Hey dudes. I'm at the end of a glorious three day snow day, with only one quick 4 hour work interruption in the middle. I've watched a shit ton of movies during that time, so here we go.
First, I started Tuesday with an 8 AM viewing of Good Burger. I'm not really sure why. It was in my Netflix queue and I guess I felt like it was an easy early morning watch. I completely regretted it.
I don't really hate it or anything, but that movie is strictly for 8-12 year old kids in 1997. I'm surprised it exists outside of that year.
After that debacle I started the show Arrow. I'm a Smallville superfan so I knew this would be right up my alley. A co-worker had informed me that the sooner I realize that the first six episodes are basically Batman Begins, the better. And actually, they basically just turned the character of Green Arrow into Batman. But that's OK! It is The CW after all.
As I said, this show is exactly what I want it to be. Fun and cheesy. Also, I have to admit that I was surprised at the shows ability to strive for an actual arc, as opposed to just having villains of the week. I have a hard time watching dramas that don't really advance episode to episode. The first few seasons of Smallville suffered from this and it made it a real chore to sit through.
Anyway, the show is a lot of fun.
I've been on a Russell Crowe kick lately. The Insider, Man of Steel and Gladiator have been viewed by me in the last few weeks. So I kept it going with another viewing of 3:10 To Yuma. Man, such a great western. Fast paced, filled with great performances all around and a legitimately rousing finale, this remake ranks right up there with Unforgiven and Tombstone for me. Crowe's Ben Wade is one of his most charismatic performances to date. Can't forget my boy Christian Bale either, so good as a down on his luck rancher whose own son can't even find anything to look up to. Great stuff. I also plan on keeping this Crowe train going with a viewing of Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World in the next week or two. Stay tuned.
Next up was Wreck-it Ralph. I honestly don't have much to say on this one other than it was really cute and enjoyable. I'm not a gamer so I know I missed most of the references, but still I had a good time with it.
And then, for whatever reason, a viewing of the Red Dawn remake just felt right. Honestly, it's not that bad, and it fulfilled the desire I was looking for at 11 PM with a glass of red wine. Chris Hemsworth proves once again that he rules and the rest of the ridiculously good looking cast do fine as well. The original is legitimately amazing and better in every way, but still, this remake was slight and fun.
Then I had my first viewing of A.I. Artificial Intelligence in about 8 years. Such a bizarre film, merging together the sensibilities of Spielberg with Stanley Kubrick, who was originally going to direct before handing it over to the other guy with a beard. Not his best film, but certainly not his worst either, A.I. remains fascinating to me and features an insanely good and creepy performance from Haley Joel Osment. This kid was the real deal, and I wish he had continued to do more work. I'm genuinely curious to see how he fits in with Will Ferrel's mini series The Spoils of Babylon and hopefully see if he can retain some of his former glory.
I've watched a bit more, but I think I'm gonna end this with my viewing of The Sum of all Fears, starring Ben Affleck's awful hair as Jack Ryan. This is actually a pretty decent entry in the Ryan series, with the absurdly dated technology only sometimes bringing the movie into truly silly territory. As a longtime Affleck supporter, I am pleased to say that he acquits himself nicely here. In fact, it's one of the few bright spots he had during this time of J. Lo and Gigli disasters. Long live the Affleck!
Well that felt good. I now have the absolute worst urge to watch Casino. Later dudes.
Thursday, January 30, 2014
Thursday, January 16, 2014
Her
I've seen 'Her' twice now, and I'm still struggling to wrap my head around it.
It's not an overly complicated movie, just the opposite in fact. I'd say it's theme of letting yourself love and to use that love to grow as a person, no matter how strange, is pretty universal.
It's just the way that director Spike Jonze captures the relationship Joaquin Phoenix has with his Operating System, voiced by Scarlett Johansson, in such a remarkably candid and honest way that I've found myself thinking about it every day for the past week.
Jonze is not making judgements about our addiction to technology, rather he focuses on what it means to feel lonely and to then be rescued from that feeling.
UGH, this sounds all lovey feely. But shit, let's be real, we've all been there. For some reason, I tend to look back on the hard days I've had from time to time, usually followed by a viewing of The Notebook. Why? I don't know. To remind me of what I have now? Maybe, but whatever the reason, it helps me feel human, and Jonze is able to capture that raw and ever so human feeling with a movie about a guy who dates a computer. Awesome.
Joaquin Phoenix is crazy good in this movie. Film critic Devin Faraci reminded me in his review of the film that this is same actor who only a year ago played Freddie Quell in The Master, one of the most broken characters ever put on film. In Her, his Theodore is also a broken man of sorts, but one ready and willing to have hope. It's an insane reversal, but it makes me excited to see what else this guy is capable of.
Scarlett is also great, something that is happening more and more these days. I've always enjoyed her work, but the last few years she seems to have gone out of her way to pick more interesting parts, and she seems to be relishing in the opportunities. It's extremely difficult for any actor to make any kind of impression in a movie, so the fact that Johansson comes across so real and appealing using only her voice is fascinating.
Overall, I think Her is really about accepting the love you've had and using that to move forward. I'm sucker for movies like these as it is, but Her is especially good because it just happens to be especially good.
It's not an overly complicated movie, just the opposite in fact. I'd say it's theme of letting yourself love and to use that love to grow as a person, no matter how strange, is pretty universal.
It's just the way that director Spike Jonze captures the relationship Joaquin Phoenix has with his Operating System, voiced by Scarlett Johansson, in such a remarkably candid and honest way that I've found myself thinking about it every day for the past week.
Jonze is not making judgements about our addiction to technology, rather he focuses on what it means to feel lonely and to then be rescued from that feeling.
UGH, this sounds all lovey feely. But shit, let's be real, we've all been there. For some reason, I tend to look back on the hard days I've had from time to time, usually followed by a viewing of The Notebook. Why? I don't know. To remind me of what I have now? Maybe, but whatever the reason, it helps me feel human, and Jonze is able to capture that raw and ever so human feeling with a movie about a guy who dates a computer. Awesome.
Joaquin Phoenix is crazy good in this movie. Film critic Devin Faraci reminded me in his review of the film that this is same actor who only a year ago played Freddie Quell in The Master, one of the most broken characters ever put on film. In Her, his Theodore is also a broken man of sorts, but one ready and willing to have hope. It's an insane reversal, but it makes me excited to see what else this guy is capable of.
Scarlett is also great, something that is happening more and more these days. I've always enjoyed her work, but the last few years she seems to have gone out of her way to pick more interesting parts, and she seems to be relishing in the opportunities. It's extremely difficult for any actor to make any kind of impression in a movie, so the fact that Johansson comes across so real and appealing using only her voice is fascinating.
Overall, I think Her is really about accepting the love you've had and using that to move forward. I'm sucker for movies like these as it is, but Her is especially good because it just happens to be especially good.
Monday, January 6, 2014
Anchorman 2
Oof. I died a little inside every day I didn't see Anchorman 2. Katy left for a week the day it came out and of course I was forbidden from seeing it without her. Then work and other movie obligations got in the way.
But finally, after two agonizing weeks we sat down with beer and readied ourselves for some serious funny.
And it delivers! I have to admit I had tempered my expectations a bit, there was just no way it could live up to the first one. A movie that is pure lunacy, Anchorman was a shock to the system of comedy and has obviously achieved legendary status, something that even the best sequel could never overcome. So all I really wanted was for the movie to make me laugh, and that it did.
The film starts strong and ends with a battle so absurd and brilliant that I wish the same energy was employed throughout the rest of the movie, as the middle drags quite a bit. The film runs just under 2 hours, and it could have easily lost 20 minutes if not more.
Still, I laughed hard and I laughed a lot and it was never not a treat to have these ridiculous characters on screen again.
Well, that was a bit short, but really all you want to know is if it's funny, right? It is. So now, I'm going to take a left turn and get a little bloggy.
As you probably know, I like movies. Some would even say I like movies a little too much. Not as a way of not dealing with life or whatever, but that I literally like just about any movie I see. While that's not true, I usually only write or post about movies that I like because talking about good movies is fun. My work with Carycitizen.com has given my the opportunity to not only hone my writing skills but to see more movies, some of which I actively disliked. It's a bummer writing about movies you don't like. But that's the job of a critic though, letting other film lovers know what's worth the price of admission.
So I've changed the way I view movies ever so slightly. Or rather, I've been trying to change the way I talk about them. I try to be more honest about the actual quality of a movie. Even if I liked it, I try to admit what faults a film might have.
I realize this probably seems painfully obvious. I mean, duh, a film critic is supposed to talk about the overall quality of a movie. Well, fuck you. I'm new to this and in trying to turn this love/obsession into a career I'm having to really re-think my shit.
There was a small part of me though that was scared that this new way of thinking critically about a movie would dampen my overall love of movies, including the worst of the worst that I shamelessly own and watch again and again.
So to put this fear to rest, I watched Van Helsing.
That movie fucking sucks. There is no defense. Well, the score is pretty cool. I always knew it was bad, I just didn't care.
Thankfully though, even as my newly minted critic brain was turning its wheels, I took comfort in the fact that I still didn't care that it was bad. I still enjoyed every awful second of it. None of that so bad it's good bullshit. I liked it. Just cause.
So fear not, I'll make it my duty to be honest about films, good and bad and in between.
Sometimes though, I'm just going to watch some shit. And sometimes, I'll be perfectly OK with that.
But finally, after two agonizing weeks we sat down with beer and readied ourselves for some serious funny.
And it delivers! I have to admit I had tempered my expectations a bit, there was just no way it could live up to the first one. A movie that is pure lunacy, Anchorman was a shock to the system of comedy and has obviously achieved legendary status, something that even the best sequel could never overcome. So all I really wanted was for the movie to make me laugh, and that it did.
The film starts strong and ends with a battle so absurd and brilliant that I wish the same energy was employed throughout the rest of the movie, as the middle drags quite a bit. The film runs just under 2 hours, and it could have easily lost 20 minutes if not more.
Still, I laughed hard and I laughed a lot and it was never not a treat to have these ridiculous characters on screen again.
Well, that was a bit short, but really all you want to know is if it's funny, right? It is. So now, I'm going to take a left turn and get a little bloggy.
As you probably know, I like movies. Some would even say I like movies a little too much. Not as a way of not dealing with life or whatever, but that I literally like just about any movie I see. While that's not true, I usually only write or post about movies that I like because talking about good movies is fun. My work with Carycitizen.com has given my the opportunity to not only hone my writing skills but to see more movies, some of which I actively disliked. It's a bummer writing about movies you don't like. But that's the job of a critic though, letting other film lovers know what's worth the price of admission.
So I've changed the way I view movies ever so slightly. Or rather, I've been trying to change the way I talk about them. I try to be more honest about the actual quality of a movie. Even if I liked it, I try to admit what faults a film might have.
I realize this probably seems painfully obvious. I mean, duh, a film critic is supposed to talk about the overall quality of a movie. Well, fuck you. I'm new to this and in trying to turn this love/obsession into a career I'm having to really re-think my shit.
There was a small part of me though that was scared that this new way of thinking critically about a movie would dampen my overall love of movies, including the worst of the worst that I shamelessly own and watch again and again.
So to put this fear to rest, I watched Van Helsing.
That movie fucking sucks. There is no defense. Well, the score is pretty cool. I always knew it was bad, I just didn't care.
Thankfully though, even as my newly minted critic brain was turning its wheels, I took comfort in the fact that I still didn't care that it was bad. I still enjoyed every awful second of it. None of that so bad it's good bullshit. I liked it. Just cause.
So fear not, I'll make it my duty to be honest about films, good and bad and in between.
Sometimes though, I'm just going to watch some shit. And sometimes, I'll be perfectly OK with that.
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
American Hustle and other things.
Hey dudes. It's been an interesting year. I'm still in school (gross), I still work at Best Buy (ew), and I'm still married to the same person ( who?). I did, however, begin writing movie reviews for an actual website. That exists. It's been a pretty cool experience so far, one that should continue into the new year, but as I do with every new year, I hope to get on here more often to talk about every other movie I watch that isn't included on Carycitizen.com.
So hey, let's start with American Hustle.
This is a really, really good movie filled with really, really good performances that for some reason I just can't make myself really, really like.
I love David O. Russell. Three Kings, I Heart Huckabees, Flirting With Disaster, The Fighter. I LOVE The Fighter. I also greatly enjoyed Silver Linings Playbook, even though the awards attention it got was a bit much ( I know awards don't matter anymore, but I still obsess and fret over them so SHUT IT!). But there is a safeness to American Hustle that bothers me.
But first, the cast. My love for Christian Bale is quite well known at this point, and his comb-over here is further proof of his legend. Also, he gets the rare chance to show off his comedic chops. Like the similarly crime themed The Wolf of Wall Street, it's not really fair to call American Hustle a comedy, but the film doesn't shy away from the absurdness of the situations and characters that it fills itself with.
Speaking of absurd, Bradley Cooper rocks a perm like a true professional and turns in a great coked out performance. His Louie C.K. impression alone is worth the price of admission.
However, this is the Amy Adams show all the way. Fierce, determined, and boobies, Adams steals every scene she's in with an intensity and fake British accent that can't be ignored.
I really didn't like Jennifer Lawrence when she first started out, but with The Hunger Games films and even Silver Linings Playbook she's pretty much won me over. She's really good in Hustle too, but her accent is all over the place and next to the perfect accents by Bale, Adams and even Jeremy Renner it makes her stand out in the not so best way.
As good as the cast is though, it's director Russell that really keeps the flick from being great. The film is based on the true Abscam story from the late 70s, but Russell cleverly puts "Some of this really happened" at the opening of his film, admitting right off the bat that liberties have been taken. To me, that says that he is more concerned about entertaining the audience rather than educating them, which is by no means a bad thing. I prefer it really, if I want an accurate and educational film about the subject, I'll watch a documentary. (I will not, however, read a book about it. Because that's stupid.)
It's just that Russell leans a little too far on entertainment. As likable as Bale and Adams are, their characters are crooks. Maybe not the worst of crooks, but crooks none the less. They get themselves in the horrifying situation of being used by drug addicted F.B.I agent Cooper, and while it's entertaining to watch Bale squirm as Cooper asks for more and more, it also undermines some of the actual drama the film creates with Jeremy Renner's character, a genuinely decent politician that's being conned by Bale and Cooper.
I guess it's that Russell likes these characters too much. Everyone seems to have ulterior motives and despite all the back stabbing and seemingly increasing chance of everyone being killed by each other or even the mob, everyone walks away relatively unscathed. It's all a little anticlimactic.
I really don't hate American Hustle. I laughed a lot and enjoyed seeing the talented cast have a blast with these outrageous characters. But I really wanted to love this movie. Even more confusing is that I can't call it a disappointment either. Just a good movie brought down a peg by its really talented director. Weird.
I plan on talking about my favorite films of 2013 on here soon. Unfortunately I still have like 424 movies to see so it might not be for a little while. Either way, I'm seeing Anchorman 2 later this week ( I know, why haven't I seen it already?) so I'll hop on here and tell you guys my thoughts on it whether you want to hear it or not.
So hey, let's start with American Hustle.
This is a really, really good movie filled with really, really good performances that for some reason I just can't make myself really, really like.
I love David O. Russell. Three Kings, I Heart Huckabees, Flirting With Disaster, The Fighter. I LOVE The Fighter. I also greatly enjoyed Silver Linings Playbook, even though the awards attention it got was a bit much ( I know awards don't matter anymore, but I still obsess and fret over them so SHUT IT!). But there is a safeness to American Hustle that bothers me.
But first, the cast. My love for Christian Bale is quite well known at this point, and his comb-over here is further proof of his legend. Also, he gets the rare chance to show off his comedic chops. Like the similarly crime themed The Wolf of Wall Street, it's not really fair to call American Hustle a comedy, but the film doesn't shy away from the absurdness of the situations and characters that it fills itself with.
Speaking of absurd, Bradley Cooper rocks a perm like a true professional and turns in a great coked out performance. His Louie C.K. impression alone is worth the price of admission.
However, this is the Amy Adams show all the way. Fierce, determined, and boobies, Adams steals every scene she's in with an intensity and fake British accent that can't be ignored.
I really didn't like Jennifer Lawrence when she first started out, but with The Hunger Games films and even Silver Linings Playbook she's pretty much won me over. She's really good in Hustle too, but her accent is all over the place and next to the perfect accents by Bale, Adams and even Jeremy Renner it makes her stand out in the not so best way.
As good as the cast is though, it's director Russell that really keeps the flick from being great. The film is based on the true Abscam story from the late 70s, but Russell cleverly puts "Some of this really happened" at the opening of his film, admitting right off the bat that liberties have been taken. To me, that says that he is more concerned about entertaining the audience rather than educating them, which is by no means a bad thing. I prefer it really, if I want an accurate and educational film about the subject, I'll watch a documentary. (I will not, however, read a book about it. Because that's stupid.)
It's just that Russell leans a little too far on entertainment. As likable as Bale and Adams are, their characters are crooks. Maybe not the worst of crooks, but crooks none the less. They get themselves in the horrifying situation of being used by drug addicted F.B.I agent Cooper, and while it's entertaining to watch Bale squirm as Cooper asks for more and more, it also undermines some of the actual drama the film creates with Jeremy Renner's character, a genuinely decent politician that's being conned by Bale and Cooper.
I guess it's that Russell likes these characters too much. Everyone seems to have ulterior motives and despite all the back stabbing and seemingly increasing chance of everyone being killed by each other or even the mob, everyone walks away relatively unscathed. It's all a little anticlimactic.
I really don't hate American Hustle. I laughed a lot and enjoyed seeing the talented cast have a blast with these outrageous characters. But I really wanted to love this movie. Even more confusing is that I can't call it a disappointment either. Just a good movie brought down a peg by its really talented director. Weird.
I plan on talking about my favorite films of 2013 on here soon. Unfortunately I still have like 424 movies to see so it might not be for a little while. Either way, I'm seeing Anchorman 2 later this week ( I know, why haven't I seen it already?) so I'll hop on here and tell you guys my thoughts on it whether you want to hear it or not.
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Streets of Fire, White House Down, oh and Armageddon.
Streets of Fire is one of many movies that I've been meaning to watch for what feels like forever. It's directed by Walter Hill, who also did 48 HRS, Last Man Standing, The Warriors and who also had a significant hand in creating the Alien franchise as well as producing and directing a few episodes of Deadwood. So yea, I'm a fan.
I had always heard that Streets of Fire was something special, and it had been in my instant queue for quite a while, but somewhere somehow I had grown an aversion to watching new things, especially when school was in session. I can't defend myself really, but with school and work destroying me I only wanted to watch stuff that was familiar and distracting. Pathetic, I know.
I've turned a corner this summer though, and have plowed through a number of awesome films, but Streets of Fire sticks out. As I mentioned above, Walter Hill has done some damn fine work, and this movie was right in the middle of a streak for him. He had done The Warriors in 1979, which had led to 48 HRS in 1982. If Lethal Weapon is the pinnacle of the Buddy/Action film as we know it, then 48 HRS is the creation of it. Hill took that freedom granted by the success of 48 HRS and poured it into Streets of Fire. And man, what a movie.
The film couldn't match the success of his earlier movies, but it's easy to see why it has found a second life among film lovers. Streets of Fire oozes with confidence from the very first frame, depicting an 80s version of the 50s. Or maybe it's a 50s version of the 80s. It doesn't really matter though, as Hill plants familiar faces like Willem Dafoe, Rick Moranis, Diane Lane and the films hero, Michael Pare, to help guide us through this weird and unplaceable timeline.
The story goes like this- Diane Lane is a teen rock sensation that gets kidnapped by the local biker gang leader, played by Dafoe. Enter Michael Pare, Lane's former lover and military man to the rescue. That's about it story wise. Sounds thin I know, but each character is so well played and defined, and the world so well realized that you really don't need anything else. Best of all, it really just boils down to a guy who can't do anything but the right thing.
I'd like to focus on that for a second. I miss those kinds of heroes in films. The ones who are just compelled to be good. They don't have to go through an entire movie learning what it means to be heroic, they simply are from frame one. Now, I know there are plenty of examples of recent films that have that exact hero. Captain America, for instance. ( I also know there are numerous films I have loved recently that went down the exact road I just scolded, but shut up). But I mean normal guys, not superheroes. Michael Pare in Streets of Fire really reminds me of that kind of hero. He's a guy that knows how to handle a situation. Hell, the first scene he's in he takes care of an entire group of bikers that are harassing his sister in a diner, and it's a beauty of a scene. He's tough, funny and just intimidating enough for you to realize you shouldn't mess with him. Love it.
Which brings me to White House Down. First things first, the movie is basically a carbon copy of the first three Die Hard movies rolled into one. There a scene in an elevator shaft, underground tunnels, Channing Tatum in a wife beater and Jamie Foxx in the role of Samuel L. Jackson. And that is completely OK.
Those are just a few of the similarities though. Another glaring one is Tatum's character John Cale, a divorced dad who is just trying to impress his politics obsessed teenage daughter with a tour of the White House when all hell breaks loose and Cale is forced to take action and save the day simply because if he doesn't, who will? Look, of course it's not as good as Die Hard, but I love that the movie's hero is just a good guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not to mention that the film is a total blast through and through and director Roland Emmerich knows exactly how to push all the right patriotic buttons, having previously made ID4 and The Patriot. It's a bit silly at times, but it's never boring.
Speaking of Die Hard, I can't talk about everyday heroes without mentioning Bruce Willis. Obviously, Die Hard is the template for that kind of character, but after White House Down I was drawn to Armageddon for absolutely no good reason. But again, it's a movie with multiple guys who are forced into an impossible situation and still they step up and do what's asked of them. Also, Aerosmith.
I can't quite explain my obsession with these kinds of characters right now. I mean, I've always loved heroes, especially when depicted as an everyman. Maybe it's the summertime, or maybe it's this beer I'm drinking right now, but god damnit I just want to believe in heroes. And Bruce Willis.
I had always heard that Streets of Fire was something special, and it had been in my instant queue for quite a while, but somewhere somehow I had grown an aversion to watching new things, especially when school was in session. I can't defend myself really, but with school and work destroying me I only wanted to watch stuff that was familiar and distracting. Pathetic, I know.
I've turned a corner this summer though, and have plowed through a number of awesome films, but Streets of Fire sticks out. As I mentioned above, Walter Hill has done some damn fine work, and this movie was right in the middle of a streak for him. He had done The Warriors in 1979, which had led to 48 HRS in 1982. If Lethal Weapon is the pinnacle of the Buddy/Action film as we know it, then 48 HRS is the creation of it. Hill took that freedom granted by the success of 48 HRS and poured it into Streets of Fire. And man, what a movie.
The film couldn't match the success of his earlier movies, but it's easy to see why it has found a second life among film lovers. Streets of Fire oozes with confidence from the very first frame, depicting an 80s version of the 50s. Or maybe it's a 50s version of the 80s. It doesn't really matter though, as Hill plants familiar faces like Willem Dafoe, Rick Moranis, Diane Lane and the films hero, Michael Pare, to help guide us through this weird and unplaceable timeline.
The story goes like this- Diane Lane is a teen rock sensation that gets kidnapped by the local biker gang leader, played by Dafoe. Enter Michael Pare, Lane's former lover and military man to the rescue. That's about it story wise. Sounds thin I know, but each character is so well played and defined, and the world so well realized that you really don't need anything else. Best of all, it really just boils down to a guy who can't do anything but the right thing.
I'd like to focus on that for a second. I miss those kinds of heroes in films. The ones who are just compelled to be good. They don't have to go through an entire movie learning what it means to be heroic, they simply are from frame one. Now, I know there are plenty of examples of recent films that have that exact hero. Captain America, for instance. ( I also know there are numerous films I have loved recently that went down the exact road I just scolded, but shut up). But I mean normal guys, not superheroes. Michael Pare in Streets of Fire really reminds me of that kind of hero. He's a guy that knows how to handle a situation. Hell, the first scene he's in he takes care of an entire group of bikers that are harassing his sister in a diner, and it's a beauty of a scene. He's tough, funny and just intimidating enough for you to realize you shouldn't mess with him. Love it.
Which brings me to White House Down. First things first, the movie is basically a carbon copy of the first three Die Hard movies rolled into one. There a scene in an elevator shaft, underground tunnels, Channing Tatum in a wife beater and Jamie Foxx in the role of Samuel L. Jackson. And that is completely OK.
Those are just a few of the similarities though. Another glaring one is Tatum's character John Cale, a divorced dad who is just trying to impress his politics obsessed teenage daughter with a tour of the White House when all hell breaks loose and Cale is forced to take action and save the day simply because if he doesn't, who will? Look, of course it's not as good as Die Hard, but I love that the movie's hero is just a good guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not to mention that the film is a total blast through and through and director Roland Emmerich knows exactly how to push all the right patriotic buttons, having previously made ID4 and The Patriot. It's a bit silly at times, but it's never boring.
Speaking of Die Hard, I can't talk about everyday heroes without mentioning Bruce Willis. Obviously, Die Hard is the template for that kind of character, but after White House Down I was drawn to Armageddon for absolutely no good reason. But again, it's a movie with multiple guys who are forced into an impossible situation and still they step up and do what's asked of them. Also, Aerosmith.
I can't quite explain my obsession with these kinds of characters right now. I mean, I've always loved heroes, especially when depicted as an everyman. Maybe it's the summertime, or maybe it's this beer I'm drinking right now, but god damnit I just want to believe in heroes. And Bruce Willis.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Superman Returns
Hey dudes. Man of Steel comes out in less than two weeks. I suppose it goes without saying that I am beyond excited for that movie. I love Superman almost as much as I love Batman. Almost. So I figured I'd watch a few of the older Superman flicks again and get on here and have at it. So here. We. Go.
Superman Returns is probably my second favorite film based on the Man of Steel, sometimes third depending on the day. It's certainly a flawed film, and there are numerous things in it that make me cringe when I think about them *cough* Superboy *cough*. But as a direct sequel to Richard Donner's original film from 1978 and it's production troubled sequel, Superman Returns succeeds entirely in recreating that sense of awe and wonder in a way that is just not done very often anymore.
One of the biggest complaints about the film I've heard the most is it's lack of action. First off, what? The dude lifts a landmass off of the planet. A MASS OF LAND. I guess people really just want to see Superman punch stuff. And I get it. Him punching stuff would be a lot of fun on screen, especially with today's special effects. In fact, it looks like Man of Steel is going to be filled with exactly that. So that's why I don't mind at all that director Bryan Singer decided to focus on Superman's sheer strength and power rather than his punching abilities. I mean, the airplane sequence is one of the great superhero action scenes out there. Not only is it a great re-introduction of the character in this particular movie-verse, but it's also a genuinely exciting and tense piece of action film making. Again, Singer focuses on the characters brute strength to an awesome degree.
Also, Brandon Routh is a great stand in for Christopher Reeve. No one can match Reeve in the suit, and it's possible no one ever will, but Routh does a damn good job matching that all American goodness inherit in both Superman and Clark Kent. I'm genuinely bummed out that his career hasn't gone farther since Superman Returns. He popped up in Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World and was great, though it's hard to find a bad player in any Edgar Wright feature. Still, I think Routh has an extremely likable presence onscreen, and I hope he keeps at it.
Kevin Spacey is great as Lex Luthor. I mean, duh. Like Reeve, it's hard to top Gene Hackman ( HACKMAN!) but Spacey is about as good as it gets. However, it is kind of a bummer that he didn't have some better motivation here. Yes, it's cool that it's the same motivation as the original movie, LAND LAND LAND. But it falls a little flat. Oh well, Spacey rules. I'm curious to see who plays this role next. I don't think it's quite as hard a role to fill like Superman, but Hackman (HACKMAN!) still leaves a big shadow.
The only bit of casting that really fails in Superman Returns is Kate what's her face as Lois Lane. Bland, bland, bland. And Lois Lane is anything but. Actually, the writing for Lane is pretty good here, but Kate doesn't have the chops to really bring the character to life. Amy Adams should have a field day in Man of Steel.
Superman Returns is a bit of an anomaly in today's standard of superhero movies. It's almost a romantic drama first and action movie second and it doesn't completely work. However, there is some amazing film making on display here, and it's great to see Superman on screen after almost 20 years. Man of Steel will probably ( and hopefully ) knock this out of the water, but I like this version of Superman, and it feels good that no matter how the character changes onscreen, this version is always around.
Superman Returns is probably my second favorite film based on the Man of Steel, sometimes third depending on the day. It's certainly a flawed film, and there are numerous things in it that make me cringe when I think about them *cough* Superboy *cough*. But as a direct sequel to Richard Donner's original film from 1978 and it's production troubled sequel, Superman Returns succeeds entirely in recreating that sense of awe and wonder in a way that is just not done very often anymore.
One of the biggest complaints about the film I've heard the most is it's lack of action. First off, what? The dude lifts a landmass off of the planet. A MASS OF LAND. I guess people really just want to see Superman punch stuff. And I get it. Him punching stuff would be a lot of fun on screen, especially with today's special effects. In fact, it looks like Man of Steel is going to be filled with exactly that. So that's why I don't mind at all that director Bryan Singer decided to focus on Superman's sheer strength and power rather than his punching abilities. I mean, the airplane sequence is one of the great superhero action scenes out there. Not only is it a great re-introduction of the character in this particular movie-verse, but it's also a genuinely exciting and tense piece of action film making. Again, Singer focuses on the characters brute strength to an awesome degree.
Also, Brandon Routh is a great stand in for Christopher Reeve. No one can match Reeve in the suit, and it's possible no one ever will, but Routh does a damn good job matching that all American goodness inherit in both Superman and Clark Kent. I'm genuinely bummed out that his career hasn't gone farther since Superman Returns. He popped up in Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World and was great, though it's hard to find a bad player in any Edgar Wright feature. Still, I think Routh has an extremely likable presence onscreen, and I hope he keeps at it.
Kevin Spacey is great as Lex Luthor. I mean, duh. Like Reeve, it's hard to top Gene Hackman ( HACKMAN!) but Spacey is about as good as it gets. However, it is kind of a bummer that he didn't have some better motivation here. Yes, it's cool that it's the same motivation as the original movie, LAND LAND LAND. But it falls a little flat. Oh well, Spacey rules. I'm curious to see who plays this role next. I don't think it's quite as hard a role to fill like Superman, but Hackman (HACKMAN!) still leaves a big shadow.
The only bit of casting that really fails in Superman Returns is Kate what's her face as Lois Lane. Bland, bland, bland. And Lois Lane is anything but. Actually, the writing for Lane is pretty good here, but Kate doesn't have the chops to really bring the character to life. Amy Adams should have a field day in Man of Steel.
Superman Returns is a bit of an anomaly in today's standard of superhero movies. It's almost a romantic drama first and action movie second and it doesn't completely work. However, there is some amazing film making on display here, and it's great to see Superman on screen after almost 20 years. Man of Steel will probably ( and hopefully ) knock this out of the water, but I like this version of Superman, and it feels good that no matter how the character changes onscreen, this version is always around.
Saturday, June 1, 2013
High Fidelity
Alright guys, I have to first apologize for this post because it's going to be cheesy, schmaltzy crap about how High Fidelity has quietly played a major part in my life in terms of emotions and things.
Before I delve into that history though, let's talk about how good a movie High Fidelity is. For those who haven't seen it, it stars John Cusack as a record store owner who is going through a brutal break-up with his current girlfriend and how he uses music and talking to the camera to fill the audience in on how he ended up where he is.
A large part of the way this movie works is it's love and use of music. I mean, duh. I know next to nothing about music, as is the case with most things, but I certainly appreciate it. Thankfully, it doesn't matter if you love music or not when it comes to this movie because at its core, High Fidelity is addressing fandom and elitism and of course relationships all at once in a way that makes both the elite and the casuals feel included.
It's weird knowing that I loved this movie at the age of 14. I immediately responded to the notion of loving and knowing so much about something that I couldn't even relate to most people. Forget about relationships, I loved movies in a way that no one else could. And John Cusack talking directly at me about how intimate and special it is to have such a love struck a chord. Again, I really didn't care about music, but having a ridiculously likable actor in a ridiculously likable movie tell me how meaningful it is to truly care about something special just resonated with me.
And then I had a relationship. And then it ended. And then I watched this movie again. DEVASTATION.
High Fidelity had officially become the ultimate " I feel sorry for myself" movie for me. It didn't matter that the movie actually ends ( SPOILER ALERT ) with a very natural and not entirely definite conclusion for the main couple. The bulk of the movie was about the pain of a major break-up and how an elitist of the Nth degree deals with such an event. Anytime I felt emotional I put either this or The Notebook in. ( The Notebook was reserved for especially " I'm sorry nobody loves me!" bouts) .
But then something happened. I met someone. His name was Bruce. Bruce Willis. Turns out I loved him all along. Then I met some girl named Katy. And four or five years later I gave High Fidelity another shot.
And it's just as good, but in an entirely different way. Like I said, the movie is about elitism and dealing with people and changing relationships, and over the course of time has come to resemble the artifact of a couple trying to keep it together.
I love my wife. I don't need an awesome movie or monologue to tell me otherwise. But I sure don't mind a good movie like High Fidelity to remind me of it.
I should be clear here. Nothing that happens to John Cusack and his girlfriend in High Fidelity has happened to myself and what's her name. No cheating ( besides guys for me ) and no abortions ( that I know of ), but just average everyday couple shit that happens. And it's nice to see a ridiculously likable actor in a ridiculously likable movie tell me how meaningful it is to truly care about something or someone special in a way that completely resonates with me.
I might still have nights where I want to put in High Fidelity for entirely self loathing reasons, but at least now I have someone who is legally forced to deal with me and my emotions. Thanks, you. *winks*
Before I delve into that history though, let's talk about how good a movie High Fidelity is. For those who haven't seen it, it stars John Cusack as a record store owner who is going through a brutal break-up with his current girlfriend and how he uses music and talking to the camera to fill the audience in on how he ended up where he is.
A large part of the way this movie works is it's love and use of music. I mean, duh. I know next to nothing about music, as is the case with most things, but I certainly appreciate it. Thankfully, it doesn't matter if you love music or not when it comes to this movie because at its core, High Fidelity is addressing fandom and elitism and of course relationships all at once in a way that makes both the elite and the casuals feel included.
It's weird knowing that I loved this movie at the age of 14. I immediately responded to the notion of loving and knowing so much about something that I couldn't even relate to most people. Forget about relationships, I loved movies in a way that no one else could. And John Cusack talking directly at me about how intimate and special it is to have such a love struck a chord. Again, I really didn't care about music, but having a ridiculously likable actor in a ridiculously likable movie tell me how meaningful it is to truly care about something special just resonated with me.
And then I had a relationship. And then it ended. And then I watched this movie again. DEVASTATION.
High Fidelity had officially become the ultimate " I feel sorry for myself" movie for me. It didn't matter that the movie actually ends ( SPOILER ALERT ) with a very natural and not entirely definite conclusion for the main couple. The bulk of the movie was about the pain of a major break-up and how an elitist of the Nth degree deals with such an event. Anytime I felt emotional I put either this or The Notebook in. ( The Notebook was reserved for especially " I'm sorry nobody loves me!" bouts) .
But then something happened. I met someone. His name was Bruce. Bruce Willis. Turns out I loved him all along. Then I met some girl named Katy. And four or five years later I gave High Fidelity another shot.
And it's just as good, but in an entirely different way. Like I said, the movie is about elitism and dealing with people and changing relationships, and over the course of time has come to resemble the artifact of a couple trying to keep it together.
I love my wife. I don't need an awesome movie or monologue to tell me otherwise. But I sure don't mind a good movie like High Fidelity to remind me of it.
I should be clear here. Nothing that happens to John Cusack and his girlfriend in High Fidelity has happened to myself and what's her name. No cheating ( besides guys for me ) and no abortions ( that I know of ), but just average everyday couple shit that happens. And it's nice to see a ridiculously likable actor in a ridiculously likable movie tell me how meaningful it is to truly care about something or someone special in a way that completely resonates with me.
I might still have nights where I want to put in High Fidelity for entirely self loathing reasons, but at least now I have someone who is legally forced to deal with me and my emotions. Thanks, you. *winks*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)