassbender are chilling. Showing the other half of the office with the knives was a smart move and I think captures the depravity of the Nazis. The contrast of the early lives of McAvoy and Fassbender is well done. To me it shows the importance of the Nature vs Nurture debate. Its how to make a psycopath or someone who cares for people. One is consumed by hate and revenge the other is consumes with faith in others and wanting to help others.
The operating room was a very nice visual. Very antiseptic, it draws my eye to the secne.
I thought the recruitment scenes were very funny. I thought it was well done with the best one, one that fails, is the one line by Jackman.
To me this is a Sci Fi that is really social commentary at its best. It makes it clear what mans inhumanity towards each other can have on an individual, the concentration camps. I think there may be some of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions", or it may be "no good deed goes unpunished". There is also a part that says that people dont react well to those are diffrent from "us" weather color or abilities. Its in our nature to hate those who are dffrent but hopefully in real life it dissipates some (with the intigration of the army and gay marriage). There will always be people who likes the statis quo and those for who change cant come soon enough.
There were a few scenes where the computer generation was just not good at all. One of the scenes was when Mystic was shape shifting in the bed room, the outline of her body was just totally bad. The scene with the sub landing on the beach left a lot to be desired also. I expected more out of a main stream movie.
Towards the end of the movie they may want to say that revenge can turn you into what you hate. I may be reading it wrong. It may be the past inhumanity towards Fassbender is really what it may be about. The guilt and crulity of his mothers murder may be just too much to over come when it happens to someone so young.
Im rating this movie as a B-. The first half of the movie was better for me then the second half. The first half deals with the formation and background. While I think the second half is more action packed. Its just a personal preference.
The plot of the movie is the early years of the XMen. Its a prequel that starts when some chaeracters are kids. What brings them together and then what drives them into the two camps that was important in the other XMen movies.
The starting scenes of the movie get them off to a good start. They are good scenes in the concentration camp. The scene in Bacons office with Fassbender are chilling. Showing the other half of the office with the knives was a smart move and I think captures the depravity of the Nazis. The contrast of the early lives of McAvoy and Fassbender is well done. To me it shows the importance of the Nature vs Nurture debate. Its how to make a psycopath or someone who cares for people. One is consumed by hate and revenge the other is consumes with faith in others and wanting to help others.
The operating room was a very nice visual. Very antiseptic, it draws my eye to the secne.
I thought the recruitment scenes were very funny. I thought it was well done with the best one, one that fails, is the one line by Jackman.
To me this is a Sci Fi that is really social commentary at its best. It makes it clear what mans inhumanity towards each other can have on an individual, the concentration camps. I think there may be some of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions", or it may be "no good deed goes unpunished". There is also a part that says that people dont react well to those are diffrent from "us" weather color or abilities. Its in our nature to hate those who are dffrent but hopefully in real life it dissipates some (with the intigration of the army and gay marriage). There will always be people who likes the statis quo and those for who change cant come soon enough.
There were a few scenes where the computer generation was just not good at all. One of the scenes was when Mystic was shape shifting in the bed room, the outline of her body was just totally bad. The scene with the sub landing on the beach left a lot to be desired also. I expected more out of a main stream movie.
Towards the end of the movie they may want to say that revenge can turn you into what you hate. I may be reading it wrong. It may be the past inhumanity towards Fassbender is really what it may be about. The guilt and crulity of his mothers murder may be just too much to over come when it happens to someone so young.
Im rating this movie as a B-. The first half of the movie was better for me then the second half. The first half deals with the formation and background. While I think the second half is more action packed. Its just a personal preference.
Black Irish (2006 R)
The movie stars Michael Angarano (Red State,Snow Angeles), Brendan Gleeson (Harry Potter part 5 and 7 part 1, The Tigers Tail), Tom Guiry (Black Hawk Down, Wrestling with Alligators), Melissa Leo (The Fighter, Don McKay), Emily Yan Camp (Brothers and Sisters tv, Carriers) and Michael Rispoli (To Did For, The Third Miracle).
The plot of the movie revolves around Angarano and his disfunctional family. It shows the gritty life of the family.
There was a scene at the start of the film that looked too staged. It was a robbery and it looked like be here then than do this and was not a good scene. I thought the sheets onAngarano's bed were a little too immature. I guess it could show that he is just a kidd, 15 years old, but I thought it did not fit the grittiness of the character. The tone of the movie is misrable unhappy people. The sheets did not seem to fit the tone of the movie.
There was a nice awarkard scene when Angarano and Gleeson. It was a talk about sex and was funny in that you could see conservations about sex going like that. That scene was an exception. The movie takes you up to an emotional point then pulls back and you feel disapointed and like it did not get to the point of real emotion.
This family comes across as people who really dont like each other. all seem to be bitter and mad at each other. They seem mean and distant and provide no emotional help for anybody. There was a funny scene Angarano has on a first date that I think people can relate to. It was a really bad first, and only date (it involves a family pet).
Leo has a monologue that I did not get the scence of any truth in it. There are also a few scenes that they used a shakey camera. It was distractin to me so I dont think the chaos came through.
There are a lot of family secrets and no real communication. Its a dark movie with decent acting. My problem is I found it hard to like any of the characters. I would of liked the movie more if I could have any sympathy for the characters.
Im ratking the movie as a C- and would say skip it. Some people may find something to like about this family or characters but for me I could not like anything about these people.
The plot of the movie revolves around Angarano and his disfunctional family. It shows the gritty life of the family.
There was a scene at the start of the film that looked too staged. It was a robbery and it looked like be here then than do this and was not a good scene. I thought the sheets onAngarano's bed were a little too immature. I guess it could show that he is just a kidd, 15 years old, but I thought it did not fit the grittiness of the character. The tone of the movie is misrable unhappy people. The sheets did not seem to fit the tone of the movie.
There was a nice awarkard scene when Angarano and Gleeson. It was a talk about sex and was funny in that you could see conservations about sex going like that. That scene was an exception. The movie takes you up to an emotional point then pulls back and you feel disapointed and like it did not get to the point of real emotion.
This family comes across as people who really dont like each other. all seem to be bitter and mad at each other. They seem mean and distant and provide no emotional help for anybody. There was a funny scene Angarano has on a first date that I think people can relate to. It was a really bad first, and only date (it involves a family pet).
Leo has a monologue that I did not get the scence of any truth in it. There are also a few scenes that they used a shakey camera. It was distractin to me so I dont think the chaos came through.
There are a lot of family secrets and no real communication. Its a dark movie with decent acting. My problem is I found it hard to like any of the characters. I would of liked the movie more if I could have any sympathy for the characters.
Im ratking the movie as a C- and would say skip it. Some people may find something to like about this family or characters but for me I could not like anything about these people.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
500 Days of Summer (2009 PG13)
The movie stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt (3rd Rock from the Sun tv, Inception), Zoey Deschanel (Gigantic, The Happening), Clark Gregg (Iron Man, In Good Company), Minka Kelly (The Roomate, Just Go with It), Mathew Gray Gubler (How to Be a Serial Killer, All Star Superman), Rachel Boston (Fitty Pills), Geoffrey Arend (Devil, Super Trouper), and Chloe Moretz (Kick Ass, The Poker House).
The plot of the movie is about the 500 days of Levitt dating Deschanel (Summer). The good times and the bad times.
The narrator of the movie was cast well. His voice was a big plus to the movie. The start of the movie was very good. It got me interisted from the start, good music and the narrator was very good.
The movie was good on the whole but Summer said she was not interisted in a relationship. It was obvious what she wanted and he was blind to it. The dance scene was nice visually. The girl they got to play Levitts little sister was well cast. Her dialog could of been appriote for an adult but it worked for me. She was delt with like she was closer to Levitts age.
I think there is a plot line about expectations can cloud your judgement in relationships. You can miss the signs. With love you can put blinders on. I think there are spots where this movie drags a little but at times it is really good.
Im rating this movie as a B-. The start and end of the movie are really good. There are times when it drags. The soundtrack is good. Over all a movie worth seeing but has some gaps and drags in places.
The plot of the movie is about the 500 days of Levitt dating Deschanel (Summer). The good times and the bad times.
The narrator of the movie was cast well. His voice was a big plus to the movie. The start of the movie was very good. It got me interisted from the start, good music and the narrator was very good.
The movie was good on the whole but Summer said she was not interisted in a relationship. It was obvious what she wanted and he was blind to it. The dance scene was nice visually. The girl they got to play Levitts little sister was well cast. Her dialog could of been appriote for an adult but it worked for me. She was delt with like she was closer to Levitts age.
I think there is a plot line about expectations can cloud your judgement in relationships. You can miss the signs. With love you can put blinders on. I think there are spots where this movie drags a little but at times it is really good.
Im rating this movie as a B-. The start and end of the movie are really good. There are times when it drags. The soundtrack is good. Over all a movie worth seeing but has some gaps and drags in places.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Nosferatu (1929 NR) the origional version
The movie stars Max Schreck, Gustav von Wangenheim, Greta Schroder, Alexander Granach, Georg H. Schnell.
The plot follows Bram Stokers Dracula pretty faithfully. The names are diffrent but the plot follows pretty closly.
The music seems pretty much out of step with the movie. Most of the scratchy film quality is understandable for the age of the film. Some scenes were blue. I dont know if this was meant to imply night or just part of the age of the film stock they had.
I think the biggest problem for this movie is this is a complex idea to try and get across in a silent film. The General was a much more basic and easy to understand silent film. There are just too many complex ideas to get across without dialog for me.
Im rating this movie as a C- or D. I think its considered a classic but for me it just did not get any where near the point to consider it a classic.
The plot follows Bram Stokers Dracula pretty faithfully. The names are diffrent but the plot follows pretty closly.
The music seems pretty much out of step with the movie. Most of the scratchy film quality is understandable for the age of the film. Some scenes were blue. I dont know if this was meant to imply night or just part of the age of the film stock they had.
I think the biggest problem for this movie is this is a complex idea to try and get across in a silent film. The General was a much more basic and easy to understand silent film. There are just too many complex ideas to get across without dialog for me.
Im rating this movie as a C- or D. I think its considered a classic but for me it just did not get any where near the point to consider it a classic.
Trucker (2008 R)
The movie stars Michelle Monaghan (Source Code, Unfaithful), Jimmy Bennett (No Ordinary Family tv, Evan Almighty), Nathan Fillion (Castle tv, Water's Edge), Benjamin Bratt (Traffic, Demolition Man), Joey lauren Adams (Michael, Dazed and Confused), Bryce Johnson (Sleeping Dogs Lie, Man Maid), Matthew Lawrence (Mrs. Doubtfire, The Comeback), and Dennis Hayden (One Man Army).
The plot of the movie is Monaghan's life is interupted by the arrival of her 11 year old son. She is a truck driver and not in a positon to intergrate a son into her life.
I dont think I have much to say about the movie. It is well written and well acted. There is a lot left unsaid and the writer/director found a way to make it work well. The movie is understated and that is fine in this case. The fight scene outside the convience store looked awarkard. It looked like it was blocked and just did not ring true to me.
Another scene that did not work for me ws the scene when Monaghan and Bratt talk about setting the plan 10 years ago. I think all the other scenes monaghan's character comes across as smart except this one. The robbery scene was weird. Was is someone she knew or what.
The good scenes far outnumbered the bad ones. For me Lost in Translation was a movie that did not work being understated. This one did for me.
Im rating this movie as a B and its a solid recomendation for me.
The plot of the movie is Monaghan's life is interupted by the arrival of her 11 year old son. She is a truck driver and not in a positon to intergrate a son into her life.
I dont think I have much to say about the movie. It is well written and well acted. There is a lot left unsaid and the writer/director found a way to make it work well. The movie is understated and that is fine in this case. The fight scene outside the convience store looked awarkard. It looked like it was blocked and just did not ring true to me.
Another scene that did not work for me ws the scene when Monaghan and Bratt talk about setting the plan 10 years ago. I think all the other scenes monaghan's character comes across as smart except this one. The robbery scene was weird. Was is someone she knew or what.
The good scenes far outnumbered the bad ones. For me Lost in Translation was a movie that did not work being understated. This one did for me.
Im rating this movie as a B and its a solid recomendation for me.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Freaks (1932 NR)
The movie stars Wallace Ford (The Rainmaker, A Lawless Street), Leila Hyams (The Big House, The Sins of the Children), Olga Baclanova (The Man Who Laughs, The Docks of New York), Roscoe Ates (Black Hills, Stars Over Texas), Henry Victor (King of the Zombies, The Beloved Rogue), Henry Earles, Daisy Hilton (Chained for Life) and Violet Hilton (Chained for Life).
The movie is set at a circus. The trapeaze artist marries a dwarf to get his money and then poisen him. She then plans to marry the strong man, who tries to rape someone. The trapeaze artist and strong man get what they deserve in the end of the movie. The sideshow performers learn of the plan and get there revenge.
I liked the introduction for the movie it was a paragraph or two long and scrowled on the screen. I have heard about this movie for a few years maybe 10 or 15 years. So going into it I was expecting something a lot more disturbng. It was not as bad as Iexpected. Evidedntly at the time it had to be cut, up to 30 minutes, by the diffrent states to get it to be shown. I never got the idea that the movie was outwardly mean to the freaks. Some characters are mean but it was not vindictive to the freaks
The discomefort that may be caused should be pushed through and peopel should see this movie. The documentary, about an hour, is interistng.
I was reading some reviews on Netflix. I skimmed about 10 pages of them and they were pretty positive. I would expect some of them to go on about the possible explotative nature of the film.
Im rating this movie as a B. Not sure what age group I would say this is for but as someone with no kids I dont have to figure that out.
The movie is set at a circus. The trapeaze artist marries a dwarf to get his money and then poisen him. She then plans to marry the strong man, who tries to rape someone. The trapeaze artist and strong man get what they deserve in the end of the movie. The sideshow performers learn of the plan and get there revenge.
I liked the introduction for the movie it was a paragraph or two long and scrowled on the screen. I have heard about this movie for a few years maybe 10 or 15 years. So going into it I was expecting something a lot more disturbng. It was not as bad as Iexpected. Evidedntly at the time it had to be cut, up to 30 minutes, by the diffrent states to get it to be shown. I never got the idea that the movie was outwardly mean to the freaks. Some characters are mean but it was not vindictive to the freaks
The discomefort that may be caused should be pushed through and peopel should see this movie. The documentary, about an hour, is interistng.
I was reading some reviews on Netflix. I skimmed about 10 pages of them and they were pretty positive. I would expect some of them to go on about the possible explotative nature of the film.
Im rating this movie as a B. Not sure what age group I would say this is for but as someone with no kids I dont have to figure that out.
Super 8 (2011 PG 13)
The movie stars Joel Courtney, Kyle Chandler (King Kong 2005, The Day the Earth Stood Still 2008), Elle Fanning (The Curious Case of Benjamin Buttons, I Am Sam), Amanda Michalka (The Lovely Bones, The Guardian), Jessica Tuck (Secretary, Life Pod), Joel McKinnon Miller (Friday After Next, Gone But Not Forgotten), Ryan Lee (Super Brawl), Zach Mills (Mr. Mangorium's Wonder Emporium, Steam), and Gabriel Basso (Alabama Moon).
The plot is six kids, while making a super 8 movie, witness and film a train wreck. The train has an army alien captave (I dont think Im letting any cat out of the bag.)
This movie works for me. It goes inbetween kids being friends and the secondary (at least for me its secondary)plot line of trying to figure whats loose, what to do about it and stay alive.
The six kids all did a pretty good job on the whole. Fanning and Courtney (I am assuming thats the makeup artist/ Deputys son) both did a very good job. The kid with braces had a few good lines. And the kid director (what JJ was like when he was a kid?) was good also.
I thought there were some broad simularities with Super 8 and It and Stand By Me (based on the short story The Body). It for kids battling a supernatural foe and Stand By Me with the bond between kids of a particular age. All are good examples of what good child actors can do when given good material or directors to work with.
I thought the movie was strongest when focusing on the kids and a little less good when the alien was the focus of the movie. It may be because both JJ and Spielberg (a producer or an exec. producer I think) both were doing movies when they were kids. And they are both pretty good at this movie thing.
The alien was pretty good visually. To me it was not seen too much but that worked. It left some to the imagination but when you do see its face its pretty cool.
Im rating the movie as a solid B. The grade is baed on the performances of the kids. It is a sci fi sort of thing but its not what is good about this movie.
The plot is six kids, while making a super 8 movie, witness and film a train wreck. The train has an army alien captave (I dont think Im letting any cat out of the bag.)
This movie works for me. It goes inbetween kids being friends and the secondary (at least for me its secondary)plot line of trying to figure whats loose, what to do about it and stay alive.
The six kids all did a pretty good job on the whole. Fanning and Courtney (I am assuming thats the makeup artist/ Deputys son) both did a very good job. The kid with braces had a few good lines. And the kid director (what JJ was like when he was a kid?) was good also.
I thought there were some broad simularities with Super 8 and It and Stand By Me (based on the short story The Body). It for kids battling a supernatural foe and Stand By Me with the bond between kids of a particular age. All are good examples of what good child actors can do when given good material or directors to work with.
I thought the movie was strongest when focusing on the kids and a little less good when the alien was the focus of the movie. It may be because both JJ and Spielberg (a producer or an exec. producer I think) both were doing movies when they were kids. And they are both pretty good at this movie thing.
The alien was pretty good visually. To me it was not seen too much but that worked. It left some to the imagination but when you do see its face its pretty cool.
Im rating the movie as a solid B. The grade is baed on the performances of the kids. It is a sci fi sort of thing but its not what is good about this movie.
The Thing (1982 R)
The movie stars Kurt Russell (3000 Miles to Graceland, Stargate), Richard A Dysart (LA Law tv, Truman), Richard Masur (Palindromes, Forget Paris), Wilford Brimley (Last of the Dogmen, The Natural), and Keith David (They Live, Armageddon).
The plot is a research lab in Antarctica is forced to defend itself from a dog infected by an alien infested dog. Teh alien jumps from host to host and attempts to copy the host.
I think the most impressive thing about the movie is the cast. Most of the cast, even though pretty small cast, has been in other things I have seen or heard about. The computer chess program in the beginning certainly dates the movie.
For some of the movie it left things, like the look of the alien, to the imagination and it was a good way to go. I guess a lot of movies do that. Leaving things to the imagination is a good thing.
This seems like a B movie. I think it started off well but lost steam towards the end. When we saw what the alien looks like I think it took away something from the movie. It may be me but it seems a lot like Alien just set on Earth not in space.
Im rating this as a week C+. The movie starts off good then fades towards the end. If B movies are your thing watch it if not go ahead and just pass on it.
The plot is a research lab in Antarctica is forced to defend itself from a dog infected by an alien infested dog. Teh alien jumps from host to host and attempts to copy the host.
I think the most impressive thing about the movie is the cast. Most of the cast, even though pretty small cast, has been in other things I have seen or heard about. The computer chess program in the beginning certainly dates the movie.
For some of the movie it left things, like the look of the alien, to the imagination and it was a good way to go. I guess a lot of movies do that. Leaving things to the imagination is a good thing.
This seems like a B movie. I think it started off well but lost steam towards the end. When we saw what the alien looks like I think it took away something from the movie. It may be me but it seems a lot like Alien just set on Earth not in space.
Im rating this as a week C+. The movie starts off good then fades towards the end. If B movies are your thing watch it if not go ahead and just pass on it.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Rope (1948 PG)
The movie stars James Stewart (Rear Window, Flight of the Pheonix), John Dell (Gun Crazy, The Man Who Created Himself), Farley Granger (Edge of Doom, The Purple Heart), and Constance Colier (The Girl from Manhattan, Stage Door).
The plot, base on a real life crime, is about two school friends who kill a friend then host a party to see if they can get away with it. At the party is a former teacher, Stewart, of the two students, Dell and Granger.
I liked the color design of the house. The contrast of the personalities of the two friends was nice. For a short movie I thought the time between the killing and when the party started was a bit too long. The movie was about 80 minutes so I thought it needed to get to the party sooner.
Im rating this movie as a C. I can take it or leave it. If you are a big Hitchcock or Stewart go for it but for me I would probally say pass.
The plot, base on a real life crime, is about two school friends who kill a friend then host a party to see if they can get away with it. At the party is a former teacher, Stewart, of the two students, Dell and Granger.
I liked the color design of the house. The contrast of the personalities of the two friends was nice. For a short movie I thought the time between the killing and when the party started was a bit too long. The movie was about 80 minutes so I thought it needed to get to the party sooner.
Im rating this movie as a C. I can take it or leave it. If you are a big Hitchcock or Stewart go for it but for me I would probally say pass.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Creation (2009 PG13)
The movie stars Paul Bettany (Margin Call, Iron Man 2), Jennifer Connelly (Labyrinth, House of Sand and Fog), Jeremy Northam (Gosforth Park, Enigma). Toby Jones (What's Wrong with Virginia, Frost/Nixon), and Jim Carter (The Madness of King George, Blame it on the Bellboy).
The plot revolves around Charles Dawin after he and his religous wife loose a daughter and he strugles to write The Origion of Species.
The acting is good all around in this BBC production. Beattany and Connelly do very well. The girl who play the daughter that dies does a very good job also. She has some adult like scenes with Beattany espically.
The time laspe scene of the decaying animal was done well also. The stress in Darwins life comes through in Bettamys performance. Its unclear to me if the stress is from his daughter or not being able to finish his book but that ambiguity is not a distraction for me.
There is a great scene when the surviving children and Bettany where they ask for a real story and the scene plays very well. I thought it was a great leap of faith for Darwin to send his only copy (I assume only copy) with the mail to the publisher. But what option did they have at the time.
Im rating this movie as a B+. It is worth the time to stream.
The plot revolves around Charles Dawin after he and his religous wife loose a daughter and he strugles to write The Origion of Species.
The acting is good all around in this BBC production. Beattany and Connelly do very well. The girl who play the daughter that dies does a very good job also. She has some adult like scenes with Beattany espically.
The time laspe scene of the decaying animal was done well also. The stress in Darwins life comes through in Bettamys performance. Its unclear to me if the stress is from his daughter or not being able to finish his book but that ambiguity is not a distraction for me.
There is a great scene when the surviving children and Bettany where they ask for a real story and the scene plays very well. I thought it was a great leap of faith for Darwin to send his only copy (I assume only copy) with the mail to the publisher. But what option did they have at the time.
Im rating this movie as a B+. It is worth the time to stream.
To Be or Not to Be (1942 NR)
The movie stars Carole Lombard (My Man Godfrey, Nothing Sacred), Jack Benny (Without Reservations, Its in the Bag), Robert Stack (Airplane, Written on the Wind), Felix Bresssart (The Shop Around the Corner, Portrait of Jennie), Lionel Atwill (House of Frankstein, Dead End Kids) and Charles Halton (Enemy of Women, Golden Boy).
The plot of the movie is a troupe of Polish actors led by Benny, help and American soldier ane the Resistance. There is a complication when Lombard, Bennys wife and fellow actor, has feelings for the soldier Stack.
I have mentioned before that it seems to me that actors of the time seem to over act and over dramitize things. When dealing with war and genoside I think movies have to be careful about dealing with the subject matter. For me the movie did not get to to a point of clarity of purpose. Im not sure there views came through.
There was a scene where Stack came across as a stalker. I guess its a sign of the times where then a stalker could be a hero of the movie now it would be a sign of mental instability. Bennys character came across as self obsessed and unlikeable. If kevin Costner can get bad reviews for his English accent for Robin Hood, then this moive is on a whole new level. These people are suspole to play people from Poland and they all spoke with perfect American accents or is it just me.
There are somethings that dont translate from one decade to another. This movie came out almost 70 years ago and what people knew about the Nazis is dramaticly diffrent from what we know today (seems logical right). Also this is suspose to be entertainment. I think there are lines that may be lost to current people. There was a scene where Hitler (or a Hitler imposter) jummping from a plane. Then a farmer has a line about first we got Ness now Hitler. The referance was lost on me.
Im rating the movie as a C-. Just go ahead and skip it.
The plot of the movie is a troupe of Polish actors led by Benny, help and American soldier ane the Resistance. There is a complication when Lombard, Bennys wife and fellow actor, has feelings for the soldier Stack.
I have mentioned before that it seems to me that actors of the time seem to over act and over dramitize things. When dealing with war and genoside I think movies have to be careful about dealing with the subject matter. For me the movie did not get to to a point of clarity of purpose. Im not sure there views came through.
There was a scene where Stack came across as a stalker. I guess its a sign of the times where then a stalker could be a hero of the movie now it would be a sign of mental instability. Bennys character came across as self obsessed and unlikeable. If kevin Costner can get bad reviews for his English accent for Robin Hood, then this moive is on a whole new level. These people are suspole to play people from Poland and they all spoke with perfect American accents or is it just me.
There are somethings that dont translate from one decade to another. This movie came out almost 70 years ago and what people knew about the Nazis is dramaticly diffrent from what we know today (seems logical right). Also this is suspose to be entertainment. I think there are lines that may be lost to current people. There was a scene where Hitler (or a Hitler imposter) jummping from a plane. Then a farmer has a line about first we got Ness now Hitler. The referance was lost on me.
Im rating the movie as a C-. Just go ahead and skip it.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Fitzcarraldo (1982 PG)
The movie stars klaus Kinski (Slaughter Hotel, Count Dracula), and Claudia Cardinale (Circus World, The Salamander).
The plot is about a mans desire to make money in order to persue his passion. To open an Opera house.
For a two and a half hour movie Im strugling to get started on the review. The plot line on Netflix states Kinskis chaeracter is a rubber barron. I did not pick up on that. He has done a few things before the rubber job. Im not convinced he has really succeded at anythng he has tried.
I think the best parts of the movie is the music selection that they play when showing the scenery. That part of the review was right on. The beauty of the country side is awe inspiring. I could of seen alot more in the movie and been satisfied with it.
The look of Kinski character is nice. The hair and raggety look of his hair adds a lot of understanding to the character. I also like the fact that he is in the country side and he is in a white suit. The white suit looks like something totally wrong for the envirment but adds to the crazyness of the chaeracter.
When they get the boat to the other river it is a nice statement to always have hope. It may also be something akin to "If Mohamed cant come to the mountain..."
I am trying to decide if the ending is happy and I think it is. The statement being if you dont succede then maybe scale back the plan but dont let failure get the better of you.
Im rating this as a bairly a C+. The scenes of the environment, getting over to the other river and the ending I say go and stream it. The two and a half hour running time is a drawback. There was just enough for me to say see it but just bairly.
The plot is about a mans desire to make money in order to persue his passion. To open an Opera house.
For a two and a half hour movie Im strugling to get started on the review. The plot line on Netflix states Kinskis chaeracter is a rubber barron. I did not pick up on that. He has done a few things before the rubber job. Im not convinced he has really succeded at anythng he has tried.
I think the best parts of the movie is the music selection that they play when showing the scenery. That part of the review was right on. The beauty of the country side is awe inspiring. I could of seen alot more in the movie and been satisfied with it.
The look of Kinski character is nice. The hair and raggety look of his hair adds a lot of understanding to the character. I also like the fact that he is in the country side and he is in a white suit. The white suit looks like something totally wrong for the envirment but adds to the crazyness of the chaeracter.
When they get the boat to the other river it is a nice statement to always have hope. It may also be something akin to "If Mohamed cant come to the mountain..."
I am trying to decide if the ending is happy and I think it is. The statement being if you dont succede then maybe scale back the plan but dont let failure get the better of you.
Im rating this as a bairly a C+. The scenes of the environment, getting over to the other river and the ending I say go and stream it. The two and a half hour running time is a drawback. There was just enough for me to say see it but just bairly.
Nothing Sacred (1937NR)
The movie stars Carole Lombard (To Be or Not to Be, Big News), Fredric March (Alexander the Great, So Ends our Night), Charles Winninger (State Fair, Pot o' Gold), Walter Connolly (The Good Earth, It Happened One Night), and Sig Ruman (Stalag 17, To Be or Not to Be).
The plot of the movie is a newspaper reporter, March, comes to small town Vermont in search of his next big story. A girl, Lombard, dying of radium poisoning. They head back to New York City, fall in love, and try to come up to a solution to the problem that Lombard is not sick.
This movie did not start too well. There were racists overtones and a feeling of the Jim Crow era. The editor comes across as one dimentional. The scenes in Vermont I thought were weird. The people were jaded and so filled of hate and mistrust it did not ring true to me of what small towns were like. I could be wrong but the bitterness of Vermont seemed weird. There was a scene where Lombard and March stopped and had dialog with a branch blocking out there faces. I though that was not good blocking.
I suspose they may of been going as something like a mistaken identy plot or a comedy of errors. For me it was just people only out for themselves and damn everyone else. The last line was so out of place and was totally out of the blue. It seemed that the ran out of film mid sentence and just decided to call it a day.
Im rating this movie as a D. I think the movies that are this old I just dont understand. It may be I just dont understand the diffrent generation of movies. Im not saying they are bad but its like i have nothing in common with the era and just dont understand what they are going for. My advice get a root canal it will bem a less painful event then getting through this movie.
The plot of the movie is a newspaper reporter, March, comes to small town Vermont in search of his next big story. A girl, Lombard, dying of radium poisoning. They head back to New York City, fall in love, and try to come up to a solution to the problem that Lombard is not sick.
This movie did not start too well. There were racists overtones and a feeling of the Jim Crow era. The editor comes across as one dimentional. The scenes in Vermont I thought were weird. The people were jaded and so filled of hate and mistrust it did not ring true to me of what small towns were like. I could be wrong but the bitterness of Vermont seemed weird. There was a scene where Lombard and March stopped and had dialog with a branch blocking out there faces. I though that was not good blocking.
I suspose they may of been going as something like a mistaken identy plot or a comedy of errors. For me it was just people only out for themselves and damn everyone else. The last line was so out of place and was totally out of the blue. It seemed that the ran out of film mid sentence and just decided to call it a day.
Im rating this movie as a D. I think the movies that are this old I just dont understand. It may be I just dont understand the diffrent generation of movies. Im not saying they are bad but its like i have nothing in common with the era and just dont understand what they are going for. My advice get a root canal it will bem a less painful event then getting through this movie.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Cleopatra (1934 NR)
The movie stars Claudette Colbert (Parrish, Three Came Home), Warren William (Arizona, The Wolf Man), Henry Wilcoxon (Caddyshack, The Greatest Show on Earth), Joseph Schildkraut (The Greatest Story Ever Told, Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation), and Ian Keith (It Came from Beneath the Sea, Idenity Unknown).
The plot follows Cleopatra, Mark Anthony, and Julius Caesar. It centers on Cleopatra trying to do whats best for Egypt.
I though the Williams Caesar wsa a little over the top acting. I think it may be more a sign of the times he acted in. There was a scend with trumpets that made t seem obvious that they were on a sound stage, not a good thing.
It seemed to me to be more "racy" then I expectd. It was shot pre sensorship. There was something called the Hayes Code that was around from around 1930 (might be 1934) to 1968. It was guidelines for most major studios. I thought if the Code was in effect it would have problems with the costumes.
I thought the stock footage for the big battle scenes were interisting. It came across as it came from several other movies and several degrees of quality.
I was not too impressed with the movie. It just did not do much for me. I am mostly feeling indiffrent. I rate the movie as a C. If you like old movies stream it but otherwise I say pass on it.
The plot follows Cleopatra, Mark Anthony, and Julius Caesar. It centers on Cleopatra trying to do whats best for Egypt.
I though the Williams Caesar wsa a little over the top acting. I think it may be more a sign of the times he acted in. There was a scend with trumpets that made t seem obvious that they were on a sound stage, not a good thing.
It seemed to me to be more "racy" then I expectd. It was shot pre sensorship. There was something called the Hayes Code that was around from around 1930 (might be 1934) to 1968. It was guidelines for most major studios. I thought if the Code was in effect it would have problems with the costumes.
I thought the stock footage for the big battle scenes were interisting. It came across as it came from several other movies and several degrees of quality.
I was not too impressed with the movie. It just did not do much for me. I am mostly feeling indiffrent. I rate the movie as a C. If you like old movies stream it but otherwise I say pass on it.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Midnight in Paris (2011 PG 13)
The movie stars Owen Wilson (The Royal Tennenbaums, Armageddon), Rachel McAdams (Red Eye, Mean Girls), Michael Sheen (Frost/Nixon, Music Within), Adrien Brody (Splice, The Village), Kathy Bates (Misery, Rumor Has It), and Kurt Fuller ( Angels in the Infield, Miracle Mile).
The plot is while Wilson is in Paris he time travels back to 1920's Paris. He splits his time between the present and past.
First off the first 3 to 5 minutes of the movie is quiet possibly the worst start of a movie I have seen for a while. The movie is directed by Woody Allen. My message to Mr Allen would be if you have worked with an editor for a while you should fire him or her or take away any decission making authority that person has. There were no credits or anything of value at all.
The other problem I had with the moive is the charctersz in the present day. The know it all with the beard not only made me want to walk out of the theater it also made me want to poke my eyes out and my ears out also. He was that annoying. I say that knowing it is not a good thing to even slightly come across of making fun of people who cant see or hear. McAdams character, and her mom and dad in the movie, are only slightly better. I thought the degree of meaness of those characters was appaling. Now I know why I dont go and see that many Allen films. I rate the modern scenes as a D (they got a little better towards the end).
Now for the good part of the film. Im not a big Wilson. He was great in this movie. Let me restate. He was really great. I thought he carried the film very well. He was good in the current scenes and he was good in the 20's time frame. I thought the historical figures were great. I wish the film was set all in the 20's.
The only problem there may be with the 20's scene is it may take a lot of Suspension of Disbelief. It may be a little too much to take that Wilsons character would meet that many famous people. Some people may not be able to get over the disblief.
Im rating the time in the 20's as a B+. Im rating the over all movie as a B-. For me its worth going to see even having to suffer through the times in current Paris.
The plot is while Wilson is in Paris he time travels back to 1920's Paris. He splits his time between the present and past.
First off the first 3 to 5 minutes of the movie is quiet possibly the worst start of a movie I have seen for a while. The movie is directed by Woody Allen. My message to Mr Allen would be if you have worked with an editor for a while you should fire him or her or take away any decission making authority that person has. There were no credits or anything of value at all.
The other problem I had with the moive is the charctersz in the present day. The know it all with the beard not only made me want to walk out of the theater it also made me want to poke my eyes out and my ears out also. He was that annoying. I say that knowing it is not a good thing to even slightly come across of making fun of people who cant see or hear. McAdams character, and her mom and dad in the movie, are only slightly better. I thought the degree of meaness of those characters was appaling. Now I know why I dont go and see that many Allen films. I rate the modern scenes as a D (they got a little better towards the end).
Now for the good part of the film. Im not a big Wilson. He was great in this movie. Let me restate. He was really great. I thought he carried the film very well. He was good in the current scenes and he was good in the 20's time frame. I thought the historical figures were great. I wish the film was set all in the 20's.
The only problem there may be with the 20's scene is it may take a lot of Suspension of Disbelief. It may be a little too much to take that Wilsons character would meet that many famous people. Some people may not be able to get over the disblief.
Im rating the time in the 20's as a B+. Im rating the over all movie as a B-. For me its worth going to see even having to suffer through the times in current Paris.
The General (1926 or 1927 NR)
The movie stars Buster Keaton (The Navigator, Three Ages), Marion Mack, Glen Cavender (The Nevada Buckaroo, The Cook and Other Treasures), Frederick Vroom (The Navigator), and Frank Barnes.
The plot is Keaton having been rejected by the Confederate army goes on a one man raid to get his train back, prove his worthyness to his girlfriend and rescue her from the Confederate army.
I read a few reviews on Netflix. I seem like Im the only one that likes the music in this film. I think it was done maybe in the 90's (not origional at least). I thought the music was good but I was the only one.
I think this movie is perfect for the silent movie age. Its plot, unlike Metropolis, is suited for silent films. Metropolis is an idea movie that needes more "lines". This movie is an action film that I think can go up aganst any movie from today and totally hold its own. There is no question that this movie deserves to be on any top movie list.
It may of been one of the most expensive movies to make at the time. It may not of been well received, like Its a Wonderful Life, but its worthy of people seeing.
Im rating this movie as a solid B. I lost focus towards the end, maybe because Im tired but is close to an A.
The plot is Keaton having been rejected by the Confederate army goes on a one man raid to get his train back, prove his worthyness to his girlfriend and rescue her from the Confederate army.
I read a few reviews on Netflix. I seem like Im the only one that likes the music in this film. I think it was done maybe in the 90's (not origional at least). I thought the music was good but I was the only one.
I think this movie is perfect for the silent movie age. Its plot, unlike Metropolis, is suited for silent films. Metropolis is an idea movie that needes more "lines". This movie is an action film that I think can go up aganst any movie from today and totally hold its own. There is no question that this movie deserves to be on any top movie list.
It may of been one of the most expensive movies to make at the time. It may not of been well received, like Its a Wonderful Life, but its worthy of people seeing.
Im rating this movie as a solid B. I lost focus towards the end, maybe because Im tired but is close to an A.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
The Odd Couple (1968 G)
The movie stars Jack Lemmon (Tuesdays With Morrie, Glengarry Glen Ross), Walter Matthau (I'm Not Rappaport, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three 1974), John Fielder (Winnie the Pooh,Seize the Day), Herb Edelman (A Cry for Love, The Way We Were), David Sheiner (Blut Thunder, Gideons Trumpet), Larry Haines, Carole Shelley (The Supper, The Woopee Boys), and Iris Adrian (The Apple Dumpling Gang, The Fast and the Furious 1955).
The plot is neat freak Lemmon gets kicked out by his wife and after an aborted suicide attempt he moves in with his best friend and slob Matthau.
At the start of the movie the music and Time Square seem so dated. The first 30 minutes of the movie are drawn out and almost wanted me to give up on this movie. Please dont give up on the movie. The friends at the poker game seem to really get after each other.
Matthau dalog about living life was well written. Maybe its because it comes from an unexpected source. He seems child like and not really an adult but has some insights on living life after a divorce.
One of the best scenes is the one with out dialogue. Its good because it goes on for so long and comes across as interistng. The climax also works well. Its good because what they say to each other is unexpected, Lemmon for being positive and Matthau because he does not respond in kind.
Im rating this movie as a C+ or B-. Like I said make it through the first 30 minutes and the rest should be good.
The plot is neat freak Lemmon gets kicked out by his wife and after an aborted suicide attempt he moves in with his best friend and slob Matthau.
At the start of the movie the music and Time Square seem so dated. The first 30 minutes of the movie are drawn out and almost wanted me to give up on this movie. Please dont give up on the movie. The friends at the poker game seem to really get after each other.
Matthau dalog about living life was well written. Maybe its because it comes from an unexpected source. He seems child like and not really an adult but has some insights on living life after a divorce.
One of the best scenes is the one with out dialogue. Its good because it goes on for so long and comes across as interistng. The climax also works well. Its good because what they say to each other is unexpected, Lemmon for being positive and Matthau because he does not respond in kind.
Im rating this movie as a C+ or B-. Like I said make it through the first 30 minutes and the rest should be good.
Little Ceaser (1931 NR)
The movie stars Edward G Robinson (Little Giant, Grand Slam), Douglas Fairbanks Jr (Party Girl, Ghost Stroy), Glenda Farrell (Middle of the Night, Lady for a Day), William Colier Jr (Cimarron, Street Scene), and Sidney Blackmer (High Society, Great God Gold).
The plot of the movie is a small time crook moves to the big city with dreams of taking over a big city. His success is short lived when his ex partner gives the cops information that brings down the Capone type ganster.
At first I would of thought that Robinson's accent would be dstracting but it was not. There was a style of delevering the lines very fast and I thought that was a lot more dstracting. The way they did scene changes is a lot diffrent then today. There are "announcements" when the location or scene changes.
I think there are some simulrities between Robinson taking over and how jack Nickelson takes over the in the 1989(?) version of Batman.
People seem to die diffrently in the old movies. When they get shot it seems they cant wait to die, the same way the dialoge is rushed through. It seems I may grade old movies on a scale. Give them more of the benefit of a doubt because they are so diffrent from movies that are maybe 30-40 years old.
Some of the blocking seems awkard. Particular the cop that does not speak in the Stolen Item scene. Also for me there seems to be holes in the plot. It may be because Im tired but there does not seem to be enough explanaton on how Roinsons character is good enough to take over a major crime family.
For me the climax where Little Ceasar character is dealt with lacks all sence of flair. It seems just to be there and was somewhat lacking. That being said Im rating the movie as a C+ or B-. It should be seen mostly because it is considerred a classic. If you miss I think you can live with it but sometimes the classics should be seen just for and homage to the past.
The plot of the movie is a small time crook moves to the big city with dreams of taking over a big city. His success is short lived when his ex partner gives the cops information that brings down the Capone type ganster.
At first I would of thought that Robinson's accent would be dstracting but it was not. There was a style of delevering the lines very fast and I thought that was a lot more dstracting. The way they did scene changes is a lot diffrent then today. There are "announcements" when the location or scene changes.
I think there are some simulrities between Robinson taking over and how jack Nickelson takes over the in the 1989(?) version of Batman.
People seem to die diffrently in the old movies. When they get shot it seems they cant wait to die, the same way the dialoge is rushed through. It seems I may grade old movies on a scale. Give them more of the benefit of a doubt because they are so diffrent from movies that are maybe 30-40 years old.
Some of the blocking seems awkard. Particular the cop that does not speak in the Stolen Item scene. Also for me there seems to be holes in the plot. It may be because Im tired but there does not seem to be enough explanaton on how Roinsons character is good enough to take over a major crime family.
For me the climax where Little Ceasar character is dealt with lacks all sence of flair. It seems just to be there and was somewhat lacking. That being said Im rating the movie as a C+ or B-. It should be seen mostly because it is considerred a classic. If you miss I think you can live with it but sometimes the classics should be seen just for and homage to the past.
The Poker House (2008 R)
The movie stars Jennifer Lawrence (The Beaver, XMen First Class), Selma Blair (The Sweetest Thing, In Good Company), David Alan Grier (Angles in the Outfield, Jumanji), Chloe Moretz (The Eye, Today You Die), Clark Peters (Treme tv, Legacy), Bokeem Woodbine (Devil, 3000 Miles to Graceland) and Sophia Bairley (Canvis, Black Oaisis).
The plot of this movie is in the background. Its more of a character study of a 14 year old girl and her two younger sisters. The daughters live in the local drug house with there strung out prostitute mother. The father is out of the pictue. Lawrence, the 14 year old, carries this movie with some good characters in the background.
The movie starts off strong that draws you in from the start. Its good from the start. There is good dialogue between the sisters. While Lawrence carries the movie. There is a good scene with the youngest sister and her best friends dad. There is a good scene with a younger sister and two homeless guys returning bottles.
The dialogut when lawrence goes in to get her paycheck from rhe newspaper(?) is well written and the actos in this scene are interisting even though this is there only scene. When Lawrence leaves the house after she is raped by a pimp is done well also.
The only character that stuck out as bad was the basketball coach, the other characters are all done well. The only scene that sticks out as really bad is the scene where the sisters sing in the car. The song is overused and who ever ownes the rights shoud not let it be used in any movies at least untill I have forgotten how many other movies it has been used in. Ill let them know. In the credits one of the actors is James Earl Jones II (maybe a grandson but could be a son I assume).
Its directed by Lori Petty of Tank Girl (a movie that seems bad but I have never seen) and A League of There Own.
Im ratng this movie as a B. If you want to see an uplifting life afferming movie wath something else. But this is a good movie that is worth seeing. And while you are at it see A League of There Own.
The plot of this movie is in the background. Its more of a character study of a 14 year old girl and her two younger sisters. The daughters live in the local drug house with there strung out prostitute mother. The father is out of the pictue. Lawrence, the 14 year old, carries this movie with some good characters in the background.
The movie starts off strong that draws you in from the start. Its good from the start. There is good dialogue between the sisters. While Lawrence carries the movie. There is a good scene with the youngest sister and her best friends dad. There is a good scene with a younger sister and two homeless guys returning bottles.
The dialogut when lawrence goes in to get her paycheck from rhe newspaper(?) is well written and the actos in this scene are interisting even though this is there only scene. When Lawrence leaves the house after she is raped by a pimp is done well also.
The only character that stuck out as bad was the basketball coach, the other characters are all done well. The only scene that sticks out as really bad is the scene where the sisters sing in the car. The song is overused and who ever ownes the rights shoud not let it be used in any movies at least untill I have forgotten how many other movies it has been used in. Ill let them know. In the credits one of the actors is James Earl Jones II (maybe a grandson but could be a son I assume).
Its directed by Lori Petty of Tank Girl (a movie that seems bad but I have never seen) and A League of There Own.
Im ratng this movie as a B. If you want to see an uplifting life afferming movie wath something else. But this is a good movie that is worth seeing. And while you are at it see A League of There Own.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)