1. Did I enjoy it? YES
The Ice Age films continue with this third installment in the series, and this one is actually pretty decent. Ray Romano, Queen Latifah and company are all back and do very well in their prehistoric roles. What I like best about these films, however, is the character of Scrat and his beloved acorn. While having smaller parts in the first two films, this time his character is expanded and interwoven more often with the other characters. He now also has a love interest/adversary, who also wants the acorn. I saw this film in 3-D, which added to the fun of this movie too.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
This is a pretty clear 1 out of 2 points for me. An entertaining film, but nothing beyond that to warrant multiple viewings. Viewers who'd pick animated films as one of their favorite genres, however, might disagree. This is a cute movie for sure and worth your ticket of admission. That we can all agree on.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
The Hangover (Bob says 1 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
This film has some pretty funny parts. I especially thought the lines given to Zach Galifianikis were great. I've grown to love Ed Helms from The Office, and it was great to see him here. I think though, that I heard so many great things about this movie that I was a little underwhelmed when I actually saw it. I had the same problem with Napoleon Dynamite and Pineapple Express. Funny, yes. But not as much as I expected. The origin of the tiger in this movie could have had a better story, although the method these guys use to get him out of their hotel is quite hilarious. This comedy is not without its faults, but it passes the funny test in my book.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
Usually comedies have to be pee in your pants funny for me to watch it over and over, I don't think I'd go that far with this one. But, people should check it out while it's still in theaters. They'll get a solid laugh or two.
This film has some pretty funny parts. I especially thought the lines given to Zach Galifianikis were great. I've grown to love Ed Helms from The Office, and it was great to see him here. I think though, that I heard so many great things about this movie that I was a little underwhelmed when I actually saw it. I had the same problem with Napoleon Dynamite and Pineapple Express. Funny, yes. But not as much as I expected. The origin of the tiger in this movie could have had a better story, although the method these guys use to get him out of their hotel is quite hilarious. This comedy is not without its faults, but it passes the funny test in my book.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
Usually comedies have to be pee in your pants funny for me to watch it over and over, I don't think I'd go that far with this one. But, people should check it out while it's still in theaters. They'll get a solid laugh or two.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (Bob says 0 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? NO
I was pleasantly surprised that I enjoyed the first Transformers movie, not having watched the previous incarnations growing up. I did have a transformer action figure or two, which were pretty cool. There were portions of this film that I liked. Optimus Prime returns, and he's an awesome character and leader. I would have liked to have seen him more than he appeared this time out. The special effects are also first rate, but the amount of explosions and action sequences are overkilled here. One of the main problems is the movie is too long. It could easily have been condensed into a 90 minute feature that would have been fine. They also needed to cut out a lot of annoying characters, especially Sam's mother and Leo, his college roommate. Leo has no purpose in this movie except to scream like a girl and make Sam look better than him. The mom character is terrible, Sam would be better off if he was only raised by his dad. The story is pretty cliche too, I'd stick to the first film and forget about this one. Not all good movies should be given a sequel. Most are better off on their own.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
I was pretty bored watching this movie, glancing at my watch often. There's a lot happening on screen, but very little substance. And yet, it's doing well at the box office. I guess this is catered to people who like effects movie that make you go "ooo" and "ahh." I prefer going to the Fourth of July fireworks for that sort of thing.
I was pleasantly surprised that I enjoyed the first Transformers movie, not having watched the previous incarnations growing up. I did have a transformer action figure or two, which were pretty cool. There were portions of this film that I liked. Optimus Prime returns, and he's an awesome character and leader. I would have liked to have seen him more than he appeared this time out. The special effects are also first rate, but the amount of explosions and action sequences are overkilled here. One of the main problems is the movie is too long. It could easily have been condensed into a 90 minute feature that would have been fine. They also needed to cut out a lot of annoying characters, especially Sam's mother and Leo, his college roommate. Leo has no purpose in this movie except to scream like a girl and make Sam look better than him. The mom character is terrible, Sam would be better off if he was only raised by his dad. The story is pretty cliche too, I'd stick to the first film and forget about this one. Not all good movies should be given a sequel. Most are better off on their own.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
I was pretty bored watching this movie, glancing at my watch often. There's a lot happening on screen, but very little substance. And yet, it's doing well at the box office. I guess this is catered to people who like effects movie that make you go "ooo" and "ahh." I prefer going to the Fourth of July fireworks for that sort of thing.
Friday The 13th (Bob says 0 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? NO
In preparation for the Freddy vs. Jason film that came out in 2003, I made a decision to watch every Friday The 13th and Nightmare On Elm Street movie made up to that point. Once you've made that kind of commitment, it's hard to stop when new sequels, or in this case remakes, come out. Having not seen a Friday movie since I saw the last film in the theater, I was looking forward to sitting down and watching it. "Maybe they'll actually try to make this remake scary," I thought to myself. No such luck. It's the same old schtick as the others, with oversexed teens hanging out at Crystal Lake and one by one being slaughtered by Jason in gruesome ways. For hardcore Jason fans, they might like this B-movie. The bad dialogue, acting, blood-and-guts mutilation and soft porn sex is what they expect, and it delivers all of those in abundance. But I was hoping this time around the filmmakers were going to be serious about scaring me. Apparently not.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
There's nothing unique about this movie; it's a remake that is just more of the same. Give me a story where I actually care about the heroins before you wipe them out. The original Nightmare On Elm Street did that well.
In preparation for the Freddy vs. Jason film that came out in 2003, I made a decision to watch every Friday The 13th and Nightmare On Elm Street movie made up to that point. Once you've made that kind of commitment, it's hard to stop when new sequels, or in this case remakes, come out. Having not seen a Friday movie since I saw the last film in the theater, I was looking forward to sitting down and watching it. "Maybe they'll actually try to make this remake scary," I thought to myself. No such luck. It's the same old schtick as the others, with oversexed teens hanging out at Crystal Lake and one by one being slaughtered by Jason in gruesome ways. For hardcore Jason fans, they might like this B-movie. The bad dialogue, acting, blood-and-guts mutilation and soft porn sex is what they expect, and it delivers all of those in abundance. But I was hoping this time around the filmmakers were going to be serious about scaring me. Apparently not.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
There's nothing unique about this movie; it's a remake that is just more of the same. Give me a story where I actually care about the heroins before you wipe them out. The original Nightmare On Elm Street did that well.
Angels & Demons (Bob says 1 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
I have a good friend who was upset about Christians getting all bent out of shape about the unorthodox themes in The Da Vinci Code. After all, it's based on a book that's fiction, what's the big deal? Fair enough. Provided that no filmmakers create fictional movies other than to entertain the audience. And provided that no messages in fiction films ever influence an audience member's way of thinking. If you ask me, "what's the big deal?" is either pretty naive or simply just a form of denial. While some might argue a film critic should not rate a film based on its messages, I disagree. One should not give a thumbs up to a film that he believes is not beneficial to the audience, be it story, acting, effects, or message. Angels & Demons will probably only bother devout Catholics, however, so this sequel did not fall into my same soap box as the previous Dan Brown effort. There are some great scenes of suspense in this film, like when Tom Hanks is locked in the Vatican vault without any oxygen. It also brings up interesting questions: does the Catholic Church hold onto traditions and views even when the truth lies elsewhere? The villain in this film, who is not revealed until the film's end, is a character who has good motives but carries them out in a very violent and evil way. I was surprised that I liked this film, although I will continue to have a proceed with caution mindset when watching another Da Vinci film.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
Probably would only watch it again if it was years down the road and someone wanted to watch and discuss the ideas in the film. On my own movie spreadsheet, I gave the movie 2 1/2 stars, meaning it wasn't bad the first time, but doesn't warrant multiple viewings.
I have a good friend who was upset about Christians getting all bent out of shape about the unorthodox themes in The Da Vinci Code. After all, it's based on a book that's fiction, what's the big deal? Fair enough. Provided that no filmmakers create fictional movies other than to entertain the audience. And provided that no messages in fiction films ever influence an audience member's way of thinking. If you ask me, "what's the big deal?" is either pretty naive or simply just a form of denial. While some might argue a film critic should not rate a film based on its messages, I disagree. One should not give a thumbs up to a film that he believes is not beneficial to the audience, be it story, acting, effects, or message. Angels & Demons will probably only bother devout Catholics, however, so this sequel did not fall into my same soap box as the previous Dan Brown effort. There are some great scenes of suspense in this film, like when Tom Hanks is locked in the Vatican vault without any oxygen. It also brings up interesting questions: does the Catholic Church hold onto traditions and views even when the truth lies elsewhere? The villain in this film, who is not revealed until the film's end, is a character who has good motives but carries them out in a very violent and evil way. I was surprised that I liked this film, although I will continue to have a proceed with caution mindset when watching another Da Vinci film.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
Probably would only watch it again if it was years down the road and someone wanted to watch and discuss the ideas in the film. On my own movie spreadsheet, I gave the movie 2 1/2 stars, meaning it wasn't bad the first time, but doesn't warrant multiple viewings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)