This movie looked hilarious from the previews, and it certainly didn't dissapoint.
The story takes place at a funeral where the father of two boys (Martin Lawrence and Chris Rock) has passed. When the whole, dysfunctional family shows up, along with some uninvited guests, the whole thing ends up a mess.
This one is apparently a remake, although I haven't seen the original. The story was original and many of the situations were slight variations on old cliches, strung together in a very fresh way. The humor really held this one together, although there were moments of sincerity. Short moments, but moments nonetheless.
Fantastic acting from everyone, especially Chris Rock. He and Tracey Morgan play the same character every movie, but they always manage to make it feel slightly different. It works, as both of them are always funny. Martin Lawrence did a good job as well, although his character does tend to get irritating. James Marsden had a breakout performance here; he was hilarious. And of course, I have to mention Danny Glover. He plays the crabby, old uncle perfectly, better than any other
The humor was interesting. When this many black comediens come together, you know it has to be funny. And it was, but it didn't maintain hilarity throughout. Some side jokes fell flat, and a lot of silly antics when by with merely a chuckle. However, the dozen or so moments of hilarity were gut-busting and definitely made up for the rest.
Good movie overall, although the all-star cast should have been able to produce a feew more laughs. I recommend this one anyway. 3.5/5 stars
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
How to Train Your Dragon
I'll be honest, I had very low expectations on this one. But, I saw 98% on Rotten Tomatoes, so I decided I would see it anyway. Boy, was I surprised.
The movie is centered on a viking village with a gigantic pest problem: it is frequently raided by dragons. Everything in the village is in some way related to slaying dragons and its most respected citizens are expert dragon slayers. Hiccup, however, is not good at being a viking. He does discover though that he is quite good at taming the beasts, much to the dismay of the village.
This movie was pure genius. The story was excellently crafted with just enough tension in all the right places. It was careful to inject emotion-filled moments, but never crossed the line into tear-jerking territory. It was an inspiring tale that leaves the viewer feeling cheerful and fulfilled. It had such good writing that I cannot even put it into words. The dialogue was fantastic. It was never overly-corny and had just enough moments of gentle humor that it made the whole experience uplifting. Brilliant.
The production itself was just as masterful. The voice acting was very, very good and each one matched the on-screen persona. The visuals were simply stunning. The animation was flawless and I can only imagine how good it must have looked in 3D (I need to go see it before it's gone). It was a masterpiece of animation.
I can't say enough about How to Train Your Dragon. Go see this movie, you won't be disappointed. Truly superb movie. 5/5 stars
The movie is centered on a viking village with a gigantic pest problem: it is frequently raided by dragons. Everything in the village is in some way related to slaying dragons and its most respected citizens are expert dragon slayers. Hiccup, however, is not good at being a viking. He does discover though that he is quite good at taming the beasts, much to the dismay of the village.
This movie was pure genius. The story was excellently crafted with just enough tension in all the right places. It was careful to inject emotion-filled moments, but never crossed the line into tear-jerking territory. It was an inspiring tale that leaves the viewer feeling cheerful and fulfilled. It had such good writing that I cannot even put it into words. The dialogue was fantastic. It was never overly-corny and had just enough moments of gentle humor that it made the whole experience uplifting. Brilliant.
The production itself was just as masterful. The voice acting was very, very good and each one matched the on-screen persona. The visuals were simply stunning. The animation was flawless and I can only imagine how good it must have looked in 3D (I need to go see it before it's gone). It was a masterpiece of animation.
I can't say enough about How to Train Your Dragon. Go see this movie, you won't be disappointed. Truly superb movie. 5/5 stars
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
MMA promotions
For those of you who don't know, I'm a huge mixed martial arts fan. For around two years now, I've watched every major card from every major promotion religiously. Today, I want to talk about the recent mma events from various promotions, and how good they all are from a production standpoint.
Lets start with the UFC. As we all know, the UFC is top-notch when it comes to production. Rogan and Goldberg are iconic figures in the sport, and they do a fantastic job commentating. Rogan is knowledgeable and very articulate when it come to describing technical aspects of the game. He may be biased at times, but what commentator (who isn't a robot) isn't? I think that only adds to his personality and gives even more of a comedic factor to his words. Goldberg is, of course, a robot. His lines get repeated over and over again, but what fight would be complete without, "It's allllllll overrrrrrr!!"? Those two are the perfect team in my opinion.
Now, to get into the fighters themselves. The UFC unarguably has the best fighters on the planet (minus Fedor Emilianenko), and they know how to hype a fight. They consistently put on the matchups that people want to see, and they make sure that everyone wants to see it.
They are not, however, without their flaws. Sometimes they put on bad matchups (Silva-Maia, I'm looking at you). These things just shouldn't happen when Joe Silva is getting paid top dollar to put up good matchups. They also play with rankings, which is inevitable to some degree. But, it is often too much, as it was with Hardy's title shot or Dos Santos and Okami being held back. Yes, it is a business put on to entertain, but give the fighters the respect they deserve. One last thing: Dana White needs to clean up his language and stop bending the truth. His attitude is a perfect fit for the sport and he most certainly cares about the fans, but his language is just bad public image and his outright lies hurt his credibility. In general, though, I think he is great for mma as a whole.
Let's move on to Strikeforce, or should I say Strikefarce? For a company with very few elite fighters and even fewer viewers, they have bitten off far more than they can chew. With Strikeforce: Nashville this past weekend, they put most of their A-level fighters on one card with three titles on the line. That was a terrible idea. One, that makes timing issues extremely difficult. As it was, they ran over more than a half-hour, and they could've just as easily been an hour short. Two, the three long, drug out decisions that occurred are boring to the casual fan, which is who you are trying to attract by putting it on network tv. Also, they claim to have the sport's best interest in mind, but should an inferior product be on network tv? Some people re watching mma there for the first time, so shouldn't the UFC be what they see? introducing people on Strikeforce is only going to turn them away. I like free mma as much as the next guy, but Strikeforce has to go.
Last and certainly not least is Bellator FC. First off, the circular cage is genius and I have no idea why no one thought of it sooner (maybe someone did and I don't know?). The commentating is awesome; I've been a fan of Jimmy (not sure his last name, he's from Fight Quest) for some time and he really knows his stuff. He's a very like able guy and shows a real connection to the fighters. The promotion knows exactly how big it is and never overestimate themselves. They don't acquire and overplay UFC rejects (Huerta is different and he certainly isn't overhyped), but rather they build up and create their own stars. They put on fantastic fights with hungry up and comers and best of all, it's free! I love Bellator and I hope they last a long time.
That's it for now, I've already spent way too much time writing this. I'll write again soon.
-Joe
Lets start with the UFC. As we all know, the UFC is top-notch when it comes to production. Rogan and Goldberg are iconic figures in the sport, and they do a fantastic job commentating. Rogan is knowledgeable and very articulate when it come to describing technical aspects of the game. He may be biased at times, but what commentator (who isn't a robot) isn't? I think that only adds to his personality and gives even more of a comedic factor to his words. Goldberg is, of course, a robot. His lines get repeated over and over again, but what fight would be complete without, "It's allllllll overrrrrrr!!"? Those two are the perfect team in my opinion.
Now, to get into the fighters themselves. The UFC unarguably has the best fighters on the planet (minus Fedor Emilianenko), and they know how to hype a fight. They consistently put on the matchups that people want to see, and they make sure that everyone wants to see it.
They are not, however, without their flaws. Sometimes they put on bad matchups (Silva-Maia, I'm looking at you). These things just shouldn't happen when Joe Silva is getting paid top dollar to put up good matchups. They also play with rankings, which is inevitable to some degree. But, it is often too much, as it was with Hardy's title shot or Dos Santos and Okami being held back. Yes, it is a business put on to entertain, but give the fighters the respect they deserve. One last thing: Dana White needs to clean up his language and stop bending the truth. His attitude is a perfect fit for the sport and he most certainly cares about the fans, but his language is just bad public image and his outright lies hurt his credibility. In general, though, I think he is great for mma as a whole.
Let's move on to Strikeforce, or should I say Strikefarce? For a company with very few elite fighters and even fewer viewers, they have bitten off far more than they can chew. With Strikeforce: Nashville this past weekend, they put most of their A-level fighters on one card with three titles on the line. That was a terrible idea. One, that makes timing issues extremely difficult. As it was, they ran over more than a half-hour, and they could've just as easily been an hour short. Two, the three long, drug out decisions that occurred are boring to the casual fan, which is who you are trying to attract by putting it on network tv. Also, they claim to have the sport's best interest in mind, but should an inferior product be on network tv? Some people re watching mma there for the first time, so shouldn't the UFC be what they see? introducing people on Strikeforce is only going to turn them away. I like free mma as much as the next guy, but Strikeforce has to go.
Last and certainly not least is Bellator FC. First off, the circular cage is genius and I have no idea why no one thought of it sooner (maybe someone did and I don't know?). The commentating is awesome; I've been a fan of Jimmy (not sure his last name, he's from Fight Quest) for some time and he really knows his stuff. He's a very like able guy and shows a real connection to the fighters. The promotion knows exactly how big it is and never overestimate themselves. They don't acquire and overplay UFC rejects (Huerta is different and he certainly isn't overhyped), but rather they build up and create their own stars. They put on fantastic fights with hungry up and comers and best of all, it's free! I love Bellator and I hope they last a long time.
That's it for now, I've already spent way too much time writing this. I'll write again soon.
-Joe
Friday, April 16, 2010
TV week of the 17th
I watched a bunch of cool stuff this week that I want to share with you guys.
First thing was on Sunday, usually a terrible day for TV. Minute to Win It, a new game show centered around minute-long challenges, pleasently surprised me. The premiss is sound and the games are actually quite complelling (and difficult!). Guy Fierri (maybe spelled wrong there?) is actually a real good host. He is much better at game shows than he is at showcasing food. I also watched a fair amount of Sasuke this week (ninja warrior for you american types), and I am as happy to watch it as ever. I think I'll make a post later this week relating the two shows. I have a few things to say about it.
I watched V again this week, and I am still very pleased with the show. The production is top notch, and the story is still compelling week after week. I find myself becoming more and more annoyed at the female lead, but I'm sure I'm in the minority. She's a good actor, but her constant angry expression just grates on me. Anyway, watch this show. It's that good.
I was a bit dissapointed with American Idol this week. They got rid of my boy Andrew Garcia, but I guess he really was in the bottom two of that group. I feel like he never quite lived up to his potential and I'm curious to know why. My pick to win at this point is Lee Dwyze (spelling again?). Oh and Adam Lambert was really good. I'm glad he toned done the performance a bit and let his insane talent shine rather than some flashy act.
Well, I think that's all for now. I'll probably have two posts in the next few days. One on all the mma productions that have been occuring recently and one on the two game shows I mentioned. And I want to see Kick Ass and Death at a Funeral. Later all.
-Joe
First thing was on Sunday, usually a terrible day for TV. Minute to Win It, a new game show centered around minute-long challenges, pleasently surprised me. The premiss is sound and the games are actually quite complelling (and difficult!). Guy Fierri (maybe spelled wrong there?) is actually a real good host. He is much better at game shows than he is at showcasing food. I also watched a fair amount of Sasuke this week (ninja warrior for you american types), and I am as happy to watch it as ever. I think I'll make a post later this week relating the two shows. I have a few things to say about it.
I watched V again this week, and I am still very pleased with the show. The production is top notch, and the story is still compelling week after week. I find myself becoming more and more annoyed at the female lead, but I'm sure I'm in the minority. She's a good actor, but her constant angry expression just grates on me. Anyway, watch this show. It's that good.
I was a bit dissapointed with American Idol this week. They got rid of my boy Andrew Garcia, but I guess he really was in the bottom two of that group. I feel like he never quite lived up to his potential and I'm curious to know why. My pick to win at this point is Lee Dwyze (spelling again?). Oh and Adam Lambert was really good. I'm glad he toned done the performance a bit and let his insane talent shine rather than some flashy act.
Well, I think that's all for now. I'll probably have two posts in the next few days. One on all the mma productions that have been occuring recently and one on the two game shows I mentioned. And I want to see Kick Ass and Death at a Funeral. Later all.
-Joe
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Hancock
I just saw Hancock over the weekend on some movie channel and I had never seen it before, so I thought I would review it.
The plot centers around John Hancock (Will Smith), an alcohollic superhero with no desire to please his critics. When he meets an HR rep named Ray (Jason Bateman) who wants to change his image, Hancock goes on a mission to become the upstanding citizen everyone wants him to be.
The acting was pathetic in this one, other than Bateman and to a lesser extent, Smith. Will Smith fit the early, dirty Hancock part pretty well. After the cleanup, however, it felt pretty odd and forced. Late in the movie, Smith lost all traces of the old character and was far too much himself, rather than the part. He seemed to have been perfect for it on paper, but something just didn't click. Bateman was very good, although maybe it just seems that way in comparison.
I was a big fan of the plot in general, as I always am with innovative sci-fi/superhero scripts. However, I felt like the early plt could have standed on its own and that the plot twist and subsequent occurences were rushed and unnecessary. Sure, it had surprise factor, but afterwards it quickly became predictable. I would've liked to have seen the whol "becoming a real superhero" plot drawn out into the whole movie. Maybe a vilain could have been used as well.
Not a bad movie, but certainly not what it could have been. 2/5 stars
The plot centers around John Hancock (Will Smith), an alcohollic superhero with no desire to please his critics. When he meets an HR rep named Ray (Jason Bateman) who wants to change his image, Hancock goes on a mission to become the upstanding citizen everyone wants him to be.
The acting was pathetic in this one, other than Bateman and to a lesser extent, Smith. Will Smith fit the early, dirty Hancock part pretty well. After the cleanup, however, it felt pretty odd and forced. Late in the movie, Smith lost all traces of the old character and was far too much himself, rather than the part. He seemed to have been perfect for it on paper, but something just didn't click. Bateman was very good, although maybe it just seems that way in comparison.
I was a big fan of the plot in general, as I always am with innovative sci-fi/superhero scripts. However, I felt like the early plt could have standed on its own and that the plot twist and subsequent occurences were rushed and unnecessary. Sure, it had surprise factor, but afterwards it quickly became predictable. I would've liked to have seen the whol "becoming a real superhero" plot drawn out into the whole movie. Maybe a vilain could have been used as well.
Not a bad movie, but certainly not what it could have been. 2/5 stars
Friday, April 2, 2010
TV Week of 1/2
So this week was pretty poor tv-wise. Most of my favorite shows were reruns. Some really good things kept it from being absolutely horrible though.
The biggest thing this week was the premiere of "V". I watched the pilot and three other episodes from last year in preparation for the season premiere, and I was immediately hooked. While it is a remake, it is 100% better than the original. The cast is fantastic and the special effects that the present day provides is superb. The story is still a scifi masterpiece, centering on the arrival of an alien race who call themselves "the visitors" or "the V's" for short. Humankind is largely in love with the technology and hope that the V's bring, but the select few who know the truth must fight to stop them. It's an absolute masterpiece in my opinion.
American Idol is still pretty bad, although I'm glad Andrew Garcia was decent this week. Big Mike is still really good too and I hope one of those two win. I'll probably just stop watching it for a bit and come back in for the top three.
The marriage ref was very funny this week. Kirstie Alley was hilarious. She said whatever she was thinking and it was always on point (and funny of course). Jimmy Fallon was funny too, although he didn't really make many points. He just said funny one-liners. Sheryl Crow was completely pointless; she really didn't say anything. Didn't ruin the show or anything, but she just didn't say anything of substance. Good episode overall though.
Last but definitely not least was UFC fight night/TUF. Fight night was fantastic, full of dynamic fighters as always. I like how the UFC puts their dynamic strikers on fight nights to try and attract new fans and I think it's an effective strategy. TUF (the ultimate fighter) was great as well; best season opener in a long while. The focus was on the fights and only highlights were shows, and boy were they ever good highlights. Loads of talent this season.
Enjoy the weekend!
-Joe
The biggest thing this week was the premiere of "V". I watched the pilot and three other episodes from last year in preparation for the season premiere, and I was immediately hooked. While it is a remake, it is 100% better than the original. The cast is fantastic and the special effects that the present day provides is superb. The story is still a scifi masterpiece, centering on the arrival of an alien race who call themselves "the visitors" or "the V's" for short. Humankind is largely in love with the technology and hope that the V's bring, but the select few who know the truth must fight to stop them. It's an absolute masterpiece in my opinion.
American Idol is still pretty bad, although I'm glad Andrew Garcia was decent this week. Big Mike is still really good too and I hope one of those two win. I'll probably just stop watching it for a bit and come back in for the top three.
The marriage ref was very funny this week. Kirstie Alley was hilarious. She said whatever she was thinking and it was always on point (and funny of course). Jimmy Fallon was funny too, although he didn't really make many points. He just said funny one-liners. Sheryl Crow was completely pointless; she really didn't say anything. Didn't ruin the show or anything, but she just didn't say anything of substance. Good episode overall though.
Last but definitely not least was UFC fight night/TUF. Fight night was fantastic, full of dynamic fighters as always. I like how the UFC puts their dynamic strikers on fight nights to try and attract new fans and I think it's an effective strategy. TUF (the ultimate fighter) was great as well; best season opener in a long while. The focus was on the fights and only highlights were shows, and boy were they ever good highlights. Loads of talent this season.
Enjoy the weekend!
-Joe
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Hot Tub Time Machine
This one looked really stupid from the previews, didn't it? Well, never being one to turn down an R-rated comedy, I saw it anyway. I was pleasantly surprised by the result.
The story follows three middle-aged men (John Cusack, Craig Robinson, and Rob Corddry) and their young companion (Clark Duke) as they attempt to relive their youth after drifting apart over the years. When they take a trip to the old ski lodge they used to frequent, they discover things aren't the way they remember them. After a crazy night spent in a hot tub, they get sent back in time where they are faced with a difficult decision: change their lives for the better or go back to 2010.
Physics (and metaphysics) issues aside, the story is obviously fairly nonsensical. It was that silliness that made it the perfect fit for this movie. It was structured just enough, while just being silly enough to enhance the comedy. Like I said, there were obvious logical issues, but what more can you expect from a comedy?
The humor was fantastic. Just enough silliness to please the potty-humor crowd, while having some pop culture jokes and references as well. Well written and funny throughout. The cast was perfect for this too, providing the diversity needed for the jokes to be pulled off. The group had such conflicting personalities that it just made everything that much funnier. The only issue here is that it wasn't as quotable as many recent blockbuster comedies have been. While it was certainly funny throughout, there weren't many laugh-out-loud moments of hilarity.
This movie was well dont done and definitely surpassed my expectations. Minor issues keep it from being spectacular, but it is definitely worth a watch. 4/5 stars.
-Joe
The story follows three middle-aged men (John Cusack, Craig Robinson, and Rob Corddry) and their young companion (Clark Duke) as they attempt to relive their youth after drifting apart over the years. When they take a trip to the old ski lodge they used to frequent, they discover things aren't the way they remember them. After a crazy night spent in a hot tub, they get sent back in time where they are faced with a difficult decision: change their lives for the better or go back to 2010.
Physics (and metaphysics) issues aside, the story is obviously fairly nonsensical. It was that silliness that made it the perfect fit for this movie. It was structured just enough, while just being silly enough to enhance the comedy. Like I said, there were obvious logical issues, but what more can you expect from a comedy?
The humor was fantastic. Just enough silliness to please the potty-humor crowd, while having some pop culture jokes and references as well. Well written and funny throughout. The cast was perfect for this too, providing the diversity needed for the jokes to be pulled off. The group had such conflicting personalities that it just made everything that much funnier. The only issue here is that it wasn't as quotable as many recent blockbuster comedies have been. While it was certainly funny throughout, there weren't many laugh-out-loud moments of hilarity.
This movie was well dont done and definitely surpassed my expectations. Minor issues keep it from being spectacular, but it is definitely worth a watch. 4/5 stars.
-Joe
Friday, March 19, 2010
TV Week of 3/19
Good TV this week, especially considering that I got to watch it all due to spring break.
My CBS Monday shows were all reruns, so nothing to talk about there. However, I did get to watch the Ricky Gervais show for the first time and I thouroughly enjoyed it. As I type this, I'm eagerly awaiting the new episode that airs in about an hour. The show is a cartoon adaptation of Ricky's wildly popular radio show from around ten years back. Two cohosts and Gervais himself talk about anything and everything, often leading to exchanges that are quite funny, if not completely random. I highly recommend checking this one out on HBO.
American Idol is still ho hum. Nothing to see here.
Being off from school, I was able to watch Robot Chicken for the first time in a while. The newer episodes don't have the kick as the older ones do, which is dissapointing. I'm still a huge fan of the older ones, but the new ones are taking the show in the wrong direction. They tend to have fewer sketches, which are longer timewise to compensate. I don't think that was a good choice; the older ones have some hilarious 5-seconders, which leads to gut-busting strings of a dozen or more sketches. Still a funny show, but not the comedic genious I've come to expect from Doug Goldstein and Tom Root.
Thursday night from NBC was just a amusing as ever. If anyone is not watching their three hour block of comedy on Thursday nights, I highly recommend that they start. The Office and 30 Rock are still just as funny as ever, and Parks and Recreation is really beginning to pick up. Last night's episode was very well-written and extremely funny, and it should be Hulu'ed as soon as you finish reading this. Andy Samberg guest stared too, which made it even better. Community and The Marriage Ref are two new additions to the lineup, and both can be very funny. Community is my favorite new show, for combining dry humor with a diverse cast. The writing is superb and the acting even better. Its an all-around great show. The Marriage Ref is hit or miss, depending on the cast (which changes weekly), but can be very funny as well.
Thats about all for now, have a great weekend everyone!
-Joe
My CBS Monday shows were all reruns, so nothing to talk about there. However, I did get to watch the Ricky Gervais show for the first time and I thouroughly enjoyed it. As I type this, I'm eagerly awaiting the new episode that airs in about an hour. The show is a cartoon adaptation of Ricky's wildly popular radio show from around ten years back. Two cohosts and Gervais himself talk about anything and everything, often leading to exchanges that are quite funny, if not completely random. I highly recommend checking this one out on HBO.
American Idol is still ho hum. Nothing to see here.
Being off from school, I was able to watch Robot Chicken for the first time in a while. The newer episodes don't have the kick as the older ones do, which is dissapointing. I'm still a huge fan of the older ones, but the new ones are taking the show in the wrong direction. They tend to have fewer sketches, which are longer timewise to compensate. I don't think that was a good choice; the older ones have some hilarious 5-seconders, which leads to gut-busting strings of a dozen or more sketches. Still a funny show, but not the comedic genious I've come to expect from Doug Goldstein and Tom Root.
Thursday night from NBC was just a amusing as ever. If anyone is not watching their three hour block of comedy on Thursday nights, I highly recommend that they start. The Office and 30 Rock are still just as funny as ever, and Parks and Recreation is really beginning to pick up. Last night's episode was very well-written and extremely funny, and it should be Hulu'ed as soon as you finish reading this. Andy Samberg guest stared too, which made it even better. Community and The Marriage Ref are two new additions to the lineup, and both can be very funny. Community is my favorite new show, for combining dry humor with a diverse cast. The writing is superb and the acting even better. Its an all-around great show. The Marriage Ref is hit or miss, depending on the cast (which changes weekly), but can be very funny as well.
Thats about all for now, have a great weekend everyone!
-Joe
Saturday, March 13, 2010
She's Out of My League
From the previews, "She's Out of My League" looked hilarious. It delivered in that regard, and exceeded expectations in others.
The story follows Kirk (Jay Baruchel), an airport security guard with no self-confidence but a huge heart. When Kirk is granted the good fortune to meet a "solid 10" named Molly (Alice Eve), she asks him out several times as a way of dating someone "safe". Kirk's friends and family start to agitate the relationship, however, and Kirk struggles with the concept of dating a woman so gorgeous.
Jay Baruchel was perfect for his part. Not only did his physical apearance fit the part, but he also was able to really get into character and it was very convincing. Eve wasn't particularly outstanding and was obviously chosen for her looks, but she wasn't bad at all. Kirk's friends, Stainer (TJ Miller), Jack (Mike Vogel), and Devon(Nate Torrence), were all very good for their parts, and their group dynamic was quite funny. Miller had a particullarly noteworthy performence. Most of the smaller parts did at least decently and the whole cast felt well done.
The story is where this comedy particularly shines. The whole thing was a nice twist on the classic date movie story, and it was well executed. Making it a comedy definitely allowed for more character depth and it really allowed the concept to be fully explored. Even though it wasn't constantly funny, there was just enough to make it work. The comedy enhanced the story and the story enhanced the comedy. It's nice to finally see a hilarious movie that is also intellectually stimulating. They're rare these days.
With incredible dry humor and a unique and compelling plotline, "She's Out of My League" was quite a sucess. If you're expecting gut-busting, immature humor throughout, however, look elsewhere. This is a adult movie with comedy interweaved with a well-written story. Very well done. 4.5/5 stars
-Joe
The story follows Kirk (Jay Baruchel), an airport security guard with no self-confidence but a huge heart. When Kirk is granted the good fortune to meet a "solid 10" named Molly (Alice Eve), she asks him out several times as a way of dating someone "safe". Kirk's friends and family start to agitate the relationship, however, and Kirk struggles with the concept of dating a woman so gorgeous.
Jay Baruchel was perfect for his part. Not only did his physical apearance fit the part, but he also was able to really get into character and it was very convincing. Eve wasn't particularly outstanding and was obviously chosen for her looks, but she wasn't bad at all. Kirk's friends, Stainer (TJ Miller), Jack (Mike Vogel), and Devon(Nate Torrence), were all very good for their parts, and their group dynamic was quite funny. Miller had a particullarly noteworthy performence. Most of the smaller parts did at least decently and the whole cast felt well done.
The story is where this comedy particularly shines. The whole thing was a nice twist on the classic date movie story, and it was well executed. Making it a comedy definitely allowed for more character depth and it really allowed the concept to be fully explored. Even though it wasn't constantly funny, there was just enough to make it work. The comedy enhanced the story and the story enhanced the comedy. It's nice to finally see a hilarious movie that is also intellectually stimulating. They're rare these days.
With incredible dry humor and a unique and compelling plotline, "She's Out of My League" was quite a sucess. If you're expecting gut-busting, immature humor throughout, however, look elsewhere. This is a adult movie with comedy interweaved with a well-written story. Very well done. 4.5/5 stars
-Joe
Monday, March 8, 2010
Random Musings
Just thought I'd talk about some random stuff since I haven't seen any movies or substantial shows lately.
First, The Marriage Ref was a pretty good show. It premiered last Thursday and wasn't half bad. The idea is that a random panel of celebrities comments on the arguments married couples have. Some of the arguments are quite random too, which adds to the hilarity. I'm not sure if the funniness of the pilot was due to the show simply being funny, or if it was that specific trifecta of judges. We'll find out Thursday I suppose.
This next one is a bit random, but it needs to be said: Dave Chappelle is still the funniest comedian of the 21st century. Bar none. Just saying. The Rick James sketch is still the best of all time.
I just finished watching Rules of Engagement and I'm definitely glad it's back on. Warburton is perfect for his part and I'm a big fan of David Spade. Adhir Kalyan is surprisingly good hear as well, joining the cast just last season as Spade's assisstant. This is a weekly one to watch for me for sure.
Last but certainly not least is last night's Oscars. Most of them were fine by me, but I feel like Up in the Air (and more specifically George Clooney) flew severely under the radar. I was really pulling for District 9 in several places, especially writing, but I understand that not everyone was as crazy about it as I was. A good night, just a couple questionable ones.
My next post most likely be Shes's Out of My League, which I am very much looking forward too. Thanks for reading.
-Joe
First, The Marriage Ref was a pretty good show. It premiered last Thursday and wasn't half bad. The idea is that a random panel of celebrities comments on the arguments married couples have. Some of the arguments are quite random too, which adds to the hilarity. I'm not sure if the funniness of the pilot was due to the show simply being funny, or if it was that specific trifecta of judges. We'll find out Thursday I suppose.
This next one is a bit random, but it needs to be said: Dave Chappelle is still the funniest comedian of the 21st century. Bar none. Just saying. The Rick James sketch is still the best of all time.
I just finished watching Rules of Engagement and I'm definitely glad it's back on. Warburton is perfect for his part and I'm a big fan of David Spade. Adhir Kalyan is surprisingly good hear as well, joining the cast just last season as Spade's assisstant. This is a weekly one to watch for me for sure.
Last but certainly not least is last night's Oscars. Most of them were fine by me, but I feel like Up in the Air (and more specifically George Clooney) flew severely under the radar. I was really pulling for District 9 in several places, especially writing, but I understand that not everyone was as crazy about it as I was. A good night, just a couple questionable ones.
My next post most likely be Shes's Out of My League, which I am very much looking forward too. Thanks for reading.
-Joe
Thursday, March 4, 2010
American Idol Week 2
So here I am again, watching American Idol for the millionth year in a row. I didn't bother commenting on week 1 because it was terrible, but I think everyone improved enough that I can comment on this week.
First off, the guys all got much better. Every single one. Michael Lynche started things off strong, showing his real talent for the first time in my opinion. He improved immensely from last week and I found his rendition of "It's a Man's World" enjoyable and refreshing. Andrew Garcia also gave a great performance despite what the judges said, although it still didn't live up to "Straight Up" from Hollywood week (if you still haven't seen it, check it out here). Regardless, it was definitely better than last week's. Other than those two, Lee Dewyze and Alex Lambert continued their ascent, getting better and more confident as time goes on. If they can let go of their nerves, the other contestants better watch out. Jermaine Sellers and Tim Urban are my picks for elimination, although I wouldn't be surprised if legions of young girls kept Tim in it for a few more weeks.
The girls, on the other hand, were just as bad as last week for me. Crystal Bowersox was fantastic, as I'm sure everyone knows by now, but she was the only one. No one else is memorable; it's like they're happy being mediocre. No one is taking chances and it's going to hurt them if they don't get their act together. Didi Benami and Haeley Vaughn are most likely going home.
Still a crappy season but at least it's getting better.
-Joe
First off, the guys all got much better. Every single one. Michael Lynche started things off strong, showing his real talent for the first time in my opinion. He improved immensely from last week and I found his rendition of "It's a Man's World" enjoyable and refreshing. Andrew Garcia also gave a great performance despite what the judges said, although it still didn't live up to "Straight Up" from Hollywood week (if you still haven't seen it, check it out here). Regardless, it was definitely better than last week's. Other than those two, Lee Dewyze and Alex Lambert continued their ascent, getting better and more confident as time goes on. If they can let go of their nerves, the other contestants better watch out. Jermaine Sellers and Tim Urban are my picks for elimination, although I wouldn't be surprised if legions of young girls kept Tim in it for a few more weeks.
The girls, on the other hand, were just as bad as last week for me. Crystal Bowersox was fantastic, as I'm sure everyone knows by now, but she was the only one. No one else is memorable; it's like they're happy being mediocre. No one is taking chances and it's going to hurt them if they don't get their act together. Didi Benami and Haeley Vaughn are most likely going home.
Still a crappy season but at least it's getting better.
-Joe
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Cop Out
I saw Cop Out last night and let me just say this: I wasn't disappointed.
The story follows two joke making cops (Tracey Morgan and Bruce Willis) and the crazy things they call "policework". When they are suspended for misconduct, Bruce Willis must find a way to pay for his daughter's wedding. His solution is to sell his father's baseball card, but when the card is stolen, they go on a mission to get it back. All the while, they have to deal with Mexican drug trafficking.
The story was actually fairly nonsensical. It was simplistic and cliche, but in a comedy like this I think it works. By making the overarching problems and goals silly, the comedic elements are enhanced and the jokes are highlighted more than the story. It made sense and wasn't overly complicated, what more can you ask for in a comedy? The acting of all but the main characters seemed to fall flat, which was dissapointing. But the big three (Willis, Scott, and Morgan) were all very good.
The jokes themselves were clearly made for Tracey Morgan and Seann William Scott, and they were funny because of those specific actors. I wish Scott was in it a little more, as his dynamic with Morgan was hilarious. Morgan's interaction with Bruce Willis worked surpiringly well too, and I think it was Scott and Willis that allowed Morgan to be so funny. Willis didn't really have as many funny lines as the rest, but he was definitely needed to facilitate jokes. The humor got stagnent at times, but it had its moments of hilarity.
One last thing that surprised me was the enormous amount of pop culture references. There were two Star Wars references in the first five minutes and that certainly made me happy. There were at least 30 pop culture references, and I'm sure there were at least a dozen others that went right over my head.
Not a bad movie overall, with some great one-liners. Great job by Morgan and Willis. 3/5 stars
The story follows two joke making cops (Tracey Morgan and Bruce Willis) and the crazy things they call "policework". When they are suspended for misconduct, Bruce Willis must find a way to pay for his daughter's wedding. His solution is to sell his father's baseball card, but when the card is stolen, they go on a mission to get it back. All the while, they have to deal with Mexican drug trafficking.
The story was actually fairly nonsensical. It was simplistic and cliche, but in a comedy like this I think it works. By making the overarching problems and goals silly, the comedic elements are enhanced and the jokes are highlighted more than the story. It made sense and wasn't overly complicated, what more can you ask for in a comedy? The acting of all but the main characters seemed to fall flat, which was dissapointing. But the big three (Willis, Scott, and Morgan) were all very good.
The jokes themselves were clearly made for Tracey Morgan and Seann William Scott, and they were funny because of those specific actors. I wish Scott was in it a little more, as his dynamic with Morgan was hilarious. Morgan's interaction with Bruce Willis worked surpiringly well too, and I think it was Scott and Willis that allowed Morgan to be so funny. Willis didn't really have as many funny lines as the rest, but he was definitely needed to facilitate jokes. The humor got stagnent at times, but it had its moments of hilarity.
One last thing that surprised me was the enormous amount of pop culture references. There were two Star Wars references in the first five minutes and that certainly made me happy. There were at least 30 pop culture references, and I'm sure there were at least a dozen others that went right over my head.
Not a bad movie overall, with some great one-liners. Great job by Morgan and Willis. 3/5 stars
Monday, February 22, 2010
Valentine's Day
I saw Valentine's Day this weekend and now I don't even know what to say about it. There was so much going on that it's hard to know where to start.
The plot consisted of several (at least eight) different plotlines, all running parallel and loosely connected in some way. Most were based on classic romantic cliches, such as the boy with a crush on his teacher, the jock and the ditz, and the good old married boyfiend. A couple unexpected twists kept it from being completely unoriginal, but they were nothing that hasn't been tried before. Predictible from the very start. The transition from story to story was intelligently done, but no amount of intelligence could keep the jumble from getting confusing. Two or three too many unique storylines.
The star power was a redeming factor here. A movie with 15+ big names can't be all bad, and the plethora a big talent kept it from being a snoozefest.There are too many characters to list here (or maybe I'm just too lazy), so go to imdb if you really need to know the names of all the stars you already know. If you think they are in it, they probably are. Notable performances include Taylor Swift (shockingly well done) and Ashton Kutcher. Great job by both of them.
It's hard to leave Valentine's Day feeling unhappy, despite its cliche nature. Throwing money and stars at the holiday of love is bound to be a box office hit. The movie is a sucess in that regard, and definitely made money. It was a mess, but an upbeat mess with the people everyone loves. 2/5 stars
The plot consisted of several (at least eight) different plotlines, all running parallel and loosely connected in some way. Most were based on classic romantic cliches, such as the boy with a crush on his teacher, the jock and the ditz, and the good old married boyfiend. A couple unexpected twists kept it from being completely unoriginal, but they were nothing that hasn't been tried before. Predictible from the very start. The transition from story to story was intelligently done, but no amount of intelligence could keep the jumble from getting confusing. Two or three too many unique storylines.
The star power was a redeming factor here. A movie with 15+ big names can't be all bad, and the plethora a big talent kept it from being a snoozefest.There are too many characters to list here (or maybe I'm just too lazy), so go to imdb if you really need to know the names of all the stars you already know. If you think they are in it, they probably are. Notable performances include Taylor Swift (shockingly well done) and Ashton Kutcher. Great job by both of them.
It's hard to leave Valentine's Day feeling unhappy, despite its cliche nature. Throwing money and stars at the holiday of love is bound to be a box office hit. The movie is a sucess in that regard, and definitely made money. It was a mess, but an upbeat mess with the people everyone loves. 2/5 stars
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Cinderella Man
We watched Cinderella Man in class this week, so it seemed fitting that I review it.
The film (based on a true story) follows an aging James Braddock (Russel Crowe), a boxer from New Jersey who started off his career on a run leading to an eventual defeat to the titleholder. After breaking his hand multiple times and posting a losing streak, Braddock is forced to retire. After working a ton of hours to support his family (the film takes place in the 30s), his manager Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti) gets him a fight as much needed income. Braddock defies the odds, wins multiple times, and ends up getting a shot at the title and wins in what turns out to be one of boxing's biggest upsets of all time.
The cast of this movie was top notch. Crowe put on a fantastic performance, especially when dealing with the children. He played a very convincing 30s-man and captured the time period beautifully. Giamatti put on the best performance of his career in my opinion. It was very believable and perfectly emotion-laced. Renee Zellweger was good as Mae as well. The rest of the cast put on performances that were good enough to support that powerhouse threesome.
The story was written very well, but it felt slow and cumbersome at times. The writers appeared to be indecisive on whether this movie should focus on the boxing world, or on the Depression life of Braddock. By emphasising both equally, the movie felt a bit disjointed and slightly drawn out. The dialogue was very well written and it captured the time period perfectly.
Lastly, the boxing scenes themselves were done very well. The action was well choreographed and very believable. The actors cast as Braddock's opponents were good for the job, as was Crowe himself.
A good movie overall, despite it's belabored approach to storytelling. Well done. 4/5 stars
The film (based on a true story) follows an aging James Braddock (Russel Crowe), a boxer from New Jersey who started off his career on a run leading to an eventual defeat to the titleholder. After breaking his hand multiple times and posting a losing streak, Braddock is forced to retire. After working a ton of hours to support his family (the film takes place in the 30s), his manager Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti) gets him a fight as much needed income. Braddock defies the odds, wins multiple times, and ends up getting a shot at the title and wins in what turns out to be one of boxing's biggest upsets of all time.
The cast of this movie was top notch. Crowe put on a fantastic performance, especially when dealing with the children. He played a very convincing 30s-man and captured the time period beautifully. Giamatti put on the best performance of his career in my opinion. It was very believable and perfectly emotion-laced. Renee Zellweger was good as Mae as well. The rest of the cast put on performances that were good enough to support that powerhouse threesome.
The story was written very well, but it felt slow and cumbersome at times. The writers appeared to be indecisive on whether this movie should focus on the boxing world, or on the Depression life of Braddock. By emphasising both equally, the movie felt a bit disjointed and slightly drawn out. The dialogue was very well written and it captured the time period perfectly.
Lastly, the boxing scenes themselves were done very well. The action was well choreographed and very believable. The actors cast as Braddock's opponents were good for the job, as was Crowe himself.
A good movie overall, despite it's belabored approach to storytelling. Well done. 4/5 stars
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Dear John
While on leave from the army, John Tyree (Channing Tatum) falls in love with a conservative Savannah Curtis (Amanda Seyfried). When John is away, they write a series of letters to one another, keeping the love alive. When John reenlists, however, the time away starts to put a strain on the relationship.
The story here was absolutely top notch; the writers got it all right with this one. Although slow at times, the plot line is compelling from start to finish with plenty of uncertainty to keep the viewers on their toes. There was enough love in all the right places and the perfect number of tear-inducing moments to go along with it.
The acting, however, was another story. Seyfriend did a fairly good job with "good girl" Savannah, but I'm afraid the same can't be said for Tatum. Although he is getting better, his emotionless face leaves much to be desired and much of the emotion that does exists seems forced. The dynamic between the two actors was compelling enough to note though. Henry Thomas had a great performance as Tim, doing a great job of portraying a carefree man who's forced to care when faced with very real problems. Also, another great performance by Richard Jenkins as Mr. Tyree, the autistic father of John. The acting of most of the rest was fairly mediocre, with no one in particular to point out.
Not a bad movie, although I wish they would stop complimenting superb writing with less than superb acting. Sure, women like to look at Channing, but eventually it's going to get old. Overall, it was enjoyable. 3.5/5 stars
The story here was absolutely top notch; the writers got it all right with this one. Although slow at times, the plot line is compelling from start to finish with plenty of uncertainty to keep the viewers on their toes. There was enough love in all the right places and the perfect number of tear-inducing moments to go along with it.
The acting, however, was another story. Seyfriend did a fairly good job with "good girl" Savannah, but I'm afraid the same can't be said for Tatum. Although he is getting better, his emotionless face leaves much to be desired and much of the emotion that does exists seems forced. The dynamic between the two actors was compelling enough to note though. Henry Thomas had a great performance as Tim, doing a great job of portraying a carefree man who's forced to care when faced with very real problems. Also, another great performance by Richard Jenkins as Mr. Tyree, the autistic father of John. The acting of most of the rest was fairly mediocre, with no one in particular to point out.
Not a bad movie, although I wish they would stop complimenting superb writing with less than superb acting. Sure, women like to look at Channing, but eventually it's going to get old. Overall, it was enjoyable. 3.5/5 stars
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Early week TV
I've already got so much TV to talk about and it's only Tuesday, so I figured I'd never make it until the end of the week. Lots of interesting things to talk about.
I have to start with American Idol tonight. Ellen made her debut and she certainly didn't disappoint. I find her hilarious and she lived up to that here. Plus, she didn't argue with Simon, a rumor that I had hoped wasn't true and am glad to see that it isn't. That judge drama was getting on my nerves big time. Anyway, certainly glad to have Ellen on board.
The talent this season seems thin, but really strong among those who stand above the rest. Andrew Garcia, the young father trying to better his struggling family, completely blew me away tonight. Not only was his voice right on the money, but h has a beautiful tone to his voice and a soft yet commanding stage presence that warms the heart. Watch out for this guy; he's for real.
Moving on, Monday night is still my favorite pretty much solely due to The Big Bang Theory. This week had quite a bit of character development, all wrapped in the candy shell that is Sheldon's insanity. He was hilarious as always, begging unrelentingly for Leonard to take him to see the Large Haldron Collider rather than Penny. Problem is, it's valentines day and Leonard just wants time away with his girlfriend. I won't give it away, but the writers found a clever and surprisingly funny resolution to the conflict.
Going back a little bit further, I want to touch on the Superbowl commercials a little bit. I tend to disagree with the masses that the Doritos commercial with the protective child was the best. For me, a different Doritos commercial takes the title: the Dorito samurai guy. Hilarious. They really pulled out all the stops this year and spent a boatload on advertising. A smart move in my opinion for the extremely competitive snack food business.
Am I the only one getting sick of these talking babies? I mean, it's funny the first few times but then it starts to get creepy. Not to mention the fact that these children are posed for hours at a time for their parents' monetary gain. Bad, Etrade, bad. /end rant
Budweiserfelt pretty week this year, as did Coke. Although, the Coke commercial with the Simpsons was pretty cute. Could have used more humor, but it was fairly effective in my opinion. On a side note, I'm proud of what Pepsi did this year. For those of you who don't know, you can find out here: http://www.refresheverything.com/ . (for shameless plug version, go here: http://www.refresheverything.com/TotemanEpilepsyPSA it's a great cause my friend is trying to fund, so please vote if you can). It's great to see a massive corporation do something positive, even if it is just good public relations.
That's all for today folks, thank for reading!
-Joe
I have to start with American Idol tonight. Ellen made her debut and she certainly didn't disappoint. I find her hilarious and she lived up to that here. Plus, she didn't argue with Simon, a rumor that I had hoped wasn't true and am glad to see that it isn't. That judge drama was getting on my nerves big time. Anyway, certainly glad to have Ellen on board.
The talent this season seems thin, but really strong among those who stand above the rest. Andrew Garcia, the young father trying to better his struggling family, completely blew me away tonight. Not only was his voice right on the money, but h has a beautiful tone to his voice and a soft yet commanding stage presence that warms the heart. Watch out for this guy; he's for real.
Moving on, Monday night is still my favorite pretty much solely due to The Big Bang Theory. This week had quite a bit of character development, all wrapped in the candy shell that is Sheldon's insanity. He was hilarious as always, begging unrelentingly for Leonard to take him to see the Large Haldron Collider rather than Penny. Problem is, it's valentines day and Leonard just wants time away with his girlfriend. I won't give it away, but the writers found a clever and surprisingly funny resolution to the conflict.
Going back a little bit further, I want to touch on the Superbowl commercials a little bit. I tend to disagree with the masses that the Doritos commercial with the protective child was the best. For me, a different Doritos commercial takes the title: the Dorito samurai guy. Hilarious. They really pulled out all the stops this year and spent a boatload on advertising. A smart move in my opinion for the extremely competitive snack food business.
Am I the only one getting sick of these talking babies? I mean, it's funny the first few times but then it starts to get creepy. Not to mention the fact that these children are posed for hours at a time for their parents' monetary gain. Bad, Etrade, bad. /end rant
Budweiserfelt pretty week this year, as did Coke. Although, the Coke commercial with the Simpsons was pretty cute. Could have used more humor, but it was fairly effective in my opinion. On a side note, I'm proud of what Pepsi did this year. For those of you who don't know, you can find out here: http://www.refresheverything.com/ . (for shameless plug version, go here: http://www.refresheverything.com/TotemanEpilepsyPSA it's a great cause my friend is trying to fund, so please vote if you can). It's great to see a massive corporation do something positive, even if it is just good public relations.
That's all for today folks, thank for reading!
-Joe
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Daybreakers
Due to ever increasing amounts of snow, I've been unable to see any movies this weekend. So I decided I would review an old one that left a pretty strong impression on me: Daybreakers.
In the year 2017, a large portion of humans have been turned into immortal, reflectionless, blood-craving vampires. Those humans who remain are captured and farmed for blood by a corporation named Bromley Marks. The chief hematologist at Bromley Marks is Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), and he is in hot pursuit of a blood substitute to counter the diminishing number of captured humans. After meeting with humans Audrey (Claudia Karvan) and "Evis" (Willem Dafoe), Edward is able to devise a cure for vampirism. No one at Bromley Marks, however, wants this cure to exist.
To start with, the idea behind this movie is brilliant. It ventures into unexplored territory in the underused horror/sci-fi crossover genre. The directors are able create this deeply fascinating world with a personality all its own, and all in the first few minutes! Not only is the story written extremely well, but the dialogue as well. "Life sucks and then you don't die," being one of my favorites. The vampire society is able to create many interesting conversations that otherwise would be absent in human dialogue. The only instance of poor writing is the ending. I won't give anything away, but it is fairly nonsensical and extremely open-ended. A small amount of open-endedness is a good thing, but this one is so wide open that the viewer is left feeling disappointed in the unresolved plot. A sequel could set this one straight.
The acting is absolutely fantastic for a B-movie. Hawke played his part well, putting just enough vampire and just enough humanity. His depressed look is all but perfected here. Sam Neill does a great job as Charles Bromley, giving the antagonist just enough of a human side to make the audience understand him. He isn't one of those over-the-top villains which the audience hates with a passion. Dafoe's acting was fantastic as well, a necessary breath of fresh air. His southern accent and witty dialogue marked a move in the screenplay from darkness to light; a move that disrupts the atmosphere, but ultimately allows the story to progress forward. He brought an amount of human and humanity to the story that kept it from being overly dark. Overall, superb acting cast. Even the extras fit their parts perfectly.
The only remaining flaw was the violence. Occasionally I found myself saying, "Is that really necessary?" as chunks of flesh flew in all directions. On further contemplation, however, I think it was completely necessary. A larger budget would have made it more believable and less cartoonish, but the violence was ultimately a strong device employed by the directors.
Were it not for budget limitations and slight flaws in the plot, this one would be getting a perfect score from me. Still loved it though. 4.5/5
-Joe
In the year 2017, a large portion of humans have been turned into immortal, reflectionless, blood-craving vampires. Those humans who remain are captured and farmed for blood by a corporation named Bromley Marks. The chief hematologist at Bromley Marks is Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), and he is in hot pursuit of a blood substitute to counter the diminishing number of captured humans. After meeting with humans Audrey (Claudia Karvan) and "Evis" (Willem Dafoe), Edward is able to devise a cure for vampirism. No one at Bromley Marks, however, wants this cure to exist.
To start with, the idea behind this movie is brilliant. It ventures into unexplored territory in the underused horror/sci-fi crossover genre. The directors are able create this deeply fascinating world with a personality all its own, and all in the first few minutes! Not only is the story written extremely well, but the dialogue as well. "Life sucks and then you don't die," being one of my favorites. The vampire society is able to create many interesting conversations that otherwise would be absent in human dialogue. The only instance of poor writing is the ending. I won't give anything away, but it is fairly nonsensical and extremely open-ended. A small amount of open-endedness is a good thing, but this one is so wide open that the viewer is left feeling disappointed in the unresolved plot. A sequel could set this one straight.
The acting is absolutely fantastic for a B-movie. Hawke played his part well, putting just enough vampire and just enough humanity. His depressed look is all but perfected here. Sam Neill does a great job as Charles Bromley, giving the antagonist just enough of a human side to make the audience understand him. He isn't one of those over-the-top villains which the audience hates with a passion. Dafoe's acting was fantastic as well, a necessary breath of fresh air. His southern accent and witty dialogue marked a move in the screenplay from darkness to light; a move that disrupts the atmosphere, but ultimately allows the story to progress forward. He brought an amount of human and humanity to the story that kept it from being overly dark. Overall, superb acting cast. Even the extras fit their parts perfectly.
The only remaining flaw was the violence. Occasionally I found myself saying, "Is that really necessary?" as chunks of flesh flew in all directions. On further contemplation, however, I think it was completely necessary. A larger budget would have made it more believable and less cartoonish, but the violence was ultimately a strong device employed by the directors.
Were it not for budget limitations and slight flaws in the plot, this one would be getting a perfect score from me. Still loved it though. 4.5/5
-Joe
Thursday, February 4, 2010
TV week of 2/4
So I'm not gonna lie, I didn't watch much TV this week. I did, however, enjoy what I did watch.
The first thing was Monday, The Big Bang Theory. I've loved this show for a while; I find it quite funny. The character of Sheldon Cooper is especially hilarious. This weeks episode was superb. Sheldon, in the process of trying to deduce why electrons behave as though they have no mass under certain conditions, didn't get any sleep for three days. Hilarity ensued. I really recomend this one, it was probably the funniest episode yet of this emerging powerhouse of a comedy.
Next up was American Idol of course. Again, I'm not feeling this season. It just seems gimmicky to me and it's not the talent show that it used to be. On the up side, only one more week until the debut of Ellen. Let's hope it gets better.
Next up is Thursday night comedy on ABC. All four shows (community, parks and recreation, the office, and 30 rock) were excellent as always. The Office was especially entertaining yet again. I feel like the show has finally returned to its winning form after a rocky season and a half. The episodes around the time of the writer's strike (before and after) were pretty poor, but the show is now returning to its full stride. This weeks episode centered around a Dunder Mifflin - Sabre merger and the unfavorable changes that it brought. It was very funny and didn't try too hard to be profound. The show isn't trying to be overly serious anymore and is just being funny, the thing that it does best.
Last and also least is the superbowl commercials special that played before AI on Wednesday. Not only were the hosts completely fake in their demeanor, but they also made tons of pathetic attempts at humor. The actual meat of the show, the top ten commercials of the decade, did little to remedy the shell that they were wrapped in. I'll pass on this one from now on.
Thanks for readin and enjoy the snow!
-Joe
The first thing was Monday, The Big Bang Theory. I've loved this show for a while; I find it quite funny. The character of Sheldon Cooper is especially hilarious. This weeks episode was superb. Sheldon, in the process of trying to deduce why electrons behave as though they have no mass under certain conditions, didn't get any sleep for three days. Hilarity ensued. I really recomend this one, it was probably the funniest episode yet of this emerging powerhouse of a comedy.
Next up was American Idol of course. Again, I'm not feeling this season. It just seems gimmicky to me and it's not the talent show that it used to be. On the up side, only one more week until the debut of Ellen. Let's hope it gets better.
Next up is Thursday night comedy on ABC. All four shows (community, parks and recreation, the office, and 30 rock) were excellent as always. The Office was especially entertaining yet again. I feel like the show has finally returned to its winning form after a rocky season and a half. The episodes around the time of the writer's strike (before and after) were pretty poor, but the show is now returning to its full stride. This weeks episode centered around a Dunder Mifflin - Sabre merger and the unfavorable changes that it brought. It was very funny and didn't try too hard to be profound. The show isn't trying to be overly serious anymore and is just being funny, the thing that it does best.
Last and also least is the superbowl commercials special that played before AI on Wednesday. Not only were the hosts completely fake in their demeanor, but they also made tons of pathetic attempts at humor. The actual meat of the show, the top ten commercials of the decade, did little to remedy the shell that they were wrapped in. I'll pass on this one from now on.
Thanks for readin and enjoy the snow!
-Joe
Friday, January 29, 2010
Tv week of 1/29
So I thought I would talk about what I watched this week. Maybe these Friday articles about TV will be a weekly event; we'll see I suppose.
So this week was largely reruns of my favorite shows so I don't have an overwhelming amount of material. It started off Monday night with Chuck. This was the first episode I caught of this season unfortunately, but I didn't feel too lost. The same quick wit and superb action kept me glued to the screen just as the previous season had. The new "upgraded" Chuck was a little cheesy for me (they made so that he can look at a weapon and get instant proficiency in using it), but it might have been necessary to advance the plot line. The show still rocks though, and the excellent writing/acting combo will bring me back next week.
The only other new episodes I caught this week was American Idol. I don't know about anyone else, but this season feels really shallow to me thus far. The gimmick of having a new guest star got old extremely quickly (bring on Ellen already!), and the constant feuding within the judges panel (such as Kara vs Katie Perry or Simon vs Neil Patrick Harris) is not interesting in the least. I feel like the talent is playing second fiddle this year, and bad singers and angry judges is not why I watch this show. When the highlight thus far is a song tittled "Pants on the Ground" sung by an old black man, you know the show has jumped the shark. Not sure if I'll be watching this season; we'll have to see how much better Ellen makes it.
I thought I should also mention this weeks episode of The Office, despite it being a rerun. It centered around Michael Scott (Steve Carell) being invited to New York to attend a shareholders meeting for an ailing Dunder Mifflin. Little does he know that the shareholders are livid at the upper management, and he is only there to show that there is a small spark of life still in the company.
I feel like this episode shines a light on the character of Michael and gives insight into his moral fiber. His intense optimism is inspiring and it is in the forefront in this episode. When a congressman says "Who is this moron [Michael]?" in the hospitality sweet, Michael replies (and I'm paraphrasing), "My branch is the only one to make money and you're in a hole. So you're the moron." It's this type of disdain for authority and honesty in speech that makes the character of Michael Scott so appealing to the viewers. The Office is my favorite show and I hope it continues to stay true to itself.
Well, that's all for TV this week. Not a bad week overall.
-Joe
So this week was largely reruns of my favorite shows so I don't have an overwhelming amount of material. It started off Monday night with Chuck. This was the first episode I caught of this season unfortunately, but I didn't feel too lost. The same quick wit and superb action kept me glued to the screen just as the previous season had. The new "upgraded" Chuck was a little cheesy for me (they made so that he can look at a weapon and get instant proficiency in using it), but it might have been necessary to advance the plot line. The show still rocks though, and the excellent writing/acting combo will bring me back next week.
The only other new episodes I caught this week was American Idol. I don't know about anyone else, but this season feels really shallow to me thus far. The gimmick of having a new guest star got old extremely quickly (bring on Ellen already!), and the constant feuding within the judges panel (such as Kara vs Katie Perry or Simon vs Neil Patrick Harris) is not interesting in the least. I feel like the talent is playing second fiddle this year, and bad singers and angry judges is not why I watch this show. When the highlight thus far is a song tittled "Pants on the Ground" sung by an old black man, you know the show has jumped the shark. Not sure if I'll be watching this season; we'll have to see how much better Ellen makes it.
I thought I should also mention this weeks episode of The Office, despite it being a rerun. It centered around Michael Scott (Steve Carell) being invited to New York to attend a shareholders meeting for an ailing Dunder Mifflin. Little does he know that the shareholders are livid at the upper management, and he is only there to show that there is a small spark of life still in the company.
I feel like this episode shines a light on the character of Michael and gives insight into his moral fiber. His intense optimism is inspiring and it is in the forefront in this episode. When a congressman says "Who is this moron [Michael]?" in the hospitality sweet, Michael replies (and I'm paraphrasing), "My branch is the only one to make money and you're in a hole. So you're the moron." It's this type of disdain for authority and honesty in speech that makes the character of Michael Scott so appealing to the viewers. The Office is my favorite show and I hope it continues to stay true to itself.
Well, that's all for TV this week. Not a bad week overall.
-Joe
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Legion
I can describe "Legion" in one word: bad.
The story describes a time when God becomes angry at his creation yet again. This time, however, he has decided to send all the angels of heaven rather than a flood. For unknown reasons, the last hope for humanity lies with an unborn child who must be protected by a gang of misfits in the middle of the desert. They are assisted by the archangel Michael (Paul Bettany), who has disobeyed his orders from God.
The story was an interesting concept, but the execution was very poor. The writing was terrible, leaving plot holes miles wide and constantly overloading on cheesy dialogue. The viewers constantly find themselves knowing exactly what was coming, as the deaths of the characters were easy to forsee. The acting was atrocious, with the sole exception of Bettany. He feels largely out of place in this movie, outclassing all the other actors immensely. He plays his role of Michael with the perfect mix of calm and emotion. The action scenes (which were few in number) were surprisingly well done; not stellar, but better than the rest of this jumble of a movie. 1/5 stars
The story describes a time when God becomes angry at his creation yet again. This time, however, he has decided to send all the angels of heaven rather than a flood. For unknown reasons, the last hope for humanity lies with an unborn child who must be protected by a gang of misfits in the middle of the desert. They are assisted by the archangel Michael (Paul Bettany), who has disobeyed his orders from God.
The story was an interesting concept, but the execution was very poor. The writing was terrible, leaving plot holes miles wide and constantly overloading on cheesy dialogue. The viewers constantly find themselves knowing exactly what was coming, as the deaths of the characters were easy to forsee. The acting was atrocious, with the sole exception of Bettany. He feels largely out of place in this movie, outclassing all the other actors immensely. He plays his role of Michael with the perfect mix of calm and emotion. The action scenes (which were few in number) were surprisingly well done; not stellar, but better than the rest of this jumble of a movie. 1/5 stars
Thursday, January 21, 2010
The Lovely Bones
Here's a review fom my buddy Bob Dalton:
"In order to experience fully the cinematic work that is The Lovely Bones, one must shed any preconceived notions that other movies of the drama/thriller genre might have left after the credits have rolled. Early in the film Suzie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan) is murdered by an exceedingly creepy neighbor (Stanley Tucci) and we learn that after death one must travel to heaven. Susie however is in “the in-between”, a metaphysically inspired world of artistic beauty and filmmaking genius. Peter Jackson’s interpretation of this world alone is worth the price of admission. Susie’s parents (Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weiz) are also major players in this movie as Jackson shows how Susie’s murder strains their relationship. Susie’s father is determined to find her killer whereas her mother doesn’t want to think about what has occurred. I did not read the book, but I understand that many purists are upset that Peter Jackson deviated from the “canon” so to speak. I submit that this film should be viewed in the perspective of the director, as it was intended, instead of comparing it to the book ad nauseam. It is true there are some deviations, but I could not envision this artistic experience any different. The characters are all sufficiently developed, apart from the mom, who leaves the family only to return at the end of the film. Susie’s murderer is meant to epitomize evil in the film, so is character is not as developed as the others. He is simply “a very bad man” and we learn a little about his past, but only that he has murdered more than once. This seems to fit, as the focus of the movie is Susie in her new world and her individual family members coping with her loss in whatever way they know how. The Lovely Bones is not for everyone. The movie is so emotionally powerful. The simple insinuation of this little girl being brutally murdered is powerful. Peter Jackson so seamlessly integrates music with the action on screen, heightening the emotional sense. It’s not for everyone, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The movie has an interesting, albeit, happy ending. Those moviegoers who go to the movies for tangible action on screen and the logical development of a formula-oriented plot will not get the most of this film. These pre conceived notions as previously alluded to, will inhibit the moviegoer from watching the Lovely Bones as an artistic experience. Those that can stand the somewhat slow-moving and farfetched plot will be treated to a surreal experience that tugs on the heartstrings. Think not, “what will happen next?”, but appreciate each individual moment as a work of art. This is not to say that only the very artistic can appreciate this movie. It is an emotional drama that has enough effects to keep the casual viewer entertained. All in all, I loved the Lovely Bones, but the genre is not for everyone. This movie is the very best of what a drama/thriller has to offer, but don’t expect any big explosions or fight scenes. And I’ll leave it at that. 4/5 stars"
"In order to experience fully the cinematic work that is The Lovely Bones, one must shed any preconceived notions that other movies of the drama/thriller genre might have left after the credits have rolled. Early in the film Suzie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan) is murdered by an exceedingly creepy neighbor (Stanley Tucci) and we learn that after death one must travel to heaven. Susie however is in “the in-between”, a metaphysically inspired world of artistic beauty and filmmaking genius. Peter Jackson’s interpretation of this world alone is worth the price of admission. Susie’s parents (Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weiz) are also major players in this movie as Jackson shows how Susie’s murder strains their relationship. Susie’s father is determined to find her killer whereas her mother doesn’t want to think about what has occurred. I did not read the book, but I understand that many purists are upset that Peter Jackson deviated from the “canon” so to speak. I submit that this film should be viewed in the perspective of the director, as it was intended, instead of comparing it to the book ad nauseam. It is true there are some deviations, but I could not envision this artistic experience any different. The characters are all sufficiently developed, apart from the mom, who leaves the family only to return at the end of the film. Susie’s murderer is meant to epitomize evil in the film, so is character is not as developed as the others. He is simply “a very bad man” and we learn a little about his past, but only that he has murdered more than once. This seems to fit, as the focus of the movie is Susie in her new world and her individual family members coping with her loss in whatever way they know how. The Lovely Bones is not for everyone. The movie is so emotionally powerful. The simple insinuation of this little girl being brutally murdered is powerful. Peter Jackson so seamlessly integrates music with the action on screen, heightening the emotional sense. It’s not for everyone, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The movie has an interesting, albeit, happy ending. Those moviegoers who go to the movies for tangible action on screen and the logical development of a formula-oriented plot will not get the most of this film. These pre conceived notions as previously alluded to, will inhibit the moviegoer from watching the Lovely Bones as an artistic experience. Those that can stand the somewhat slow-moving and farfetched plot will be treated to a surreal experience that tugs on the heartstrings. Think not, “what will happen next?”, but appreciate each individual moment as a work of art. This is not to say that only the very artistic can appreciate this movie. It is an emotional drama that has enough effects to keep the casual viewer entertained. All in all, I loved the Lovely Bones, but the genre is not for everyone. This movie is the very best of what a drama/thriller has to offer, but don’t expect any big explosions or fight scenes. And I’ll leave it at that. 4/5 stars"
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Book of Eli
So I figured I'd start off with the most recent movie I've seen, "The Book of Eli":
The story follows Eli (Denzael Washington), humanity's last hope in a post apocalyptic world 30 years in the future. Eli has the last King James bible and is on a mission to transport it to an unknown destination in the west. He runs into some trouble along the way, including the antagonist, Carnegie (Gary Oldman), who seeks to use the bible to become a dictator. Eli also picks up a companion along the way, played by Mila Kunis.
Despite fantastic performances from Washington and Oldman, this poorly written post apocalyptic action flick falls flat somewhere along the way. Washington plays his role flawlessly, although the character does feel one-dimensional at times. Oldman is one of the saving graces of "Eli", playing an increasingly insane villain who is over-the-top in the pursuit of power. His acting is believable and surprisingly powerful. Kunis feels largely out of place in the drab desert landscape, and her high-pitched speech tends to disrupt the overall mood of the movie.
The plot had several weak spots, including the ridiculous plot twist at the end. Not to give anything away, I'll just say that it was incredibly unbelievable and definitely unnecessary. I also found myself questioning why a man of god was so violent. "Kill unto others", maybe? Killing a bar full of people doesn't seem very Christian-like (although they did attack first - just saying). This is why it was so hard to figure out which side this movie was taking: is Christianity just a means of control and a cause of war or is it the saving grace of humanity? I wish the movie would have given us a little more philosophically to wrap our heads around in that regard.
It wasn't a complete disaster, but this inundation of apocalypse movies is getting a little old. Despite its fallacies, the performances of Washington and Oldman in addition to the well done action sequences make "Eli" watchable if there's no better alternative. Just don't expect too much from it. 2/5 stars
The story follows Eli (Denzael Washington), humanity's last hope in a post apocalyptic world 30 years in the future. Eli has the last King James bible and is on a mission to transport it to an unknown destination in the west. He runs into some trouble along the way, including the antagonist, Carnegie (Gary Oldman), who seeks to use the bible to become a dictator. Eli also picks up a companion along the way, played by Mila Kunis.
Despite fantastic performances from Washington and Oldman, this poorly written post apocalyptic action flick falls flat somewhere along the way. Washington plays his role flawlessly, although the character does feel one-dimensional at times. Oldman is one of the saving graces of "Eli", playing an increasingly insane villain who is over-the-top in the pursuit of power. His acting is believable and surprisingly powerful. Kunis feels largely out of place in the drab desert landscape, and her high-pitched speech tends to disrupt the overall mood of the movie.
The plot had several weak spots, including the ridiculous plot twist at the end. Not to give anything away, I'll just say that it was incredibly unbelievable and definitely unnecessary. I also found myself questioning why a man of god was so violent. "Kill unto others", maybe? Killing a bar full of people doesn't seem very Christian-like (although they did attack first - just saying). This is why it was so hard to figure out which side this movie was taking: is Christianity just a means of control and a cause of war or is it the saving grace of humanity? I wish the movie would have given us a little more philosophically to wrap our heads around in that regard.
It wasn't a complete disaster, but this inundation of apocalypse movies is getting a little old. Despite its fallacies, the performances of Washington and Oldman in addition to the well done action sequences make "Eli" watchable if there's no better alternative. Just don't expect too much from it. 2/5 stars
New blog!
Hey everyone, welcome to my new blog! Here, I'll be reviewing new movies, old movies, tv shows, or basically whatever I happen to watch. I'll have guest writers from time to time as well. Hope everyone enjoys my writing, even if they happen to disagree with me. Thanks for visiting!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)