1. Did I enjoy it? YES (2 points)
Once upon a time, there was a nine-year-old child who was adopted by a family in a suburban neighborhood. The child had burned down the house he lived in with his biological parents, and now there are signs that the youngster is dangerous, maybe even a killer. What movie am I describing? If you think I'm talking about Orphan, think again. Actually this was a screenplay I had written in film school during the spring of 2004. That's why I was taken off guard when I came across a movie that fit the exact same description. In Orphan, however, the child is female, along with other differences that make the 2009 film an original story. But it does make you wonder. When I came up with the idea for my screenplay, entitled Nathan, I had no idea that killer children had been made into several films previously. The Bad Seed and The Omen are the two most popular, while The Good Son and Children of the Corn were not applauded by many. What makes The Orphan unique is the twist ending, which I must admit, took me by surprise.
2. Would I watch it again? YES (2 points)
One of these days, I want to write a final draft of my own script. But it always helps to research why similar stories went well or bombed. The Orphan works and is a film I may like to view again for some enjoyable research.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Coraline (Bob says 3 out of 4)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES (2 points)
I loved the visuals in this film. Henry Selick, director of A Nightmare Before Christmas, creates another unique and dark world using stop-motion animation to tell the story. Coraline, our protagonist with a few more flaws than the average cartoon heroine, is frustrated that her parents pay little attention to her. Her family has just moved and her only potential playmate is Wybourne Lovat, a kid she believes talks way too much. One day, Coraline discovers a small door in her house which opens up a tunnel to another world. The new world appears to be an alternate universe of where she is now. Her parents are attentive and give her whatever she wants and Wybourne smiles but doesn't speak. The only oddity is the new parents have black buttons attached to their eyes and Coraline must agree to wear buttons as well if she wants to stay. Like the new Christmas Carol movie, this film is pretty dark for young children, but will be very entertaining for older kids and adults. Selick does a great job with this movie, I liked it.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
It wouldn't be my first choice for a repeated viewing, but I could do a lot worse. It might wear out its welcome if watched too often, but once in a blue moon maybe if someone else has it on.
I loved the visuals in this film. Henry Selick, director of A Nightmare Before Christmas, creates another unique and dark world using stop-motion animation to tell the story. Coraline, our protagonist with a few more flaws than the average cartoon heroine, is frustrated that her parents pay little attention to her. Her family has just moved and her only potential playmate is Wybourne Lovat, a kid she believes talks way too much. One day, Coraline discovers a small door in her house which opens up a tunnel to another world. The new world appears to be an alternate universe of where she is now. Her parents are attentive and give her whatever she wants and Wybourne smiles but doesn't speak. The only oddity is the new parents have black buttons attached to their eyes and Coraline must agree to wear buttons as well if she wants to stay. Like the new Christmas Carol movie, this film is pretty dark for young children, but will be very entertaining for older kids and adults. Selick does a great job with this movie, I liked it.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
It wouldn't be my first choice for a repeated viewing, but I could do a lot worse. It might wear out its welcome if watched too often, but once in a blue moon maybe if someone else has it on.
Drag Me to Hell (Bob says 1 out of 4)
1. Did I enjoy it? SOME OF IT (1 point)
Sam Raimi likes to do what Gremlins did well, create a movie with horror and black comedy. I thought he did this successfully in The Evil Dead, although he went too over the top with its sequels. Drag Me to Hell is a movie that works some of the time, but not enough of it. The makeup and special effects are certainly well done, as is the acting. Where I think it went wrong is the writing and direction. As are the trappings of many horror films, this one relies too heavily on music to make us jump and startle us. Mrs. Ganush also seems pretty unbelievable in this film. Ganush is the old woman in the story who curses Christine, a young loan officer who refuses to extend her another loan on her mortgage payment. We see scenes with Ganush playing with her false teeth a lot, biting Christine on the mouth, and destroying her car. What disappointed me most, however, was that I was able to predict the ending. Raimi makes it a little too obvious, although the twist I'm gathering was supposed to be a surprise. It wasn't.
2. Would I watch it again? NO (0 points)
Raimi is a talented director, but he didn't quite win me over this time out. I think he has the potential to win me over with future films, however.
Sam Raimi likes to do what Gremlins did well, create a movie with horror and black comedy. I thought he did this successfully in The Evil Dead, although he went too over the top with its sequels. Drag Me to Hell is a movie that works some of the time, but not enough of it. The makeup and special effects are certainly well done, as is the acting. Where I think it went wrong is the writing and direction. As are the trappings of many horror films, this one relies too heavily on music to make us jump and startle us. Mrs. Ganush also seems pretty unbelievable in this film. Ganush is the old woman in the story who curses Christine, a young loan officer who refuses to extend her another loan on her mortgage payment. We see scenes with Ganush playing with her false teeth a lot, biting Christine on the mouth, and destroying her car. What disappointed me most, however, was that I was able to predict the ending. Raimi makes it a little too obvious, although the twist I'm gathering was supposed to be a surprise. It wasn't.
2. Would I watch it again? NO (0 points)
Raimi is a talented director, but he didn't quite win me over this time out. I think he has the potential to win me over with future films, however.
The Cove (Bob says 3 out of 4)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES (2 points)
This film actually has a lot of suspense in it for a documentary. Ric O'Barry, former dolphin trainer for the TV series Flipper turned animal activist, joins filmmaker Louie Psihoyos and his crew as they travel to Taiji, Japan. While the town seems to promote dolphins, O'Barry has become aware of a remote cove off its shores where fishermen capture and brutually kill dolphins by the thousands. The killings are so numerous that the entire cove's water turns blood red when the fishermen conduct their "work". Because the Japanese officials in the town want the practice covered up, they refuse to let Psihoyos take any cameras to document what is happening. O'Barry and the crew decide to do it anyway, making a secret trek in the night to plant hidden cameras all around the cove. These scenes are as intense as any thriller. The film also packs with it a lot of emotion, as we find out some of the dolphin meat is being used for school lunches, even though it has dangerously high levels of mercury in it. You can also see how remorseful O'Barry is, who realized that the dolphins he trained for Flipper were so unhappy with their captivity that one "chose" to end his life by refusing to breathe when he had the opportunity. O'Barry then spent his life freeing dolphins held in captivity, being jailed on many occassions. This is a fascinating story that I knew nothing about before watching. What a nice surprise.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
I may not be as passionate as O'Barry about his cause, but he did make me feel that way while I was watching it. I encourage anyone to see this film, it will make you aware of an issue that threatens not only dolphins, but anyone who has one for supper.
This film actually has a lot of suspense in it for a documentary. Ric O'Barry, former dolphin trainer for the TV series Flipper turned animal activist, joins filmmaker Louie Psihoyos and his crew as they travel to Taiji, Japan. While the town seems to promote dolphins, O'Barry has become aware of a remote cove off its shores where fishermen capture and brutually kill dolphins by the thousands. The killings are so numerous that the entire cove's water turns blood red when the fishermen conduct their "work". Because the Japanese officials in the town want the practice covered up, they refuse to let Psihoyos take any cameras to document what is happening. O'Barry and the crew decide to do it anyway, making a secret trek in the night to plant hidden cameras all around the cove. These scenes are as intense as any thriller. The film also packs with it a lot of emotion, as we find out some of the dolphin meat is being used for school lunches, even though it has dangerously high levels of mercury in it. You can also see how remorseful O'Barry is, who realized that the dolphins he trained for Flipper were so unhappy with their captivity that one "chose" to end his life by refusing to breathe when he had the opportunity. O'Barry then spent his life freeing dolphins held in captivity, being jailed on many occassions. This is a fascinating story that I knew nothing about before watching. What a nice surprise.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
I may not be as passionate as O'Barry about his cause, but he did make me feel that way while I was watching it. I encourage anyone to see this film, it will make you aware of an issue that threatens not only dolphins, but anyone who has one for supper.
Just Another Love Story (Bob says 3 out of 4)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES (2 points)
I really like film noir. It's dark, it's mysterious and it's full of adventure. This story is a modern film noir from Denmark that came out to limited release in the United States last January. The film follows Jonas, a man with a wife and kids living in the suburbs who is likeable but growing weary of his life's routines. One day, however, he and his family witness a tragic car accident while driving down the road. Jonas feels responsible for the woman who survives, as she swerved around his car before hitting another one. Jonas discovers her name is Julia and decides to visit her in the hospital while she's in a coma. When he arrives, his family mistakenly assumes he's Julia's boyfriend Sebastian and encourage him to spend time with her and not run out. Now, in real life, Jonas would explain he is not the boyfriend, but that would end the movie pretty quickly. Instead, Jonas spends more and more time with Julia, even as she wakes from her coma but doesn't remember who she is or what happened to her. The plot has many twists which I won't reveal here, but remember that most film noir's have consequences when a main character makes a bad choice, and most noirs do not have a happy ending.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
With the many films I watch each year, it's very difficult for me to take time out and watch a movie for a second time. This certainly would not be a bad choice for a repeated viewing, so you never know. It would be fun to rent again with a few other people who haven't seen it. The first time you watch a great movie, you're absorbed by the film. The second time, you have the fun of watching others be absorbed by it too.
I really like film noir. It's dark, it's mysterious and it's full of adventure. This story is a modern film noir from Denmark that came out to limited release in the United States last January. The film follows Jonas, a man with a wife and kids living in the suburbs who is likeable but growing weary of his life's routines. One day, however, he and his family witness a tragic car accident while driving down the road. Jonas feels responsible for the woman who survives, as she swerved around his car before hitting another one. Jonas discovers her name is Julia and decides to visit her in the hospital while she's in a coma. When he arrives, his family mistakenly assumes he's Julia's boyfriend Sebastian and encourage him to spend time with her and not run out. Now, in real life, Jonas would explain he is not the boyfriend, but that would end the movie pretty quickly. Instead, Jonas spends more and more time with Julia, even as she wakes from her coma but doesn't remember who she is or what happened to her. The plot has many twists which I won't reveal here, but remember that most film noir's have consequences when a main character makes a bad choice, and most noirs do not have a happy ending.
2. Would I watch it again? MAYBE (1 point)
With the many films I watch each year, it's very difficult for me to take time out and watch a movie for a second time. This certainly would not be a bad choice for a repeated viewing, so you never know. It would be fun to rent again with a few other people who haven't seen it. The first time you watch a great movie, you're absorbed by the film. The second time, you have the fun of watching others be absorbed by it too.
The Great Buck Howard (Bob says 2 out of 4)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES (2 points)
Anytime you meet a person who is really famous or was at one point, you're in awe and will never forget the experience. I'll never forget meeting and talking to Ron Santo, a radio broadcaster and former third baseman for the Chicago Cubs. His playing days may have been long over, but it was still an incredible moment. So it is for fans of Buck Howard, played by John Malkovich. His days of drawing huge crowds to his magic shows might be finished, but those who come to his performances still love him. The film actually follows Colin Hanks' character Troy Gable, a young man who quits law school and is approached by Howard to be his road manager. Troy dreams of becoming a writer, but accepts Howard's offer to support himself. He discovers Howard is quite demanding and full of himself for a man past his glory days, but greatly admires his signature trick of guessing which audience member is secretly holding his fee for that night's performance. I suspect this is true of any celebrity one might get to know behind the scenes. They are talented but still flawed like the rest of us, perhaps even more so. Troy will eventually move on to other jobs and experiences, but he will never forget his time working with Buck Howard. Great performances by everyone involved, including cameos by Tom Hanks, Tom Arnold and various real-life talk show hosts.
2. Would I watch it again? NO (0 points)
This was a nice movie to watch, but I don't think it's one that I'll be rushing to Blockbuster to see again. Some films work well just with one experience and this is probably one of them. But I do encourage viewers to see it once, it's a small comedic drama that's a fun look at working with a former celebrity behind the scenes.
Anytime you meet a person who is really famous or was at one point, you're in awe and will never forget the experience. I'll never forget meeting and talking to Ron Santo, a radio broadcaster and former third baseman for the Chicago Cubs. His playing days may have been long over, but it was still an incredible moment. So it is for fans of Buck Howard, played by John Malkovich. His days of drawing huge crowds to his magic shows might be finished, but those who come to his performances still love him. The film actually follows Colin Hanks' character Troy Gable, a young man who quits law school and is approached by Howard to be his road manager. Troy dreams of becoming a writer, but accepts Howard's offer to support himself. He discovers Howard is quite demanding and full of himself for a man past his glory days, but greatly admires his signature trick of guessing which audience member is secretly holding his fee for that night's performance. I suspect this is true of any celebrity one might get to know behind the scenes. They are talented but still flawed like the rest of us, perhaps even more so. Troy will eventually move on to other jobs and experiences, but he will never forget his time working with Buck Howard. Great performances by everyone involved, including cameos by Tom Hanks, Tom Arnold and various real-life talk show hosts.
2. Would I watch it again? NO (0 points)
This was a nice movie to watch, but I don't think it's one that I'll be rushing to Blockbuster to see again. Some films work well just with one experience and this is probably one of them. But I do encourage viewers to see it once, it's a small comedic drama that's a fun look at working with a former celebrity behind the scenes.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Disney's A Christmas Carol (Bob says 2 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
If you have the opportunity, please see this film in the 3-D format. This film is perfect for it, and makes you feel like you're part of the ride as Ebenezer Scrooge gets dragged through the sky by the ghosts of Christmas in this computer animated version of the Charles Dickens' classic. A Christmas Carol has been been made into more films than any other Christmas story that I know. My personal favorite is the 1951 version starring Alastir Sim. This film might be the runner-up. Robert Zemeckis, who used the "live action" performance technique for his animated feature The Polar Express, uses the same technique here with even greater success. This is a pretty dark version for kids, but it is quite faithful to the book and keeps the audience engaged from start to finish. Jim Carrey's Scrooge is not as good as Sim's, but that's a standard I suspect no one will meet.
2. Would I watch it again? YES
I'm curious how the film will hold up in two dimensional format, but I suspect the great visuals and performances will still carry it through. With the exception of Up, this is the best animated feature this year.
If you have the opportunity, please see this film in the 3-D format. This film is perfect for it, and makes you feel like you're part of the ride as Ebenezer Scrooge gets dragged through the sky by the ghosts of Christmas in this computer animated version of the Charles Dickens' classic. A Christmas Carol has been been made into more films than any other Christmas story that I know. My personal favorite is the 1951 version starring Alastir Sim. This film might be the runner-up. Robert Zemeckis, who used the "live action" performance technique for his animated feature The Polar Express, uses the same technique here with even greater success. This is a pretty dark version for kids, but it is quite faithful to the book and keeps the audience engaged from start to finish. Jim Carrey's Scrooge is not as good as Sim's, but that's a standard I suspect no one will meet.
2. Would I watch it again? YES
I'm curious how the film will hold up in two dimensional format, but I suspect the great visuals and performances will still carry it through. With the exception of Up, this is the best animated feature this year.
Funny People (Bob says 2 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
"What are you watching?" My dad asked inquisitively.
"Funny People," I hollered back.
"Well this doesn't seem like a very funny movie," he retorted.
Obviously Dad wasn't watching the comics during their standup bits. But this film is in fact more of a dramedy than anything else. Adam Sandler plays what might be a fictional version of his real self, a comedian whose career took off after making several hit comedic films. Unlike Sandler, however, George Simmons finds out he has cancer that may be terminal unless a very experimental treatment happens to work. George decides to hire aspiring stand up comedian Ira Wright to write him some jokes and keep him company. We learn that beneath the fame and the attention he receives from his very willing female fans, George is alone. What viewers may first take as a film about the struggle to stay alive is actually a film about a man struggling to become a better human being. Does Sandler have the same issues as Simmons does? It's hard to say, but I suspect this character is an authentic portrait of many celebrities today: Happy and on top of the world on the outside, but a mess deep down. Thank goodness for Ira then, who is the one person who can build a relationship with him and tell him not what he wants to hear, but what he needs to hear.
2. Would I watch it again? YES
Adam Sandler seems to be going the same route as Jim Carrey: alternating between pure comedy and taking roles with a more dramatic spin. This film develops more of the latter, and proves to me once again that Sandler is capable of taking roles that have more than one dimension to them. I hope to see him win a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Dramatic Role someday. He can get there.
"What are you watching?" My dad asked inquisitively.
"Funny People," I hollered back.
"Well this doesn't seem like a very funny movie," he retorted.
Obviously Dad wasn't watching the comics during their standup bits. But this film is in fact more of a dramedy than anything else. Adam Sandler plays what might be a fictional version of his real self, a comedian whose career took off after making several hit comedic films. Unlike Sandler, however, George Simmons finds out he has cancer that may be terminal unless a very experimental treatment happens to work. George decides to hire aspiring stand up comedian Ira Wright to write him some jokes and keep him company. We learn that beneath the fame and the attention he receives from his very willing female fans, George is alone. What viewers may first take as a film about the struggle to stay alive is actually a film about a man struggling to become a better human being. Does Sandler have the same issues as Simmons does? It's hard to say, but I suspect this character is an authentic portrait of many celebrities today: Happy and on top of the world on the outside, but a mess deep down. Thank goodness for Ira then, who is the one person who can build a relationship with him and tell him not what he wants to hear, but what he needs to hear.
2. Would I watch it again? YES
Adam Sandler seems to be going the same route as Jim Carrey: alternating between pure comedy and taking roles with a more dramatic spin. This film develops more of the latter, and proves to me once again that Sandler is capable of taking roles that have more than one dimension to them. I hope to see him win a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Dramatic Role someday. He can get there.
Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs (Bob says 1 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
I have a theory that if there is a story that was both made into a book and made into a film, you will like the one you encountered first. In my case, I read the book version of Cloudy many years ago as a child and loved it. The story was fantastic and the pictures ignited my imagination and actually made me very hungry. The film version, which I saw a few weeks ago, is not bad, but like many things after your childhood has ended, the magic is not the same. A part of that might be the computer animation. I would have preferred this film be hand drawn or maybe even made into a live version. This might sound like a negative review, but I actually think kids will like it just fine. Most likely they have not read the story, so they have no previous expectations going into the movie. I was mildly entertained too and although it didn't make me feel like a kid again, I applaud the filmmakers for paying homage to a great story.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
But I will be singing "It's Raining Sunshine" for quite a while. Animated films often have very catchy closing songs, at least they do this year. The question is, what food would you want it to rain?
I have a theory that if there is a story that was both made into a book and made into a film, you will like the one you encountered first. In my case, I read the book version of Cloudy many years ago as a child and loved it. The story was fantastic and the pictures ignited my imagination and actually made me very hungry. The film version, which I saw a few weeks ago, is not bad, but like many things after your childhood has ended, the magic is not the same. A part of that might be the computer animation. I would have preferred this film be hand drawn or maybe even made into a live version. This might sound like a negative review, but I actually think kids will like it just fine. Most likely they have not read the story, so they have no previous expectations going into the movie. I was mildly entertained too and although it didn't make me feel like a kid again, I applaud the filmmakers for paying homage to a great story.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
But I will be singing "It's Raining Sunshine" for quite a while. Animated films often have very catchy closing songs, at least they do this year. The question is, what food would you want it to rain?
The Informant! (Bob says 1 out of 2)
1. Did I enjoy it? YES
Matt Damon loves to play complicated characters. You might think a character like Mark Whitacre who goes undercover for the FBI while also participating in illegal activities himself would be an implausible piece of fiction writing. Not this time. This story is based on real events and Mark Whitacre really did take millions of dollars from the very company he was helping the FBI bust for price fixing. Steven Soderbergh, who also directed The Girlfriend Experience earlier this year, does a great job in holding back what the Whitacre character is really up to in early scenes. When Whitacre tells his first lie, I was upset with him, but thought he was simply under stress rather than having a trick up his sleeve. It turns out he played me too.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
This movie did not do well at the box office as because it was marketed wrong. Yes, there are amusing portions of this film, as Whitacre's lies get so complex it's ridiculous. But this is not the kind of comedy that has you busting a gut every five minutes. Ignore the trailers that suggest it is. If viewers go into it looking for a quirky drama, I think they'll be much more pleased with the film. I might watch this once more to see if I can tell what Whitacre is up to earlier in the movie, but beyond that, I don't think I would watch it more than that. Just don't give up on it altogether, as many viewers did.
Matt Damon loves to play complicated characters. You might think a character like Mark Whitacre who goes undercover for the FBI while also participating in illegal activities himself would be an implausible piece of fiction writing. Not this time. This story is based on real events and Mark Whitacre really did take millions of dollars from the very company he was helping the FBI bust for price fixing. Steven Soderbergh, who also directed The Girlfriend Experience earlier this year, does a great job in holding back what the Whitacre character is really up to in early scenes. When Whitacre tells his first lie, I was upset with him, but thought he was simply under stress rather than having a trick up his sleeve. It turns out he played me too.
2. Would I watch it again? NO
This movie did not do well at the box office as because it was marketed wrong. Yes, there are amusing portions of this film, as Whitacre's lies get so complex it's ridiculous. But this is not the kind of comedy that has you busting a gut every five minutes. Ignore the trailers that suggest it is. If viewers go into it looking for a quirky drama, I think they'll be much more pleased with the film. I might watch this once more to see if I can tell what Whitacre is up to earlier in the movie, but beyond that, I don't think I would watch it more than that. Just don't give up on it altogether, as many viewers did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)