Ben Likes Movies (and Stuff)

REVIEW: The Woman in Black

2012-02-01T22:24:00.000-05:00

After having done battle with vicious dragons and evil basilisks and giant spiders and the Dark Lord himself, you’d think that a simple haunted house would be a walk in the park for Daniel Radcliffe. In THE WOMAN IN BLACK, the former boy wizard plays Arthur Kipps, a young lawyer who travels to the middle of nowhere, England, to finalize some paperwork relating to the death of a local woman who owned a creepy old mansion known as the Eel Marsh House. Upon arrival, Kipps encounters wary and foreboding townsfolk who let him know that he is not welcome and should leave immediately. But why? Turns out the mansion is haunted by the ghost of a woman whose own child was once taken away from her -- and who, legend has it, seeks vengeance by killing a local child any time someone catches a glimpse of her. For this reason, superstitious locals keep as far away from the mansion as possible; Kipps, of course, unwittingly starts the cycle anew.

The film’s biggest strength lies in the way it sets an eerie stage. The Victorian-era setting and cinematography are used nicely, and the Eel Marsh House itself is a work of art: Gothic, dilapidated, shrouded by marshlands and mist and located on a secluded island that can only be reached by navigating a long & winding road during low tide; when the tide rises, the house -- and anyone inside -- is cut off from the rest of the world. The interior of the house is even better, filled with some legitimately unsettling mise-en-scene, ranging from mysterious handprints to gruesome porcelain dolls and the scariest cymbal-crashing monkey since the cover of the Stephen King book, “Skeleton Crew.” Tension is heightened by spectral images that you may not even always see in the background (it may take several viewings to notice them all), but whose presence adds an aura of dread.

Unfortunately, the film falters when it comes time to actually follow through with the big scares. They are almost always horribly telegraphed, and not in an anticipatory, PARANORMAL ACTIVITY sort of way -- more like an eye-rolling, “All right, already” sort of way. Even worse, the filmmakers seem to be of the belief that loud noises = big scares, which is not necessarily true. (Sometimes loud noises are just loud noises, which is annoying.) There is also a surprising reliance on Japanese-horror-style imagery, which became an overused cliché about five years ago -- the effectiveness of the Woman in Black herself is weakened for this very reason. Off the top of my head, I can think of exactly two moments that sent the slightest shivers down my spine (one involving the aforementioned monkey), which is simply not good enough. A disappointing waste of some very good build-up.

It’s also worth noting that the ending is a huge groaner. Even if the events leading up to it had been top-notch, the ending would have undermined the whole damn thing. I’ll say no more.

As for Radcliffe, the biggest knock against him has always been that his acting can be a bit wooden, and there is some of that here -- but he is generally solid and game for whatever ridiculousness the filmmakers throw at him. Ciaran Hinds (one of the great character actors working today) as a wealthy landowner and Kipps’ only friend in town, and recent Oscar nominee Janet McTeer as his deranged wife, provide some excellent support.

Daniel Radcliffe is a pretty good bet to have a solid career in the aftermath of the most successful movie franchise of all time. He’s a fine actor and is a damn nice guy. THE WOMAN IN BLACK may be a hit based on his pedigree alone (the teenyboppers will surely come out in droves), but as a scary movie, it could have used a little more magic.

REVIEW: Man on a Ledge

2012-01-31T22:15:00.001-05:00

Perhaps MAN ON A LEDGE would have have been a success if it had been a full-on parody of the recent “man stuck in a tight spot” sub-genre (think 127 HOURS and BURIED) -- just put a man on a ledge and keep him there by himself for 90 minutes and see what happens. As it stands, it plays things as a straight action/heist thriller, which is a big mistake, as neither the script, nor the director, nor the actors are up to the task.

Sam Worthington plays Nick Cassidy, an ex-con who climbs onto the ledge of a Manhattan hotel and threatens to jump. Elizabeth Banks is Lydia Mercer, the police negotiator who tries to talk him down -- and during the course of their interactions, comes to realize that there may be more to the situation than meets the eye. Which is true on three levels: First, we learn that the reason Nick was in jail was because he was found guilty of stealing a rare diamond from millionaire businessman David Englander (Ed Harris). Second, we learn that Nick swears his innocence, claiming that Englander, who had lost much of his fortune in the stock market, framed Nick in order to get the insurance money for the diamond. Third, we learn that the business on the ledge is nothing but a diversion, because across the street, Nick’s brother Joey (Jamie Bell) and Joey’s girlfriend (Genesis Rodriguez) are breaking into Englander’s fortress-like office to really steal the diamond, thus proving Nick’s innocence.

At first glance, it actually doesn’t sound like a terrible plot. Some potential for twists and intrigue is there. But writer Pablo F. Fenjves and director Asger Leth practically scotch-tape the proceedings together with not just every thriller cliché, but every heist cliché, too. Dialogue and acting are a mess -- a death knell for a film like this, which requires a dose of humanity and tension during the mano-a-mano scenes on the ledge. I like Elizabeth Banks, but she is woefully miscast as the negotiator, and Worthington is bland as ever and speaks with the worst Australian-New York accent you’ve ever heard. But the heist scenes are even worse: If FAST FIVE was OCEAN’S 11 for dummies, then MAN ON A LEDGE, with Bell and Rodriguez bumbling along with zero humor and even less chemistry, is FAST FIVE for idiots. If the film has a single saving grace, it’s Ed Harris, whose presence is always welcome -- but he is clearly wasted here.

Back to Worthington: Hollywood been pushing him as one of the next big action stars for a few years now, but it’s time to face facts: He is not good. His lack of personality and inability to emote may have been okay in a movie like AVATAR, where he was mostly required to serve as a vessel for the special effects and mythology, but any time he has been required to display some actual acting ability, it has been a cringe-inducing affair. He makes shitty films like CLASH OF THE TITANS even more dull than they might otherwise be and he is unquestionably the weak link in potentially-interesting films like THE DEBT. Make it stop!

MAN ON A LEDGE is a perfect example of a high-concept film that is handled ineptly and fails miserably. My biggest wish is that Samuel L. Jackson had shown up halfway through and screamed, “I HAVE HAD IT WITH THIS MOTHERFUCKING MAN ON THIS MOTHERFUCKING LEDGE!” Because that’s how I felt.

Ben's Oscar Picks & Predictions

2012-01-26T23:02:00.000-05:00

It’s the most wonderful time of the yeeeearrrr! That’s right -- it’s Oscar time! The nominations have been announced and apparently the Academy has kind of gone off the deep end. There are some very questionable picks and mind-boggling snubs -- but also some really good picks that make me very happy -- and also some flat-out weirdness. But I guess that’s fitting since it was a weird year for movies. With that in mind, let's take a look at each category and try to figure out what the Academy has been smoking. As always, I will also provide my predictions based on who I WANT to win and who I think WILL win. Ready? LET'S GO!

BEST PICTURE
THE ARTIST
THE DESCENDANTS
EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE
THE HELP
HUGO
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
MONEYBALL
THE TREE OF LIFE
WAR HORSE

Fun fact: my #1 movie of the year hasn’t won Best Picture since RETURN OF THE KING in 2004, and here we have HUGO with a total of 11 nods, which suddenly thrusts it into the discussion. Could it happen?? God, I hope so! As of now, THE ARTIST and THE DESCENDANTS are probably the two frontrunners, so here’s hoping they cancel each other out, thus allowing HUGO to swoop in. I also love that MIDNIGHT IN PARIS (my #2 movie of the year) is getting some major recognition. Wasn’t sure if THE HELP would sustain its buzz but apparently it has; that's fine. MONEYBALL is a good movie; never thought of it as a Best Picture contender, but here we are. WAR HORSE is this year’s SEABISCUIT, I guess; I liked it, and it IS the kind of movie that makes Oscar cry. The Academy probably included THE TREE OF LIFE to make itself feel smart. And then there’s EXTREMELY LOUD, which I also liked, but come on! One of the most baffling Best Picture choices ever, especially considering it is neither a critical nor commercial success. I reeeeally wish they’d just go back to five nominees -- nine is better than ten, but still way too many, especially since, let’s face it, this is a three-horse race at most. And while it would give me great pleasure to see HUGO win, I can’t argue with the silent film (which also made my Top 10) and the Clooney picture (which just missed).

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Artist

BEST ACTOR
Demián Bichir, A BETTER LIFE
George Clooney, THE DESCENDANTS
Jean Dujardin, THE ARTIST
Gary Oldman, TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY
Brad Pitt, MONEYBALL

First of all, let’s talk about who WASN’T nominated -- namely, Michael Shannon for TAKE SHELTER (best overall performance of the year, in my opinion), Ryan Gosling for DRIVE and Michael Fassbender for SHAME. Utterly senseless (unless maybe Fassbender also got votes for some of his other films and cancelled himself out?). One of these guys should absolutely be there instead of Bichir, whose nomination makes no sense to me. A BETTER LIFE had a strong story but, frankly, the acting was just not very good -- yet Bichir has had buzz swirling around him for a while and I guess it worked out. A wasted nomination. On the other hand, it is SUPREMELY AWESOME that Gary Oldman has finally gotten his first nod! I think he will take the gold -- one of those “career” wins, plus his performance in TINKER TAILOR was one for the ages -- despite the frontrunner status of both Clooney and Dujardin (either of whom would also be deserving). Pitt, meanwhile, was excellent in MONEYBALL but doesn’t stand a chance.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Oldman
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Oldman

BEST ACTRESS
Glenn Close, ALBERT NOBBS
Viola Davis, THE HELP
Rooney Mara, THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
Meryl Streep, THE IRON LADY
Michelle Williams, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN

More massive snubs here: It’s an absolute travesty that Tilda Swinton and Elizabeth Olsen were not nominated for their work in WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN and MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE, respectively -- easily two of the best performances of the year. I also would have loved to see Kirsten Dunst get a nod for MELANCHOLIA, but it seems that film has been blacklisted across the board, perhaps due to Lars von Trier’s Nazi comments at Cannes. Too bad. Anyway, I still think Michelle Williams’ magical performance as Marilyn Monroe is the one to beat, and rightly so. But don’t count out Viola Davis, who could win if the Academy decides to make a statement by honoring THE HELP. Streep is nominated for the 17th time, but will likely lose for the 15th time because THE IRON LADY is simply not very good in spite her efforts (unless of course the Academy decides that this is the year to finally honor her -- who could argue with that?). Sorry, Glenn Close, but your nomination is a joke. Lastly, I’ve heard some buzz brewing for Rooney Mara -- I guess that makes her the dark horse, but she’s not even the best Lisbeth Salander that we’ve seen recently, so it’d be silly if she won.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Williams
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Williams, but maybe Davis

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Kenneth Branagh, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN
Jonah Hill, MONEYBALL
Nick Nolte, WARRIOR
Christopher Plummer, BEGINNERS
Max Von Sydow, EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE

Bizarreness abound here. First of all, how weird is it that Jonah Hill is an Oscar nominee?? Dude loses a bunch of weight, doesn’t die, and look what happens! Makes you wonder what might’ve been if Farley had cleaned up his act... sigh. I seriously don’t get the love for Nick Nolte in WARRIOR -- the movie was surprisingly good because of the way it wore its heart on its sleeve, but the acting was pretty mediocre across the board. Branagh was very good as Sir Lawrence Olivier; a worthy nod. Max von Sydow seems like a gimmick nod for two reasons: (1) Because he didn’t speak a word in the film, and (2) so they could have two octogenarians going against each other. Speaking of which, might as well give Plummer the gold right now -- he was fantastic in BEGINNERS, a movie I would’ve liked to see get even more love!

I’M ROOTING FOR: Plummer
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Plummer

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Bérénice Bejo, THE ARTIST
Jessica Chastain, THE HELP
Melissa McCarthy, BRIDESMAIDS
Janet McTeer, ALBERT NOBBS
Octavia Spencer, THE HELP

Kind of surprised that Shailene Woodley from THE DESCENDANTS didn’t get a nod here, especially since the film got so much love from the Academy. She DEFINITELY should have gotten the spot over McCarthy, whose nod is just ridiculous. BRIDESMAIDS is now officially the most overrated movie of 2011. It was funny and all, but NO WAY IN HELL does it deserve Oscar attention! Hell, if THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRIGIN isn’t Oscar-worthy, then BRIDESMAIDS sure the hell isn’t. Ridiculous. Meanwhile, law of averages said that Chastain would get nominated for something -- the girl was in SEVEN movies last year (THE HELP being her best work). Bejo was enchanting in THE ARTIST and could surprise if the film sweeps. McTeer was by far the best thing about the otherwise-lame ALBERT NOBBS -- in fact she breathed legit life into the proceedings to the point where I may actually be rooting for her on some level. But I think Spencer will win this one -- she was the clear standout of THE HELP’s very solid ensemble.

I’M ROOTING FOR: McTeer or Spencer
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Spencer

BEST DIRECTOR
Woody Allen, MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
Michel Hazanavicius, THE ARTIST
Terrence Malick, THE TREE OF LIFE
Alexander Payne, THE DESCENDANTS
Martin Scorcese, HUGO

Call me crazy, but I have a feeling that Scorcese could pull this one out regardless of how HUGO fares the rest of the night. Academy could choose to honor him for the “pro-cinema” message that HUGO conveys, not to mention that probably no one else could have made the film work quite so well. I hope that happens. But Hazanavicius or Payne could pull it out if either of those films sweeps. I love PARIS but it’s more a testament to Allen’s writing. As for Malick... meh.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Scorcese
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Scorcese, Hazanavicius or Payne... who knows?

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
THE ARTIST
BRIDESMAIDS
MARGIN CALL
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
A SEPARATION

PARIS! PARIS PARIS! If Woody Allen wins this, for what is easily his best movie in decades, and possibly of all time (yeah, I said it), I will be deliriously happy. It could face stiff competition from A SEPARATION, which featured a ridiculously taut and compelling script. THE ARTIST is probably the favorite by default, but even if it sweeps elsewhere, I hope the Academy spreads the wealth here. MARGIN CALL is the only major Oscar nominee I haven’t seen -- which pisses me off, since I saw 155 movies last year -- but I will rectify that soon and you can’t rule out films with timely topics. And BRIDESMAIDS... gimme a break. Probably the first time an Oscar-nominated screenplay features an extended scene about diarrhea -- which wouldn’t have necessarily been a bad thing if the scene was actually funny.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Paris
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Artist

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
THE DESCENDANTS
HUGO
THE IDES OF MARCH
MONEYBALL
TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY

Obviously I’ll be rooting for Scorcese’s magical ode to cinema, HUGO, and I guess it could win if it wins everything (which would be awesome). That said, I think Alexander Payne and THE DESCENDANTS will win this one regardless of what it does elsewhere. Or maybe TINKER TAILOR’s dense but gripping story will pull it off. THE IDES OF MARCH isn’t really eye-opening as far as political revelations are concerned, but it was entertainingly cynical. MONEYBALL, again, is just along for the ride, but always nice to see a baseball movie get some love (actually, when’s the last time that has happened?).

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Descendants

BEST ANIMATED FILM
A CAT IN PARIS
CHICO & RITA
KUNG FU PANDA 2
PUSS IN BOOTS
RANGO

Wow... let’s just take a moment and contemplate the fact that, for the first time ever, Pixar is NOT nominated in a year they’ve released an eligible film. That’s just... wow. But hey, nice of them to phone it in this year to open up the field for a change (they had won FOUR years in a row, and six overall). I will tell you right now, I had not heard of A CAT IN PARIS and CHICO & RITA before the nominations were released, but I now can’t wait to se them -- kudos to the Academy for thinking outside the box when it comes to animation, at least! Since THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN didn’t get a nod for some reason (does the Academy consider motion-capture to be cheating?), as of now, RANGO is my pick to win -- it is a great film, and another testament to movie-lovers, which seems to be a theme this year. I actually would have nominated CARS 2 over KUNG FU PANDA 2, but no matter -- neither it nor PUSS IN BOOTS will win.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Rango, for now
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Rango, for now

BEST FOREIGN FILM
BULLHEAD (Belgium)
FOOTNOTE (Israel)
IN DARKNESS (Poland)
MONSIEUR LAZHAR (Canada)
A SEPARATION (Iran)

Well, the only one of these I’ve seen is A SEPARATION, the clear frontrunner, and one of the best movies of the year, foreign or otherwise. If one of these other titles is going to win, it will have to be REALLY freaking good (though a quick perusal of plot summaries informs me that IN DARKNESS is about the Holocaust, so it can’t be counted out). Hopefully I’ll get a chance to see some of them before the big show. Come on, Netflix and IFC Center, don’t let me down!

I’M ROOTING FOR: A Separation
WILL PROBABLY WIN: A Separation

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
THE ARTIST
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
HUGO
THE TREE OF LIFE
WAR HORSE

I’m gonna stick with HUGO across the board here -- Scorcese’s films are always visually interesting, but this one is a veritable feast for the eyes, and he made 3D glasses a necessary part of the movie-watching experience for the first time ever. It should win for breathing new life into a technology that had very nearly worn out its welcome. THE ARTIST, of course, has the whole black-and-white, old-Hollywood thing going for it. WAR HORSE has an epic, GONE WITH THE WIND-esque look that we rarely see anymore. DRAGON TATTOO looks like it could be set within David Fincher’s crazy universe, which is always interesting. But I can see the Academy throwing THE TREE OF LIFE a bone here -- it might be overwrought, but it sure is pretty.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Tree of Life

BEST EDITING
THE ARTIST
THE DESCENDANTS
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
HUGO
MONEYBALL

What’s the rule of thumb? The Best Picture winner almost always wins Best Editing? Or at least, they’re always nominated for both... which rules out DRAGON TATTOO (which is ironic because it was extremely well-crafted). Not really sure what will happen here, to be honest. I’m rooting for HUGO because I love it, but THE ARTIST and THE DESCENDANTS could easily scoop it up. All I know for sure is that MONEYBALL ain’t winnin’ nothin’. Actually, the movie that should probably be here is DRIVE, but that movie got snubbed something fierce... damn shame.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Artist

BEST ART DIRECTION
THE ARTIST
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2
HUGO
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
WAR HORSE

No way THE ARTIST doesn’t win this one, since it is such a perfect recreation of a classic-era silent film. But lest we forget, HUGO captured that same time period from another perspective (and set in Paris, which is innately prettier than Hollywood). Come to think of it, so did MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, much of which was set in 1920’s Paris -- I’d have no problem seeing that win. I also love the aesthetics and locations of WAR HORSE and POTTER, so really, I’d be okay with any of these.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo or Potter or Paris
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Artist

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
ANONYMOUS
THE ARTIST
HUGO
JANE EYRE
W.E.

Period pieces abound here. Haven’t seen ANONYMOUS yet, but I’m guessing it has the Shakespearean thing going for it. JANE EYRE has the 19th century England thing going for it. W.E., also, surely looks ever-so-British (damn you, Madonna). It’s probably between HUGO and THE ARTIST for their recreations of the golden age of cinema in Paris and Hollywood, respectively. Could go either way! (P.S., you guys getting tired of all the HUGO pics? Well, too bad! SWEEP! SWEEP! SWEEP!)

I’M ROOTING FOR: Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Artist

BEST MAKEUP
ALBERT NOBBS
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2
THE IRON LADY

Whew, thank God J. EDGAR wasn’t nominated here -- worst old-age makeup ever (in fact, I’m glad that shitty movie got snubbed across the board). Forget about MRS. DOUBTFIRE, er, I mean, ALBERT NOBBS (seriously, don’t they look similar?). Meryl Streep’s transformation into Margaret Thatcher was impressive so IRON LADY is a possibility. But I think POTTER, with all its creatures and characters and things, has to win here. Hell, in a perfect world, POTTER would get an honorary Oscar to pay tribute to the series as a whole, since it is collectively one of the great cinematic achievements of our time. A measly makeup award is the least the Academy can do!

I’M ROOTING FOR: Potter
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Potter

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN
THE ARTIST
HUGO
TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY
WAR HORSE

Bah, none of my favorite scores of the year are here, so one of my favorite categories is ruined. EXTREMELY LOUD is not Best Picture-worthy, but I would have liked to see Alexandre Desplat’s score get some recognition (not to mention his POTTER score, which tied the saga together nicely). I really liked the score for BEGINNERS, too. Also, what does the Academy have against electronica? No Daft Punk / TRON: LEGACY last year (a travesty that still sticks in my craw) and no Chemical Brothers for HANNA this year. (Just realized that Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross’ DRAGON TATTOO score was snubbed, too -- guess the Academy was also freaked out after seeing Trent in a tux last year.) Anyway... can’t argue with a double-dose of John Williams, though neither TINTIN nor WAR HORSE were particularly memorable (still, I’d cheer loudly if he won). Loved everything about HUGO. Don’t remember TINKER TAILOR. I think I’ll actually pick THE ARTIST since the score is so vital to a silent film and it works wonders -- though I understand one of the more prominent cues is actually lifted from the score to VERTIGO, so that’s kinda cheating, maybe. I dunno. It’s still good.

I’M ROOTING FOR: The Artist
WILL PROBABLY WIN: The Artist

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
"Man or Muppet" from THE MUPPETS
"Real in Rio" from RIO

Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a world in which THE MUPPETS are nominated for an Oscar! This is awesome because it means they will probably be there... and Jason Segel & Walter will probably perform the song, which is almost guaranteed to win because who gives a crap about RIO. Kind of funny that people always complain about the Best Song performances taking up too much time during the telecast, so this year they whittled it down to two. This is a good thing because it means we won’t have to suffer through crap from Madonna and Sinead O’Connor and whoever else. Instead, we get MUPPETS!!!

I’M ROOTING FOR: Muppets!
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Muppets!

BEST SOUND MIXING
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
HUGO
MONEYBALL
TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON
WAR HORSE

Just to recap (mostly for my own benefit), sound mixing refers to the way the various sounds, effects, dialogue, etc., of a film are mixed together to create the glorious euphonies that fill our ears when we watch a film. Or in the case of TRANSFORMERS, cacophonies -- the sound mix is crazy in that film, but not necessarily in a good way. MONEYBALL seems like an odd choice, and DRAGON TATTOO probably featured a good sound mix but damned if it sticks out in my head. HUGO is a perfect film through-and-through, but you know what? I’m gonna go with WAR HORSE here just to mix things up (pun very much intended). Lots of stuff going on in that epic, with the sounds of war and the horse itself and the sweeping score and everything in between.

I’M ROOTING FOR: War Horse or Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: War Horse?

BEST SOUND EDITING
DRIVE
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
HUGO
TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON
WAR HORSE

Sound editing, meanwhile, is related to sound design, the creation of sound effects, etc. Maybe DRIVE will get a pity award here. Or TRANSFORMERS -- I bet if you break down the aforementioned cacophony of those mind-blowing action sequences, the individual sound effects are pretty impressive. I feel like HUGO and DRAGON TATTOO both utilized some interesting sound effects. And WAR HORSE, again, with the war and the horse and etc. -- I bet it wins both categories. But really, this is another crapshoot.

I’M ROOTING FOR: Transformers or Hugo
WILL PROBABLY WIN: War Horse

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2
HUGO
REAL STEEL
RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES
TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON

Some good-looking stuff across the board here -- but it’s a moot point because this award belongs to RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES primarily for the unbelievable motion-capture performance of Andy Serkis. I mean, he could have conceivably gotten an ACTING nomination if the Academy had any balls. As it stands, this award will be the only way to honor the reigning King of Motion Capture. Hopefully the special effects guys will bring Serkis on stage with them when they win!

I’M ROOTING FOR: Apes
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Apes

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
HELL AND BACK AGAIN
IF A TREE FALLS: A STORY OF THE EARTH LIBERATION FRONT
PARADISE LOST 3: PURGATORY
PINA
UNDEFEATED

Again, I’ve only seen one of these -- Wim Wenders’ PINA -- and it was absolutely outstanding, from the jaw-dropping 3D visuals to the genuine emotional punch. As with the foreign films, the other nominees will have to be REALLY damn good to beat it. Looking forward to seeing as many of them as possible before the big show. (HELL and TREE are both available on Instant Netflix, so that’s a good start!)

I’M ROOTING FOR: Pina, for now
WILL PROBABLY WIN: Pina

Of course, I also fully intend to see the Oscar-nominated short films, which open at the IFC Center on Feb. 10th. (This year, I even hope to squeeze in the documentary shorts for the first time ever!) Oscar night is Sunday, Feb. 26th and you can bet that I will be right here at BenLikesMovies.com with my 7th ANNUAL LIVE MOMENT-BY-MOMENT OSCAR COMMENTARY! Seriously... it is always epic and entertaining and insightful and a damn good time, so be sure to check in throughout the telecast. Until then... who do YOU want to / think will win Oscar gold? Discuss!

REVIEW: Beauty and the Beast 3D

2012-01-23T22:31:00.000-05:00

If you’re a cynical bastard, you might argue that the decisions by major studios to convert some of their biggest hits to 3D and re-release them in theatres is nothing more than a quick money grab. And yes, there is plenty of truth to that. But frankly, it’s a money grab I can get behind because sometimes it is just awesome to see our favorite movies the way they were meant to be seen -- on the big screen. I love STAR WARS and TITANIC and will eat up those upcoming re-releases with giddy abandon. But there’s a special kind of joy that comes from seeing classic Disney on the big screen, and that is why their re-releases will likely succeed even if other studios fail.

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, you may recall, was released in 1991 and epitomizes Disney’s Second Golden Age, which began with THE LITTLE MERMAID in 1989 and ended with POCAHONTAS in 1995. It was the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture, and over two decades later, it remains a truly magical movie-watching experience. It still looks beautiful, has some of Disney’s most memorable characters -- and possibly the best collection of songs in ANY Disney movie.

Actually, is that true? Let’s take a look at how the “Big Four” songs in BEAUTY stack up against its closest competitors from the Second Golden Age, THE LITTLE MERMAID and THE LION KING:

BEAUTY: “Belle,” “Gaston,” “Be Our Guest” and “Beauty and the Beast”
MERMAID: “Part of Your World,” “Poor Unfortunate Souls,” “Under the Sea” and “Kiss the Girl”
LION KING: “Circle of Life,” “Be Prepared,” “Hakuna Matata” and “Can You Feel the Love Tonight”

Well, when it’s all laid out like that, it’s not as cut-and-dry as I initially thought. In fact, if someone put a gun to my head, I might go with MERMAID, my personal favorite movie of the Second Golden Age (which sort of renders this whole exercise irrelevant). Nevertheless... re-watch BEAUTY and I defy you not to react with rapturous glee when “Belle” kicks in. Or laugh at the hilarious arrogance of “Gaston,” one of Disney’s greatest villains. Or become filled with happy energy as “Be Our Guest” builds to a crescendo. Or get choked up during that sweeping overhead shot of Belle and the Beast dancing as Mrs. Potts sings the title song. Pound for pound, these songs may elicit the purest emotional reactions of any modern Disney film, and for that reason alone, the film will always be worth the price of admission.

The 3D conversion, however, leaves a lot to be desired. Not sure what happened here, as Disney usually has a pretty good handle on the technology, but it is almost as if they went overboard and infused TOO MUCH 3D this time. Backgrounds and scenery look very nice and layered on occasion, but characters in the foreground just look terrible. The 3D often makes them look unnaturally bulgy and “cut-and-pasted” into the picture. (Compare this to the LION KING re-release, in which the 3D didn’t really add anything to the film, but was more or less unobtrusive.) This is unfortunate because BEAUTY features some of the loveliest traditional Disney animation ever, and the 3D definitely detracts from that.

It does not, however, detract from the overall enjoyment of the film. Watching these classic Disney movies on the big screen remains a joyous, nostalgia-inducing movie-watching experience, and as long as they keep releasing ‘em, I’ll keep seeing ‘em (though, perhaps in 2D). Hail Disney!

Ben’s 2011 Movies By the Numbers

2012-01-12T23:11:00.000-05:00

My friends, the time has come to dig into my vast, detailed records -- which are comprised of Excel spreadsheets, my daily planner, and most impressively/obsessive-compulsively, ticket stub scrapbooks that date back to 1994 -- and explore the ins-and-outs of my record-breaking movie-going year! Why, you may ask, would we want to do this? Because, quite simply, this is the kind of shit I do.

I went to the movies 155 times in 2011, which includes 154 different movies, as I saw HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2 twice. This, of course, was a NEW PERSONAL RECORD, shattering the old mark of 141. After reaching that total in 2010, I remarked, "My guess? This record is unbreakable." Well, I stand corrected!

This also marks the 11th consecutive year that I saw 100+ movies on the big screen. I am nothing if not consistent (and insane). But clearly we've entered a golden age of movie-going, thanks to a variety of factors that we will now discuss further.

________________________________

MONTH-BY-MONTH

January: 10
February: 12
March: 13
April: 11
May: 14
June: 12
July: 7
August: 14
September: 13
October: 19
November: 12
December: 18

I saw my first movie of 2011 on January 6th (COUNTRY STRONG, ugh) and didn't let up for a moment. I was on par with 2010's pace (actually slightly ahead) for the first three months, before kicking it into overdrive in April, May and June -- ten more movies in those months than in '10, primarily due to an influx of pre-summer advance screenings. July was the one slow month, due to two major factors: I got really sick for a week, and then went on vacation the following week, and only saw one movie during that span. But business picked back up in August and September. I saw my 100th movie of the year on Sept. 13th -- a French thriller called LOVE CRIME -- which is the earliest I’ve ever hit the century mark. Then I absolutely exploded in October with an incredible 19 movies -- a record for a single month (the previous mark was 17). November was relatively laid-back, quantity-wise, but rife with quality: I saw FOUR of my Top 10 films that month (HUGO, THE ARTIST, TAKE SHELTER and MELANCHOLIA). And then I finished the year with a flurry as the Oscar bait was unleashed. The record-breaking 142nd movie occurred on Dec. 9th (THE SITTER, not exactly worthy of the occasion), and I saw my final movie on Dec. 31st (the Iranian masterpiece, A SEPARATION). Done and done!

Now, never say never, but I’m fairly certain THIS record will not be broken so quickly. For one thing, I will likely make a conscious effort to cut down a bit in 2012. Don’t worry -- I will still see a TON of movies. But the fact is, seeing 155 movies actually got kind of draining towards the end! So my plan this year is to see slightly fewer movies BUT write about them more frequently and promptly (as opposed to the end-of-month recaps I did last year). So it should be a good trade-off. We’ll see if I stick to that!

________________________________

BOX OFFICE

• Full price admissions: 69
• Free advance screenings: 53
• Free passes/awards programs/gift cards/etc.: 33

Every year I hear the age-old question: "Ben, how in the name of all that which is good and sacred in this crazy, mixed-up world do you manage to see so many movies, especially since regular admission is $13 at most NYC theatres?!" Well, the answer is two-fold. First, going to the movies is my favorite hobby & passion, and while I certainly find time to do other things (eat, drink, travel, go to ballgames & concerts, visit my niece, laze around, etc.), I am always ready and willing to go to the movies. Even if it’s a shitty movie (and this year had more than its share of those), I’m game for the big-screen experience, for better or worse.

Secondly, as you can see, I either did not pay a cent, or paid a discounted price, for the vast majority of the movies I saw. Yes, 69 full-price admissions still amounts to around $900. But, hey, it could’ve been worse. It helped that I scored lots of free AMC Gold & Silver passes from work (not to mention discounted Groupon-type deals). But the real kicker is that my wanna-be-film-critic ass saw 53 free advance screenings, which was also a NEW PERSONAL RECORD, way up from 41 in 2010. These included press screenings, word-of-mouth screenings, early test screenings, a couple of Tribeca Film Festival screenings, Q&A’s and more. (Only one red carpet premiere, though, for MEET MONICA VELOUR, where I caught glimpses of Kim Cattrall and, of all people, Liza Minnelli.) Now, a magician can't give away ALL of his secrets, but my biggest resource for such screenings is Cinemit.com, a site that has grown by leaps & bounds over the past year and offers screening opportunities in a number of cities. If you're interested in participating, you can sign up, enter the drawings and check out the message boards... just don't take my spot in line or we’ll have a problem.

Speaking of which, it's worth noting that 53 advance screenings means at least 53 hours spent waiting in line just to get into the screenings (not including the few times I didn't make it in). Not a total waste of time, because I got lots of reading done and played lots of Words With Friends -- but it sure would be nice to get press credentials someday and bypass that process! Anybody wanna hook up a humble blogger up? :)

________________________________

DAY-BY-DAY

Monday: 11
Tuesday: 22
Wednesday: 19
Thursday: 27
Friday: 53
Saturday: 14
Sunday: 9

No huge surprises here. Friday is obviously the biggest movie-going day of week -- though, oddly, I saw one FEWER Friday movie this year than in 2010. Monday was probably a slow day because I needed to come home and watch HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER. Tuesday and Thursday are big nights for advance screenings, hence the big numbers there. Wednesday is down from last year, probably because AMC did away with their “Free Popcorn Wednesdays.” Too bad about that, though I more than got my money’s worth from the new AMC Stubs program, so it balances out. I actually saw TEN more movies on Saturday this year than in ‘10 -- the reason for this is that I would often go to the movies on those nights with my lovely girlfriend, Rachel, after she got out of work. (Aww!) And Sunday, of course, is usually a day of rest. Can I get an amen?

________________________________

MY VARIOUS HOMES AWAY FROM HOME

AMC Empire 25 - 44
Loews Lincoln Square - 23
Regal 42nd St. E-Walk - 19
Lincoln Plaza Cinema - 11
Loews 34th Street - 10
Clearview Chelsea - 5
Elinor Bunin Munroe Film Center - 4
IFC Center - 4
Loews Lincoln Square IMAX - 3
Ziegfeld Theatre - 3
Tribeca Grand Hotel Screening Room - 3
Coliseum Theatre - 3
Loews Village 7 - 3
Sunshine Cinema - 2
Regal Union Square - 2
Loews 84th Street - 2
Cinema Village - 2
Angelika Theatre - 2
Regal Hadley Center (NJ) - 2
Loews Kip's Bay - 1
Loews Orpheum - 1
Disney Park Ave. Screening Room - 1
Sony Wonder Technology Lab - 1
Lighthouse International Screening Room - 1
92nd St. Y - 1
Montgomery Cinema (NJ) - 1
Loews New Brunswick (NJ) - 1

Fun stuff here. The AMC Empire dominated, mainly because I work five minutes away and would often hustle over there to catch the convenient after-work showtimes. (This is also why the E-Walk and 34th Street theatres are high up there.) Surprised that I didn’t see more movies at Lincoln Square, since it is the best overall multiplex in NYC and offers one of the best movie-going experiences. Even more surprised that I only saw THREE in glorious IMAX (SUCKER PUNCH, TRANSFORMERS 3 and MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 4); this is down from the prior year, too, so I guess I was more selective or something. Lots of movies at Lincoln Plaza, my indie theatre of choice. And then there’s an eclectic mix: Glad I saw a few screenings at the Tribeca Grand, one of the city’s hidden cinema jewels. Of course, the Ziegfeld is always a magical experience. Only four movies at the IFC Center?! That will change in 2012 because I am now a card-carrying member (thanks to Rachel!) and I need to see at least 16 movies there to make it worthwhile. I also saw four at the shiny new Munroe Film Center at Lincoln Center, which is a tremendous addition to the NYC film scene. Couple of movies at the quaint Cinema Village, which is cool. Couple of movies at the Angelika, which is a couple too many. One apiece at Kip’s Bay and the Orpheum, which is random. ZERO movies at the Paris Theatre, which is a damn shame -- not sure how that happened (or didn’t happen). A smattering in my old New Jersey stomping grounds (though one of them was my #1 movie of the year, HUGO, which somehow seems appropriate). I was even granted access to some interesting screening rooms, particularly Lighthouse International, which is an official screening room of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences (I saw MY WEEK WITH MARILYN there). Lastly, everyone please pour one out for my local Washington Heights neighborhood theatre, the old Coliseum on 181st Street, which has apparently closed its doors. Here’s hoping this is just temporary and it is reborn soon, because even though it was a shithole, it was also the oldest-running movie theatre in NYC and should be preserved!

________________________________

MISCELLANEOUS

Oddly, double-features were down this year. I saw 20 of them in 2010, and only 13 this year (plus two triple-features). What that means is that I saw multiple movies on 15 different days... and I saw a single movie on 123 different days... so altogether, I went to the movies on 138 of the 365 days in the year. Wild. Anyway, here is the list of double-features. Most were formed out of pure convenience -- but some funny combinations resulted nonetheless:

ANNIE HALL and MANHATTAN (Saw these at the Tribeca Grand Hotel. Swanky.)
OSCAR-NOMINATED ANIMATED SHORTS and OSCAR-NOMINATED LIVE ACTION SHORTS (My favorite movie tradition of the year!)
BATTLE: LOS ANGELES and HAPPYTHANKYOUMOREPLEASE
THE DOUBLE HOUR and SCREAM 4
POM WONDERFUL PRESENTS: THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER SOLD and TROLLHUNTER
THOR and THE PEOPLE vs. GEORGE LUCAS
PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES and MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
THE TRIP and BAD TEACHER
A BETTER LIFE and HORRIBLE BOSSES
ONE DAY and FINAL DESTINATION 5
DRIVE and RESTLESS
MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE - GHOST PROTOCOL and SHERLOCK HOLMES: A GAME OF SHADOWS (Longest double-feature title combo ever!)
THE IRON LADY and EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE

And the triple-features:

THE IDES OF MARCH and MACHINE GUN PREACHER and THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE: FULL SEQUENCE (Note: These three were collectively known as “The Cinematic Centipede,” the review of which can be found HERE.)
PUSS IN BOOTS and GHOSTBUSTERS and TOWER HEIST (Note: this was my first-ever free triple-feature -- all three were free! I also had to schlep from the Upper West Side to the Upper East Side and back to Times Square to complete it. Whew!)

It’s also worth noting that out of 155 movies, I saw an astounding 127 of them by myself. I’m a loner, Dottie... a rebel. But it’s okay... I enjoy going to the movies by myself; it allows me to get truly lost in the experience. I’ve never understood why some people have such an aversion to it, or even think it’s pathetic; hell, if you’re with someone, it’s not like you’re sitting there talking to each other -- and if you are talking to each other, please do us all a favor and shoot yourselves in the face. But I digress, and I did have a few movie-going companions here and there. My oft-mentioned lovely girlfriend, Rachel, accompanied me 23 times, which was actually way down from 2010 when we saw 36 movies together (she was a busy bee). I was also joined on occasion by my friends Jill and Alex in NJ (we kept the Christmas Night Movie tradition alive for the 14th year in a row!) and Tara in NYC. Thanks, gang!

I would also be remiss if I didn’t give a special thanks to my Twitter friend, @LilEsBella, who put together this amazing homage on her own blog after I saw my 142nd movie, thus breaking my personal record, in early December. Thanks again, Lili -- I am still honored! :)

Lastly, here are a few superlatives honoring my movie-going experiences of the past year, off the top of my head... because, why not:

MOST AWE-INSPIRING EXPERIENCE: Definitely TRANSFORMERS 3 and M:I-4, both of which I saw in glorious 80' x 100' IMAX at Lincoln Square. My eyeballs may never be the same again.
MOST ENTERTAINING CROWD: The PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3 crowd at the Regal E-Walk was game for anything, and it was hilarious hearing the squeals of fright, not only when the scares occurred, but as the tension built. It wasn’t people being intentionally obnoxious or annoying -- it was a legit reaction to the film. And that is why these movies rule.
MOST ANNOYING NEIGHBOR: I usually try not to make a big deal if I'm sitting next to a talker, even though I am likely seething on the inside. But when I saw UNKNOWN at Lincoln Square, the two women next to me just... wouldn't.... stop. So I snapped at them and they finally shut up. Plus they actually apologized after the movie ended. Apology accepted -- just don't let it happen again!
MOST MAGICAL EXPERIENCE: Seeing HUGO at Loews New Brunswick, NJ, and MIDNIGHT IN PARIS at Lincoln Plaza both filled me with whimsy & joy and sit atop my Top 10 of 2011. But seeing THE LION KING on the big screen for the first time -- at the Ziegfeld, no less -- was pure, unadulterated Disney magic.
WEIRDEST PRE-SHOW MOMENT: When I saw THE SKIN I LIVE IN at the AMC Empire, I'm pretty sure there was a criminal mastermind sitting in front of me. At first he was cackling to himself and rubbing his hands together diabolically -- but then when his friend arrived, he instantly started acting & talking totally normal. Considering the film's subject matter, I was fairly alarmed.
BEST PRE- OR POST-MOVIE MEAL: The pizza place across the street from Lincoln Square (my fav in the city). Or my & Rachel’s awesome super-secret Thai place (sorry, it’s a secret)!
BEST MOVIE EVENT: Nope, not any of the big summer superhero movies. And sadly, I missed the midnight show of HP7.2 because I was sick. So for me, this award goes to the opening night midnight show of THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 -- a raucous, sold-out affair at the IFC Center, at which I received the greatest movie swag ever: An official Human Centipede staple remover!

Okay, that’s enough of this madness for one year. Unless of course anybody has any questions about my movie-going prowess! Or perhaps there are more superlatives you'd like to hear about? Ask and ye shall receive!

REVIEW: Pina 3D

2012-01-07T21:38:00.001-05:00

Just when we thought that the 3D trend was on the verge of completely jumping the shark, along come some master filmmakers to prove that, when used properly, it can not only be effective and cool-looking, but actually drive a picture and enhance both the narrative and visual experience. In THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN, Spielberg clearly had a blast exploring some new techniques and his enthusiasm shows. Scorcese’s HUGO (my #1 movie of 2011) is the first instance in which 3D is actually vital to the intended viewing experience. I didn’t see Herzog’s CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS in theatres, but I hear that the 3D was exceptional and well-suited to the material. And now there’s PINA, Wim Wenders’ tribute to famed German choreographer Pina Bausch, which takes the technology to new heights, infusing the film with a level of visual depth and immersion that we’ve never seen before.

As a documentary, the film doesn’t delve too deeply into Bausch’s life; it is more of a showcase for her work and a loving tribute from Wenders and the many dancers that have worked with her over the years. Each troupe member gets a private moment of reflection, accompanied by a close-up of his or her face against a dark backdrop, as they share a memory, quote or anecdote about Bausch. These moments are interspersed among dance routines that visually expand what one would see in a performance, while still retaining an intimate, almost visceral feel, complete with the sounds of dancers moving and breathing.

I was not familiar with Pina Bausch before seeing this movie, nor am I the least bit knowledgeable about the intricacies of contemporary dance -- but her themes of loneliness, sex and interpersonal relationships are universal. The dance routines are vibrant and surreal (hell, at times, off-the-wall bizarre), filled with humor, intensity and raw human emotion. The way the dancers’ bodies move, combined with the way they utilize space and depth of field, is such that filming in 3D must have been a no-brainer. The third dimension allows us to watch the routines with the same perspective as if we were watching them on stage. It is an astonishing visual experience and it’s hard to imagine enjoying the film in 2D in quite the same way.

It’s unlikely that having watched and enjoyed PINA will suddenly turn me into a die-hard fan of dance (though I did come home and immediately download the soundtrack, which contains some damn catchy stuff). But it is nevertheless a visually-stimulating, touching tribute to a talented and influential woman, and one of the few truly must-see 3D films that have been released so far.

Ben’s Top 10 Movies of 2011

2012-01-05T23:25:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year, my friends! The year 2011 is in the books and while it was an excellent year in many respects (awesome vacations to New Orleans and Florida, lots of bonding time with my two-year-old niece, plus we got a new kitten!), to say that it was an odd year for movies would be an understatement. It was the kind of year in which the cinematic crop looks great on paper, but in practice left much to be desired. We saw a lot of great performances that were wasted in otherwise-mediocre films. We saw a larger-than-usual influx of excellent indie/low-key films, while, for the most part, the big-budget Hollywood spectacles fizzled. 3D technology, for all its faults, seems to be here to stay, especially now that some big-name filmmakers may have actually started to figure out what to do with it. We saw triumphant returns (hail the Muppets!) and death knells (RIP, funny Sandler). Indeed, as a whole, 2011 was one of the least-memorable years in some time. Yet somehow, I still parked my ass in a movie theatre an astonishing 155 times, obliterating the personal record that I set just last year. That, my friends, is a LOT of movies. Maybe TOO many -- there were plenty of titles that I’d forgotten about when looking back over my list. The crème de la crème, however, is a somewhat bizarre, art house-centric mix of bleakness and hope. Let’s take a look, shall we?

10. A SEPARATION -- I had a difficult time deciding what to put in this spot (I’ll discuss the near-misses in a bit), but in the end, for the second straight year, the last film I saw, a few hours before the ball dropped, claimed the spot at the eleventh hour. A seemingly-unremarkable situation involving a failing marriage practically becomes a gripping thriller as events snowball into something completely different. It’s a powerful, impeccably-acted and expertly-crafted Iranian family drama / murder mystery / socio-religious commentary that will keep you on the edge of your seat, teach you a few things AND make your head spin for days afterward. If this isn’t the frontrunner for Best Foreign Film, then I really need to see more foreign films -- actually, I need to do that anyway. (Fun fact: This is the first foreign film to make my Top 10 since PAN’S LABYRINTH claimed the top spot in 2006.)

9. THE ARTIST -- A black-and-white silent film that is, in turn, a loving tribute to the silent era. Not only is it hugely enjoyable, uplifting, superbly acted, beautifully-shot and featuring a wonderful musical score, but it actually inspired me to go on a silent film-watching spree, which was a genre I had never really explored. Oscar nominations haven’t even been announced yet, but I’m surprised that we’re already seeing some backlash against this movie, seemingly from a bunch of jaded Debbie Downers. Listen, I love a good, dark, soul-sucking movie-watching experience as much as the next guy (as you will soon see), but sometimes I just want to be filled with joy and wonder. THE ARTIST fits that bill nicely.

8. THE TRIP -- The funniest movie of the year follows Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon as they travel around England, eating food, bickering and trying to outdo each other with their celebrity impressions and other funny accents. But Coogan’s battles with his own ego and burgeoning mid-life crisis, paired with a distinct commentary on the dynamic of male friendships, make it one of the most stealthily poignant films of the year, too. And on top of all that, it’s easily the most quotable. Since I saw the movie in June, I haven’t stopped reciting the bit where they go back and forth spoofing the costume drama inspirational speech: “Gentlemen, to bed! For we leave at 9:30...ish.” Be sure to rent the DVD, which contains nearly 100 minutes of additional/extended footage, which are just as watchable and hilarious as the finished movie.

7. BEGINNERS -- I’m really glad to see this movie getting some props during awards season, because it is so deserving. Ewan McGregor is at his best as Oliver, a lost soul who has never really had a meaningful relationship. But that sad, lonely life is thrown for a loop when he hits it off with a woman named Anna (Melanie Laurent, absolutely luminous). This story is contrasted with Oliver’s memories of his recently-deceased father (Christopher Plummer in an Oscar-worthy performance), who came out of the closet at the age of 75 and rediscovered the will to live. A funny, poignant, multi-generational story of life, love, family and identity that wears its heart on its sleeve and features the kind of whimsy, depth, sincerity and underlying optimism that gets me every time. (Best performance by a Jack Russell Terrier in a movie this year, too -- Arthur rules!)

6. MELANCHOLIA -- Lars von Trier gives us the most bizarre disaster flick ever, also a metaphor for the destructive power of depression. Justine (Kirsten Dunst) is not happy... and her troubled mindset is paralleled by the troubling appearance of a rogue planet in Earth’s orbit. While at first the phenomenon is captivating, it slowly becomes clear that the end of the world is at hand. At this point, Justine begins to take control of her sanity while others unravel around her. The film features outstanding performances from an eclectic cast including Charlotte Gainsbourg, Keifer Sutherland, Alexander Skarsgård and the great Charlotte Rampling -- but really, it belongs to Dunst, who has risen to new heights with by far the best performance of her career. With its beautiful, dreamlike cinematography and an ending that will knock the wind out of you, this is one of the year’s most vivid and affecting films.

5. TAKE SHELTER -- Michael Shannon gives arguably the best overall performance of the year in this startling film that is part psycho-thriller, part metaphor for the mindset of America in this age of economic uncertainty. Shannon plays Curtis, a family man who starts having weird nightmares and ominous hallucinations and can’t quite figure out if he’s having a stress-induced mental breakdown or experiencing legit, prophetic, apocalyptic visions. In the end he decides that the only thing that makes sense is to build a bomb shelter in his yard to save his family from whatever storm may or may not be coming. Masterfully crafted by writer/director Jeff Nichols, the film begins with a nightmare, maintains an ethereal feel as tensions mount and Curtis’ sanity frays, and culminates with another wallop of an ending that will make your head spin.

4. DRIVE -- With its '80s noir vibe, pulsing soundtrack, fantastic cast, slow-burning plot punctuated by moments of incredible violence and intense car chases, this is the flat-out coolest movie of the year. Ryan Gosling, in turn, gives the year's flat-out coolest performance, as he infuses his enigmatic Driver (a movie stuntman who moonlights as a wheelman for armed heists) with a mixture of McQueen, Dean, Eastwood and Brando with electric results. He received Golden Globe nods for his more-accessible roles in THE IDES OF MARCH and CRAZY STUPID LOVE, but this is the one that could define his career. There was a ton of hyperbole swirling around this movie up to and following its release, but it is a rare case where it actually lives up to the hype. An intense cinematic experience from intriguing director Nicolas Winding Refn.

3. MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE -- In a year chock full of films that have messed with my mind (two of which we’ve already discussed), here we have the most unsettling of them all. Elizabeth Olsen plays Martha, a girl who tries to regain some semblance of a normal life after escaping from a cult where she spent two years being brainwashed by its charming leader. But her psyche has been so deeply damaged that she suffers from paranoid delusions that blur the line between nightmare and reality in her mind. The film exists in a shroud of tension and unfolds like a dream, slowly peeling back layers of Martha’s experiences, culminating in yet another astonishing ending that feels like a kick to the gut. Olsen -- yes, Mary Kate & Ashley’s younger sister -- gives what may be the year’s most nuanced, vulnerable and, frankly, all-around best female performance. An absolutely mesmerizing film (and pretty awesome poster that I kind of want to hang on my wall).

2. MIDNIGHT IN PARIS -- Just when you thought that this top 10 would never recover from the dark turn it took a few spots ago, here comes Woody Allen to lighten the mood. Owen Wilson (perfectly cast in the “Woody Allen” role) plays Gil, a struggling writer who visits Paris with his fiancée and can’t help but get swept up in his preconceived notions about the city’s romance and beauty. One night, while out for a walk, the clock strikes midnight and he finds himself magically transported to the 1920s, hobnobbing in French cafés and parties with such luminaries as Hemingway, Fitzgerald and Picasso and experiencing his own creative and emotional rebirth. The motley crew of literary and artistic figures are hilarious and impeccably cast (Adrien Brody as Dali... genius!). It’s a story of pure whimsy and fantasy and I loved every minute of it. And I could also relate to Gil’s mindset: Five years ago, I went to Paris with a girl as part of a whirlwind romance. I, too, got caught up in the city’s splendor and at times felt frustrated when the reality of my situation didn’t quite match up with the fantasy in my head. So, on top of everything else, thank you, Woody, for the catharsis!

...and finally....

1. HUGO -- When I heard that Martin Scorcese was making a 3D kids’ film, I figured it would be interesting, because it’s Scorcese and his films always are. But I had no idea it would be quite THIS good. It is, all at once, an epic fantasy adventure, an intimate ode to family & friendship, a postcard of old Paris, a love letter to cinema, a crash course in the history of motion pictures, a propaganda piece about the importance of film preservation AND a game-changer in the advancement of 3D technology. It works perfectly on every one of those levels and should affect different people in different ways, depending upon which aspects they latch onto. For me, it had several effects. I loved the friendship (budding romance?) between Hugo and Isabelle, which was heartwarming and real. I loved the visuals and the use of 3D -- first time the technology has ever really been NECESSARY to achieve the full intended experience. I loved the history lesson, which particularly appealed to me because I had literally just gotten into watching old silent films on Netflix. So when I saw a clip from Buster Keaton’s THE GENERAL during HUGO, I had a nice geek-out moment, as if all my cinematic stars were suddenly aligned. For me, Scorcese’s ode to movies and the people who love them was a definitive case of the elusive “cinematic thunderbolt” -- a rapturous movie-watching experience and unquestionably my #1 movie of 2011.

________________________________

Other Noteworthy Titles (in no particular order):

The Muppets. Shame. Pariah. Trollhunter. Captain America: First Avenger. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. Higher Ground. The Skin I Live In. The Descendants. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. Source Code. Moneyball. Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol. A Dangerous Method. Attack the Block. The Double Hour. The Woman. X-Men: First Class. Rango. Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Contagion. The Swell Season. The Adjustment Bureau. Transformers: Dark of the Moon. Sucker Punch. Hanna. Win Win. The Adventures of Tintin. War Horse. The Hangover: Part II. Our Idiot Brother. Paranormal Activity 3. 50/50. Cedar Rapids. Beautiful Boy. Real Steel. We Bought a Zoo. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. The Help. My Week With Marilyn.

________________________________

And now... The Ten WORST Films of 2011:

10. MEET MONICA VELOUR -- Kim Cattrall plays an aging, downtrodden ‘80s porn icon who befriends a young fan. My guess is that Cattrall was trying to shed her glamorous SEX AND THE CITY persona, but just ends up embarrassing herself. And us.
9. SEASON OF THE WITCH -- Nicolas Cage and Ron Perlman as knights of the Crusades who battle a witch that may be the source of the black plague. The movie should have gone crazier to achieve so-bad-it’s-good status; as it stands, it’s just plain bad.
8. THE DILEMMA -- Vince Vaughn thinks that best friend Kevin James’ wife is cheating and lameness ensue. The statute of limitations on Vaughn milking his SWINGERS persona is nearly up. And James is just useless.
7. LARRY CROWNE -- No idea what the hell happened here, but this collaboration of Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts is a gargantuan trainwreck. They tried to make a feel-good story about the current state of society and ended up with arguably the worst film of Hanks’ career.
6. DREAM HOUSE -- You’d think that a haunted house story directed by Jim Sheridan and starring Daniel Craig, Naomi Watts and Rachel Weisz would be great. And it might have been -- but production problems and studio re-cuts thwarted that plan and left a gigantic turd floating in the cinematic toilet.
5. KILLER ELITE -- It’s been a while since Robert DeNiro was the best part of a movie; unfortunately it’s this awful, convoluted mess of an action film starring Jason Statham and Clive Owen, both of whose shticks are now officially boring.
4. JACK & JILL -- It’s been a while since Al Pacino was the best part of a movie; unfortunately it’s this awful Adam Sandler dreck. Remember when you saw the trailer and thought, “Holy shit, this looks terrible.” Well, it is exactly as terrible as it looked. I’d say this was the final nail in Sandler’s coffin, but God help us, I’m sure Awesom-O will keep churning out ideas (South Park fans know what I'm talkin' about).
3. APOLLO 18 -- A prime example of a cool concept -- the explanation as to why we never sent man back to the Moon after the last official mission in 1972 -- ruined by awful execution. The result is poorly written, not at all scary and quite possibly the worst found-footage flick to date.
2. HALL PASS -- This dismal schlock is so wretchedly bad that it makes me rethink whether or not the Farrelly Brothers have EVER been good. It brings dick and poop jokes to new lows and is an embarrassment to all involved. A shameful waste of some good talent and Nicky Whelan’s boobs.
1. JUST GO WITH IT -- As bad as JACK & JILL was, it wasn’t the worst Adam Sandler movie of the year. This one, starring Sandler and Jennifer Aniston, is even more profoundly unfunny and a sure sign of Sandler’s demise. It is just painful to watch. Not even Brooklyn Decker’s ample, glistening bikini cleavage can save it. When you take into account the shitty attempt at a laid-back, ad-libbed vibe, lack of laughs AND the extent to which it made me (a former Sandler worshipper) die inside, this is an easy choice for the absolute worst movie of 2011.

________________________________

And now... Some Random Movie Thoughts!

Some Titles That Just Missed the Top 10: I can be very wishy-washy when compiling these lists and I often write several different titles in the #10 slot before changing my mind. THE MUPPETS is possibly the single most enjoyable movie-watching experience of the year, but it’s still not as good as the original Muppet movies, so I didn’t think it would be appropriate. SHAME is a devastating film but it has some climactic flaws (pun intended). I briefly flirted with the idea of including CAPTAIN AMERICA (the best superhero film of the year) or MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 4 (the best pure action film), but nah. I also loved TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY and THE DESCENDANTS, but I loved other movies more. And a tip of the hat to the Norwegian faux-documentary TROLLHUNTER, which hung around the Top 10 until, like, mid-November before getting bumped. Awesome movie, though!

Biggest Guilty Pleasure: As was the case with the first two films, I unabashedly love the glorious spectacle that is TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON. I don’t care what anybody says -- Transformers are awesome and these movies are awesome and if they keep making ‘em, I’ll keep seeing ‘em in glorious IMAX. Speaking of which, can you guess which filmmakers’ work I’ve seen in that large-screen format more than any other? Nope, you’re all wrong -- the answer is Zack Snyder! In the past, I've seen 300 and WATCHMEN in their 80’ x 100’ glory, and this year, I saw SUCKER PUNCH, which I quite enjoyed and have re-watched it on Blu-Ray and will probably continue to do so. It has its flaws, but it is a rollicking visual feast and not nearly as awful as most people & critics seem to believe.

Pleasant Surprises: When I first saw the trailer for REAL STEEL, I seriously thought we were getting “Rock’em, Sock’em Robots: The Movie” and the end of the world was nigh. But it turned out to be more of a cross between ROCKY and THE IRON GIANT -- stunningly entertaining and filled with heart. Likewise, WARRIOR rose above its conventional story (and stupid sport) with great performances and intense fight scenes. FAST FIVE revitalized one of the world’s dumbest franchises by merging all its various characters and storylines and transforming it into sort of a poor man’s OCEAN’S 11. I also never expected RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES to be as good as it turned out to be, thanks in no small part to motion-capture master Andy Serkis.

Disappointments: After seeing the trailer for LIKE CRAZY, I fully expected it to be this year’s great heartbreaking indie romance, a la ONCE, (500) DAYS OF SUMMER and BLUE VALENTINE... but it did not turn out that way. COWBOYS & ALIENS was not a BAD movie, necessarily... just completely unmemorable. After the greatness of IRON MAN, I expected more from Jon Favreau (not to mention a cast including Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford). PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN 4 is not quite the failure it’s been made out to be by some, but it’s certainly a step down from the first three. Hard to believe that CARNAGE, with its dream cast, wasn’t more memorable. But the biggest disappointment of all, in terms of sheer expectation, may be be HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2. I fully expected it to be my #1 movie of the year, and it didn’t even make the Top 10 thanks to some serious flaws that I just couldn’t overlook. Frustrating. But that being said....

Mischief Managed: I mean, it’s not that the eighth and final Potter film is bad by any means. It is epic and action-packed and hugely emotional and ultimately a satisfying conclusion to one of the all-time great cinematic achievements. But... it kills me that they botched the final act so badly. [Beware of spoilers over the next few sentences.] Not just the fact that they dropped the ball by not showing more of the emotionally-charged aspects of the Battle of Hogwarts, but the fact that Voldemort’s on-screen death completely undermines J.K. Rowling’s message that in the end, he was only human. David Yates & Co. showed tremendous skill when it came to thinking outside the box in films 5 thru 7.1 -- but in the end, they should’ve gone by the book. [End spoilers.] For those reasons, I couldn’t in good conscience give HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2 a spot in the Top 10 -- but I still love it and the rest of the series very much. Now that it’s over, it officially means that all of my favorite franchises are complete. No more Star Wars... no more Lord of the Rings (The Hobbit doesn’t count)... no more Potter. Sure, I will still get excited about movies in the future, but not with the same fervor that I felt for these series. It’s truly the end of an era. (At least until something really happens with Stephen King’s THE DARK TOWER.…)

Most Underrated: I’m going to stick with SUCKER PUNCH here, because I really think that the movie has been unjustly panned and is misunderstood. Only 23% on RottenTomatoes, plus widespread derision in the Twitterverse -- it’s a damn shame. It’s not perfect and has plot holes and whatever. But it also contains an interesting conglomeration of ideas -- admittedly, some better-realized than others -- and on a pure entertainment level, it’s visually spectacular and fun and that’s good enough for me. (Or maybe my crush on Emily Browning is deeper than I even realize). Meanwhile, the lovely Vera Farmiga wrote, directed & starred in a movie called HIGHER GROUND -- a wonderfully-acted and refreshingly non-judgmental take on organized religion (and this is coming from a borderline atheist) that I really would have loved to see get more widespread praise. Haven’t seen nearly enough love for two excellent slices of sci-fi, THE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU and SOURCE CODE (especially since the latter was directed by one of the genre’s most intriguing minds, Duncan Jones). I thought there was a certain level of absurd genius in having the exact same thing happen to the Wolf Pack in THE HANGOVER PART II. I also enjoyed Joe Wright’s HANNA, a stylized action fairy tale in which Cate Blanchett passes the torch to her young doppelgänger, Saoirse Ronan. Did people like CONTAGION? It sort of came & went, but I liked it. Lastly, WAR HORSE, EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE and WE BOUGHT A ZOO all tugged on all the right heartstrings -- there’s no shame in admitting that, so no need to bash them!

Most Overrated: I thought THE TREE OF LIFE was beautiful and well-crafted, as all Terrence Malick films are... but I have to wonder if the only reason it is making so many best-of lists is because people think it makes them sound smarter or something. Likewise, everyone who is touting BRIDESMAIDS as the funniest thing since sliced bread... come on. It is funny, yes, and Kristen Wiig rules and it's great to see these funny ladies get some much-deserved kudos. But realistically speaking, it’s nowhere near the level of THE HANGOVER, THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN or other such films... and is certainly not Oscar-worthy, for God’s sake! Meanwhile, Jason Reitman’s last two films (JUNO and UP IN THE AIR) both finished in my Top 5, but I didn’t love YOUNG ADULT, which seems to be a minority position. And it seems like lots of people enjoyed SUPER 8, but all it accomplished was make me want to have an old-school Spielberg marathon as soon as possible.

Animation Stagnation: Not a great year for the medium, exemplified by the fact that we saw Pixar’s first perceived “flop.” I actually kind of liked CARS 2 better than the first one -- but if I were to rank all the Pixar films, they would both sit at the very bottom. PUSS IN BOOTS and KUNG FU PANDA 2 were pretty to look at but ultimately unmemorable. I didn’t even bother with HAPPY FEET 2, which is significant since the first one actually made my Top 10 of 2005. I also skipped THE SMURFS, MARS NEEDS MOMS and ARTHUR CHRISTMAS (though I understand the latter isn’t so bad). But the year wasn’t a total loss: RANGO was a hilarious homage to spaghetti westerns, movie geekdom and Hunter S. Thompson, while THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN was a rollicking motion-capture adventure that allowed Spielberg to tap back into his RAIDERS roots.

Horror Movie Horror Show: We saw a variety of horror offerings this year. You’ve got dumping-ground bullshit like THE RITE, THE ROOMMATE and INSIDIOUS -- all of which sucked. Then you’ve got big franchise sequels like SCREAM 4, FINAL DESTINATION 5 and PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3 -- all of which were quite entertaining. Then there were a few remakes, like STRAW DOGS, THE THING and DON’T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK -- all of which were mixed bags. Then you’ve got genre-bending art house fare, like TAKE SHELTER, MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE and THE SKIN I LIVE IN -- all of which were amazing. Lucky McKee & Jack Ketchum's THE WOMAN was quite the eye-opener. And last but not least, there was THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE: FULL SEQUENCE. Ugh. Yet I can’t wait to see what that madman Tom Six has in store for us next.

Foreign Films & Docs: I actually saw a few of these this year! Very slowly but surely, my ass is gaining some culture. I obviously loved A SEPARATION. THE DOUBLE HOUR was a twisty-turny Italian mystery/thriller that will make your head spin (in a good way). I very much enjoyed THE SKIN I LIVE IN, Almodóvar’s answer to THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE (think about it). And my 100th movie of the year was an intriguing French film starring Ludivine Sagnier and Kristen Scott Thomas called LOVE CRIME. As for docs... Morgan Spurlock’s POM WONDERFUL PRESENTS: THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER SOLD was pretty fun, and THE PEOPLE vs. GEORGE LUCAS drummed up all sorts of anti-Lucas rage that I thought I’d put behind me. THE SWELL SEASON was the sequel to ONCE that we’ve always wanted. And for what feels like the umpteenth year in a row, I honored Earth Day with the latest DisneyNature film, AFRICAN CATS. Rawr.

Superhero Orgy: We saw a glut of these kinds of films as Marvel gears up for THE AVENGERS later in 2012. The best of the bunch was CAPTAIN AMERICA: FIRST AVENGER, an awesome movie that made me more excited for the superhero supergroup than any of the other related films since IRON MAN. X-MEN: FIRST CLASS was also exceptional -- probably the best X-Men film so far. On the other side of the coin, there were two epic failures, THOR and GREEN LANTERN, both of which fell victim to their own vast, complicated backstories that make no sense if you aren’t already seasoned in the comics. Outside of the Marvel universe, I mildly enjoyed THE GREEN HORNET and hated PRIEST, if that even counts. Actually, the best superhero film of them all may have been the aforementioned story of a burly Norwegian dude who hunts trolls in the dead of the night -- TROLLHUNTER kicks ass!

Sci-Fi Shenanigans: I’ve already mentioned THE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU and SOURCE CODE, both of which were smart and well-crafted and I liked them a lot. ATTACK THE BLOCK was a brilliant film and veritable geek’s paradise about a London street gang that must defend their ‘hood from an alien invasion. IN TIME was flawed but timely with its rich vs. poor morals -- they should have set up an inflatable screen and shown it in Zuccotti Park to fire the Occupiers. LIMITLESS had a cool concept but, ironically, didn’t quite take it far enough. BATTLE: LOS ANGELES tried to be this generation’s INDEPENDENCE DAY, while SUPER 8 tried to capitalize on the past generation’s nostalgia -- both failed. And then there was PAUL, an alien-encounter flick made by sci-fi geeks, for sci-fi geeks, starring Simon Pegg & Nick Frost -- need I say more?

Raunchy Comedies Galore: Holy shit, there were a lot of raunchy comedies this year. Couldn't possibly mention them all here, but briefly: BRIDESMAIDS, while not perfect, did indeed prove that ladies can bring the raunch. CEDAR RAPIDS flew under the radar but was very funny. A GOOD OLD FASHIONED ORGY hit the spot for thirtysomethings caught in the throes of the aging process (like yours truly). 30 MINUTES OR LESS was well-cast and fun in the moment. BAD TEACHER served as a reminder that Cameron Diaz is still sexy. A VERY HAROLD & KUMAR 3D CHRISTMAS helped put me in the holiday spirit. HORRIBLE BOSSES was not horrible but not particularly good, either. YOUR HIGHNESS was the year’s best filthy, violent, medieval fantasy epic stoner sex comedy. WHAT’S YOUR NUMBER? made me yearn for the day that Anna Farris finally gets to show her stuff in a project worthy of her comedic talents. THE SITTER was an unfortunate swan song for Fat Jonah Hill. FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS had the edge over NO STRINGS ATTACHED in the battle of the “fuck buddy” flicks because JT and Mila are better than Ashton and Natalie -- but both movies sucked. And lastly, I kind of loved OUR IDIOT BROTHER, a funny & heartfelt comedy starring my boy Paul Rudd in one of his most lovable roles ever, which is saying something.

Twee Romances: I like these kinds of movies because I'm an old softie, but this was a bad year for the genre (unless you count MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, but I think Woody Allen transcends such generalizations). The aforementioned LIKE CRAZY could have been great but let me down because I just didn’t believe in the power of its love story. The gimmicky ONE DAY managed to shock me with a plot twist that I totally didn’t see coming. Gus van Sant’s RESTLESS was morbid & sweet but perhaps too quirky for its own good, while THE ART OF GETTING BY had its moments but also rips off everything from Woody Allen to J.D. Salinger to BILLY MADISON. Josh Radnor’s HAPPYTHANKYOUMOREPLEASE felt like exactly the kind of douchey movie that Ted Mosby would make to impress a girl. And then there’s STUCK BETWEEN STATIONS, which is noteworthy for being the first movie screening I saw with a press pass, handed to me by the director (on the night Osama bin Laden was killed, no less); unfortunately, it turned out to be yet another mediocre BEFORE SUNRISE clone.

We Love the ‘80s: The ‘80s just won’t go away! This year we saw remakes of FOOTLOOSE, FRIGHT NIGHT and ARTHUR -- none of which were necessary but the first two of which ended up being surprisingly effective (the latter, not so much). TAKE ME HOME TONIGHT was not very good but it did mostly succeed in capturing the look and feel of a typical '80s sex/party/coming-of-age comedy. SUPER 8 was J.J. Abrams’ homage to vintage ‘80s Spielberg, which, as I’ve mentioned, just makes you want to watch those movies instead. THE LINCOLN LAWYER and TEXAS KILLING FIELDS both had the feel of ‘80s genre pieces (respectively, the old-fashioned courtroom drama and the gritty Michael Mann mystery). And of course, DRIVE invokes the decade with its COCKTAIL-style title font and retro soundtrack.

Rising Stars – Fassender vs. Chastain: It was a breakout year for both of these great actors. Fassbender kicked ass as young Magneto in X-MEN: FIRST CLASS, a well-endowed sex addict in SHAME, a smoldering love interest in JANE EYRE and one of the fathers of psychoanalysis in DANGEROUS METHOD. Chastain, meanwhile, was even more ubiquitous, showing up as an outcast socialite in THE HELP, a concerned wife in TAKE SHELTER, a Nazi-hunting Mossad agent in THE DEBT, another concerned wife in THE TREE OF LIFE and a detective in TEXAS KILLING FIELDS (plus she was in movies called WILDE SALOME and CORIOLANUS, which I did not see). Whew! I think the edge goes to Fassbender this year, but I, for one, will be watching both of their careers with great interest.

Hummable Scores (or the Lack Thereof): Whereas last year we had tons of amazing scores that I still listen to all the time (especially INCEPTION and TRON: LEGACY), this year was kind of lacking in that department. In fact, if it wasn’t for Alexandre Desplat, it’d be downright dreadful -- he scored SIX films (look ‘em up), including really good stuff for HARRY POTTER 7.2 and EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE. DRIVE had that pulsing, retro soundtrack that I’ve already mentioned. Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross once again combined their talents for THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO and it was cool. I liked the Chemical Brothers’ score that drove the underrated HANNA forward. THE ARTIST had a brilliant score that, of course, is as much a part of the film as the actors themselves. And then there was a double-dose of the man, John Williams: His scores for THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN and WAR HORSE will not rank among his all-time best, but it’s always a pleasure to hear his unmistakable sound.

3-D Overload: Like it or not, it looks like 3D technology is here to stay, though the results are still mixed and it’s important to do your homework to determine when to pay the extra money. Of course, I’ve already discussed Scorcese’s brilliant HUGO. I’d also recommend seeing Spielberg’s TINTIN in 3D -- it’s not a requirement but it looks fantastic. On the other side of the coin, 3D added very little to HARRY POTTER 7.2 -- I saw it both ways and preferred the 2D version. I stuck with 2D for PIRATES 4, THOR, GREEN LANTERN and THE GREEN HORNET and do not regret those decisions. Gimmicky films fared well: The spelunking adventure, SANCTUM, used James Cameron’s AVATAR cameras to make a bad movie look cool. HAROLD & KUMAR made great advances in the area of 3D stoner effects. DRIVE ANGRY brought 3D back to the grindhouse. As usual, 3D worked extremely well for animated films: PUSS IN BOOTS, KUNG FU PANDA 2, CARS 2 and RANGO all featured some nice visuals. And THE LION KING set the stage for what will soon be a huge influx of 3D re-releases of classic films -- yay.

Believe It Or Not, There’s Some Stuff I DIDN’T See: Quite a few titles, actually, some of which may come as a surprise (and others as a relief). One big one was WINNIE THE POOH -- the first major Disney release I didn’t see on the big screen in God knows how long. I resisted my morbid curiosity and avoided NEW YEAR’S EVE. I had hoped to score an advance screening pass for TWILIGHT: BREAKING DAWN -- what can I say, I wanna know what happens -- but I didn’t, and no way was I gonna pay for that crap. I actually skipped FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS in theatres (watched it on Blu-Ray a few days ago). Didn’t bother with THE THREE MUSKETEERS despite the debut of THE PHANTOM MENACE 3D trailer before it (times have changed since 1998). Kind of surprising that I skipped THE RUM DIARY -- perhaps, deep down, I didn’t want to sully my existing memories of Depp as Hunter S. Thompson. Somehow, out of 155 trips to the movies, I failed to see not one but TWO Werner Herzog documentaries, CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS and INTO THE ABYSS -- yes, I am ashamed of this. Really sorry I missed CERTIFIED COPY, about which I have heard great things (it is now on Netflix, so I’ll rectify that situation shortly). But my biggest regret was missing WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN during its very brief run at the Angelika in NYC. It will be back in theatres next weekend, but obviously too late to be considered for my Top 10. Would it have made a difference? We'll never know.

Big-Screen Classics: On top everything else, I even managed to see some classic films in the way they were meant to be seen. I caught ANNIE HALL and MANHATTAN as a free double-feature at the Tribeca Grand Hotel screening room. I would have liked to see the theatrical release of all three LORD OF THE RINGS Extended Editions, but due to vacations and stuff, I had to settle for THE RETURN OF THE KING and it was four-plus hours of supreme awesomeness. THE LION KING was majestic as ever on the big screen (the 3D was okay); looking forward to more classic Disney re-releases. Lastly, I saw GHOSTBUSTERS at the Sony Wonder Technology Lab screening room -- a pretty cool place --you can find their weekly FREE screening schedule HERE.

Aaaaaaaaaand there you have it. Thoughts? Questions? Criticisms? Death threats? What are YOUR picks for the best and worst movies of 2011? Let’s discuss!

December Movie Denouement, Part 2

2011-12-31T21:25:00.000-05:00

The rest of the December crop, and thus, the last batch of movies I saw in 2011. Read quick, because it’s almost time to pop the bubbly!

CARNAGE -- Two couples (Kate Winslet & Christoph Waltz and Jodie Foster & John C. Reilly) meet to discuss a confrontation that occurred between their kids. The discussion is begrudgingly civil at first, but gradually becomes more and more heated, finally escalating into all-out verbal warfare from which they cannot seem to escape. The result is often both funny and cringe-inducing as deep-seeded personal issues are revealed and exploited. Acting is obviously outstanding -- I mean, what could be better than watching these four great actors go at each other for an hour and a half? The material certainly fits right in with Roman Polanski’s usual themes of entrapment and the darker sides of humanity (if only he wasn’t such an asshole, so I could watch his films and not hate myself afterward). But I don’t know... I found it difficult to get completely invested because the whole thing is kind of silly. In reality, as soon as shit got nasty, any sane person would just get the hell out of there. If you’re a fan of the talent involved (and why wouldn’t you be?), then it’s a worthwhile curiosity -- but in the end it feels like a pointless exercise.

WE BOUGHT A ZOO -- This is the story of Benjamin Mee, a struggling single dad who packs up his two kids and moves to a new house to make a fresh start. The catch: They’ve actually bought a dilapidated zoo, which they now own and manage. With the help of a motley crew of zoo workers (led by a dressed-down but still-scorching hot Scarlett Johansson), the Mees attempt to rebuild the zoo as well as their lives. Contrived holiday-season sap? Oh yes. But everyone is so damn likeable that it works. Matt Damon plays Benjamin with wholesome earnestness and humor. His relationships with his kids are believable, as is his understated romance with Scarlett. (Incidentally, I’m going to need a video montage of every time Scarlett says the name “Benjamin,” for my own personal use. Get on that, Internet monkeys!) The budding friendship/romance between young Dylan Mee and a free-spirited zookeeper’s assistant is also very cute, though I think someone slipped something into Elle Fanning’s drink because she is perpetually, creepily smiley. Supporting cast, including such names as Thomas Haden Church and Carla Gallo, is eclectic and funny. At its core, it’s a movie about grand gestures, which is right up Cameron Crowe’s alley -- I particularly like (and have followed) Benjamin’s advice to Dylan that it only takes “twenty seconds of insane courage” to make something great happen. Not Crowe’s best film by any means, but effectively heartwarming in the moment.

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO -- I enjoyed the Swedish versions of these films and I’m not sure an English-language remake was absolutely necessary. But thanks to David Fincher’s direction and some excellent performances, this version works exceptionally well. The cool thing about Fincher is that all of his films look & feel like they exist within the same universe. So you have Detectives Mills & Somerset tracking the serial killer John Doe, while at the same time, the Zodiac killer is on the loose, Edward Norton is being suffocated by Meat Loaf’s bitch tits, and Mark Zuckerberg is sitting in his dorm room creating Facebook. Meanwhile, in Sweden, disgraced journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is recruited by reclusive millionaire Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) to solve the mystery of his missing niece, who disappeared without a trace decades earlier. A labyrinthine investigation ensues and Blomkvist enlists the help of a mysterious tattooed-and-pierced computer hacker named Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara in a star-making turn). Lisbeth also has her own problems -- namely, an asshole of a social worker who tries to control her life & finances (among other things). The film is intense, filled with menace and occasional extreme brutality, and driven by another relentless score by Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross. Craig infuses a bit more humor and steel-eyed confidence into Blomkvist, and Rooney Mara’s Lisbeth, while still bad-ass and awesome, has a fragility to her that Noomi Rapace’s interpretation did not. These subtle but key differences make for an experience that may not necessarily be better than the darker, grittier Swedish version, but works in its own right and allows it to co-exist as a separate vision. Should be interesting to see what happens with the rest of the trilogy.

ALBERT NOBBS -- A very sad, strange little film about a very sad, strange little man... or rather, a woman (Glenn Close) who dresses as a man in order to keep a job as a butler at a well-to-do hotel in 19th century Ireland. None of her employers or co-workers have any idea of this secret -- Albert does his (her) job well and blends into the background, keeping a nest egg hidden in a floorboard with the hope of someday escaping this life of suppression. One day, a burly painter by the name of Hubert (Janet McTeer) does some work at the hotel and discovers Albert’s secret when they are forced to become bedfellows. But turns out Hubert has a secret of his own -- he is a she, too! And he has embraced his situation, gotten married to a woman and lives an exuberant life that introduces Albert to a whole new world of possibility. Albert hopes this life may be achieved with the help of a young housemaid named Helen (Mia Wasikowska), who, unfortunately is smitten with a strapping loner (Aaron Johnston). It all sounds very intriguing, but the story plods along, only displaying rare bursts of excellence when Close and McTeer are onscreen together. Close is great but blends into the background perhaps TOO much; McTeer, however, breathes much-needed life into the proceedings and if an Oscar nod is destined to come from this film, I hope it goes to her.

PARIAH -- Alike (Adepero Oduye) is an African-American teenager living in Brooklyn. Lee, as she prefers to be known, likes girls -- a fact that she is slowly but surely coming to embrace. She dresses like a tomboy and sneaks off to a lesbian nightclub with her outspoken best friend, Laura (Pernell Walker), but she is shy and unsure how to proceed, sort of feeling her way through the process. Unfortunately, she has no help from her her parents, who have their suspicions about Lee’s lifestyle on top of their own marital troubles. Her mother, Audrey, tries desperately to force her to stay away from Laura and wear girly clothes, while her aloof father, Arthur, has convinced himself that there is no issue at all. When Audrey forces Lee to hang out with a co-worker’s daughter, it becomes a turning point that leads to new experiences, emotions and confrontations. If this sounds familiar, it’s because we have seen this kind of coming-of-age story before. But blistering performances (especially from Oduye and Walker), along with a potent script by Dee Rees (who also directed), help elevate it to something much more. A tremendously moving film, bursting with realism and heart, that should probably be required viewing for all in this day & age.

THE IRON LADY -- No actor or actress is taken more for granted than Meryl Streep. Think about it: She’s widely considered to be the greatest actress alive and has been nominated for SIXTEEN Oscars. Yet she hasn’t actually won since SOPHIE’S CHOICE in 1983. Since then, she easily could have walked home with gold every single time. When it comes to sheer acting talent, she is always head and shoulders above the competition. And yet, she never wins! My only guess is that the Academy must figure, “Eh, she’ll get it next year... let’s give someone else a shot.” Which brings us to this biopic of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Streep is, as always, at the top of her game, perfectly capturing Thatcher’s strength and tenacity, not to mention her voice and mannerisms. Unfortunately, the movie is simply not very good. Much like this year’s other big-name biopic, J. EDGAR, this one is too conventional and frustratingly shallow. I mean, say what you want about Thatcher’s ultra-conservative politics, but she WAS the first female leader in the western world -- yet the film never gives this fact proper gravitas. Instead, we get scenes of an elderly Thatcher doddering around, talking to her dead husband (Jim Broadbent) and reminiscing about her younger days. Story-wise, it’s a big yawn. Fortunately, the power of Streep makes the elderly scenes watchable (much better old-age makeup than the clown costumes in J. EDGAR, too) and the younger scenes fascinating. There’s no doubt that she will be nominated for her 17th Oscar -- but thanks to the shoddy material, she will also likely suffer her 15th defeat.

EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE -- I believe there are two types of people in this world: Those who will watch this movie and succumb to the raw emotion, or those who will scoff at it for being manipulative Oscar bait. If you’ve been paying attention to this blog over the past few years, you can probably guess that I fall into the former category. Yes, it’s about 9/11 and it stars Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock. Yes, it’s schmaltzy and sentimental and tugs on one’s heartstrings with reckless abandon. Yes, it may go a little too far with fantastical shots of Hanks falling to his doom from the burning World Trade Center. But damned if it isn’t extremely effective. It’s the story of Oskar Shell (Thomas Horn), a wildly precocious and inquisitive boy whose father is killed on what Oskar calls “The Worst Day.” A year after the tragedy, Oskar gets the nerve to dig through his father’s closet, where he accidentally stumbles upon a key in an envelope marked with the name “Black.” He decides that this key must unlock a hidden message from his father and becomes determined to find it. Thus, he embarks on an epic journey through the five boroughs -- one of coping, self-discovery and a greater understanding of the world around him. The film is filled with whimsy and taps into every emotion, especially for those of us who were in NYC and watched 9/11 happen with our own eyes (pretty much everyone at my screening was a blubbering mess by the end). I actually don’t think it is anywhere near good enough of a movie to compete for Oscar gold (except maybe for Best Score -- nice work from Alexandre Desplat), but as an experience, it is incredibly moving.

A SEPARATION -- The final movie I saw in 2011 was part family drama, part mystery, part socio-religious commentary on life in contemporary Iran. Expertly crafted by writer/director Asghar Farhadi, it begins with a court proceeding that shows the apparent crumbling marriage between Nader and his wife Simin. Simin wants to leave Iran for their daughter’s sake (and, considering the way women are still treated in Iran, her own, too), Termeh, but Nader refuses because he doesn’t want to leave his father who is suffering from Alzheimer’s. Things don’t go Simin’s way and she leaves them. Nader in turn hires a maid to help clean house and take care of his father, who is indeed in bad shape. From there, the film spirals off in a whole other direction and becomes a murder mystery of sorts that reveals the nature of Iranian culture and politics, the differences in class and religious beliefs and the fine line between truth and perception. As the mystery unfurls, it takes on a Hitchcockian feel in the sense that all of the clues are laid out -- you just need to pay attention and find them (which is easier said than done). Performances are outstanding, characters are complex and dialogue is multilayered -- you may find your sympathies changing as new information comes to light. An intense, intricate, riveting film that has gotten universal praise so far (100% on RottenTomatoes) -- if there’s a more worthy Best Foreign Film out there, I hope I get a chance to see it!

And on that note, after 155 trips to the movie theatre over the past twelve months, we can put 2011 in the books. My Top 10 and Bottom 10 lists, as well as all sorts of other year-end goodies, are coming soon, so stay tuned! Happy New Year to all -- and may the best of 2011 be the worst of 2012!

December Movie Denouement, Part 1

2011-12-30T21:04:00.000-05:00

Well, it’s been a long, strange trip but we’ve finally arrived at the final month of 2011. I’m not going to wax nostalgic just yet -- plenty of time (and bandwidth) for that in the days & weeks to come -- but suffice to say, it’s been an interesting, if not necessarily great, year for movies. December has been an excellent month, though, which is to be expected since we are now deep in the throes of Oscar season. There’s been some gratuitous Oscar bait, to be sure... but there’s been some legitimately good stuff, too. Let’s take a look:

TINKER, TAILOR, SOLIDER, SPY -- Sometimes you go to the movies so you can turn your mind off for a couple of hours, relax and enjoy the ride. This is not one of those films. It is an insanely complex, but fully absorbing mystery that contains layers and layers of plot and pretty much requires you to keep your eyes open, CLOCKWORK ORANGE-style, to avoid missing some vital detail. The quick summary: At the height of the Cold War, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), a disgraced British spy, is secretly brought back into action to help uncover what is feared to be a mole within the upper echelon of British intelligence. I have not (yet) read John Le Carré’s novel, but I understand that it is so densely-packed that it was difficult to adapt into a seven-hour BBC miniseries in the ‘70s -- so the fact that they’ve turned it into such a taut, compelling two-hour film is pretty remarkable. The material is skillfully directed by Tomas Alfredson, who has already proven to be a master of atmosphere with the excellent Swedish vampire flick, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN. The cast is absolutely stellar, including such luminaries as Colin Firth, Ciaran Hinds, Toby Jones, Tom Hardy and Benedict Cumberbatch. But above all, this could be the career-defining performance for Gary Oldman, who has long been one of our finest character actors. His George Smiley could go down as one of the all-time great movie spies. Hard to believe he has never even been nominated for an Oscar -- I believe his time has come.

SHAME -- On one hand, the latest collaboration of writer/director Steve McQueen and star Michael Fassbender is a sad portrait of a man with a life-consuming sex addiction. On another, it's as much an allegory for New York City excess as, say, AMERICAN PSYCHO. Only instead of a rich ‘80s yuppie murdering people in his spare time, we've got Brandon, a rich present-day yuppie, fucking anyone and getting his rocks off in any way he can. But when his wayward sister (Carey Mulligan) pays him an unexpected visit, he loses what little grip he has on his world and it begins to spiral out of control. The film is controversial for its NC-17-rated sex and nudity -- Fassbender and Mulligan both go the full monty and portray a troubled brother-sister relationship that is not given much backstory, but clearly contributes to both of their issues. The devil, of course, is in the details -- see Mulligan's haunting nightclub rendition of "New York, New York," which turns a song about possibility into a lamentation of hopelessness, literally reducing Brandon to tears. Things get a shade over-the-top in the final act, which is meant to display Brandon's collapse into complete degradation. It most certainly is that, though the climactic threesome seems a bit too slick (especially compared to his encounter in a seedy, red-lit back room). But this is one minor flaw in an otherwise devastating film. Love the abrupt, open-ended, INCEPTION-style ending, too. Does he or he doesn't he? As is the case with Chris Nolan's masterpiece, your interpretation may determine your outlook on life.

SLEEPING BEAUTY -- Zack Snyder's SUCKER PUNCH, released earlier this year, was a flawed-but-fun spectacle in which Australian cutie Emily Browning starred as Baby Doll, a captive in a women's prison who uses her sexuality to tap into her own fantasy world and gain control over her male oppressors. From a certain point of view, writer/director Julia Leigh’s debut film, SLEEPING BEAUTY is a bizarre companion piece. Browning plays Lucy, a college student with a blasé attitude towards sex and life in general, who struggles to make ends meet with odd jobs. When she takes a job as a scantily-clad waitress for a super-rich men's club, she finds that it is merely the first step to a much crazier career: She eventually gets paid to let these men have their way with her while she is completely sedated. But the catch is that the men are forbidden to have to sex with her -- and even if they were allowed, in most cases, they are so old that they probably couldn't -- so in a sense, even though she is unconscious, she still wields a curious power. The film floats along lackadaisically, perhaps to parallel Lucy's own boredom, but the scenes of her at work are shockingly frank, surreal and shot in long takes that serve to magnify those feelings. Driven by a fearless performance from Browning, who spends the majority of the film buck naked, this is imperfect but fascinating art house fare.

JACK & JILL -- There is a theory that Adam Sandler purposely made a terrible movie that is reminiscent of the one of the terrible movies that were parodied in Judd Apatow’s FUNNY PEOPLE, as sort of a high-concept meta-joke. I’d like to believe that, but I just don’t have that kind of faith in Sandler anymore. And that is a shame, because throughout the ‘90s, I worshipped the ground the man walked on. Since then... my God, has his decline been painful to watch and endure. In 2011, he finally hit rock bottom with not one but TWO god-awful movies: First, a monumental train-wreck called JUST GO WITH IT, and now this jaw-dropping wretch. Yes, Sandler plays both a guy named Jack and his annoying twin sister, Jill, and yes, it is exactly as bad as it sounds. This is a film with absolutely no redeeming value whatsoever, despite Al Pacino giving a bizarre, over-the-top performance that spoofs his many over-the-top performances over the years. In another movie, that might have actually been funny... but here, it’s just sad. JUST GO WITH IT at least had a few shots of Brooklyn Decker's glistening bikini cleavage; all JACK & JILL has is whatever morbid curiosity we old-school Sandler fans might feel. On the bright side, Sandler can’t possibly sink any lower -- or can he? I’m honestly afraid to find out.

THE SITTER -- Now that Jonah Hill has lost all sorts of weight and has gotten freakishly skinny, watching this movie is akin to watching John Candy’s last film or Chris Farley’s last film. Unfortunately for Hill, his Fat Funny Man swan song is just as bad as CANADIAN BACON and ALMOST HEROES. Hill reprises his usual shtick (which, I will say, has worked more often than not) as Noah Griffith, a slacker who is tasked with babysitting some neighbor kids, including Blythe, a bratty girl who wishes she was a Kardashian; Slater, an obsessive-compulsive hypochondriac; and Rodrigo, an adopted pyromaniac. When his sort-of-girlfriend (Ari Graynor) calls and asks him to bring her some cocaine with the promise of sex, Noah takes the kids along for the ride. Hijinks, raunchy political-incorrectness and borderline child abuse ensue, but laughs are few and far between. (The best bit is the scene in which Noah speaks jive, which was shown ad nauseam in the trailers and commercials.) It’s easy to call this an “R-rated ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING,” but that would be insulting to the glory that is Elisabeth Shue -- “Don’t fuck with the babysitter,” indeed! (Fun fact: This was the 142nd movie I saw on the big screen in 2011 -- a NEW PERSONAL RECORD, which has since been broken with each subsequent movie I’ve seen. Go me!)

YOUNG ADULT -- If Jason Reitman had retired after giving us the trifecta of THANK YOU FOR SMOKING, JUNO and UP IN THE AIR, he could have happily called it a worthy career. Fortunately, it looks like he’s going to keep making movies, and that is a good thing, even if he serves up the occasional misfire. YOUNG ADULT, which reteams Reitman with JUNO scribe Diablo Cody, is not necessarily a bad film -- but it’s not nearly as funny, touching and engaging as their previous effort. Charlize Theron is Mavis Gary, once a popular girl in high school in small-town Minnesota, now living large in the big city (well, Minneapolis) and authoring a Sweet Valley High-type book series. She’s not entirely happy, though -- and when she learns that her ex-boyfriend is about to become a father, she gets it into her head to return home and try to win him back. What results is a series of unfortunate, awkward, often cringe-inducing events. Mavis, stuck in the throes of extended adolescence, is unable to recapture her past glory and makes a fool of herself at every turn. Theron always seems to be at her best when she unpretties herself; here she is a train wreck of trashiness and not at all likeable. Nice work, as always, from Patrick Wilson as the hunky object of Mavis’ desires, but it’s Patton Oswalt who steals the show with a surprisingly poignant turn as a dorky former classmate with whom Mavis develops an unexpected friendship. The moral of the story? Growing up is indeed hard to do, though whether or not Mavis actually learns that lesson is questionable. All in all, the story feels uneven and nothing really sticks. But I have faith that both Reitman and Cody will bounce back strong.

MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE – GHOST PROTOCOL -- I’ve always considered the M:I series to be solid and enjoyable and generally underrated as far as high-profile franchises are concerned. Say what you want about Tom Cruise, but the dude is a madman, always performing his own crazy stunts and giving his all. He seems to have particular fun with the role of Ethan Hunt, and he takes things to a whole new level of badassery in this fourth installment. Directed by the great Brad Bird (who previously gave us two of the best animated films of the past two decades, THE IRON GIANT and THE INCREDIBLES -- not to mention RATATOUILLE and some classic SIMPSONS episodes), M:I-4 is a mega-spectacle of pure, relentless action, featuring some of the most mind-boggling set pieces and action sequences in recent memory. I honestly didn’t think anything this year would top TRANSFORMERS 3 in terms of sheer, unbridled insanity, but the Dubai sequence, beginning with Cruise scaling the tallest building in the world and culminating with car chase in the middle of a sandstorm, is nothing short of astonishing, especially in true IMAX (I saw it at Loews Lincoln Square, home of the gigantic 80’ x 100’ screen, which I highly recommend if you’re in NYC). Cruise is backed up by a solid story -- threat of nuclear war with Russia never gets old! -- and supporting cast, including Tom Wilkinson, Jeremy Renner, Paula Patton and Simon Pegg providing the comic relief. With all due respect to TRANSFORMERS and FAST FIVE, this is easily the best pure adrenaline popcorn flick of the year.

SHERLOCK HOLMES: A GAME OF SHADOWS -- By all powers of the universe, the SHERLOCK HOLMES films should be awesome. You've got an iconic character that is tailor-made for a big-budget, big-screen romp. You've got one of the great entertainers working today, Robert Downey, Jr., and the always-solid Jude Law playing off each other with rapid-fire dialogue. You've got an interesting visual director in Guy Ritchie, great period costumes and sets, lots of action, etc., etc. And yet, despite all these elements, the first film failed to engage on any level and was forgotten almost immediately after I left the theatre. Now, I had hoped that the addition of a better villain -- Holmes' arch-nemesis Moriarty (Jared Harris) -- might make the sequel a bit more interesting. But no... it is more the same... slick but completely unmemorable. Downey & Law are good if seemingly uninspired, Ritchie's hyper-stylized direction quickly wears thin, and the original Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Noomi Rapace, is wasted. At best, these films are an acceptable diversion for Downey fans between IRON MAN stints; at worst, they are a classic case of some nice ingredients not adding up to a very tasty dish.

Argh, so many more December movies to discuss, and we’re quickly running out of time! Can I finish the month before the ball drops tomorrow night? Wish me luck and stay tuned!

November Movie Nuggets, Part 2

2011-12-21T23:18:00.000-05:00

The rest of the November crop! GO!

A VERY HAROLD & KUMAR 3D CHRISTMAS -- Not a whole lot to say about the third installment of the Harold & Kumar saga. Are you a fan of the previous two films? Are you high right now? If the answer to either of those two questions is “yes,” you will enjoy this movie. As the film opens, the lads have drifted apart over the past few years. Kumar is still living a bachelor’s life and smoking regularly, while Harold is married and trying to be responsible and stuff. But when a mysterious package brings them back together on Christmas Eve, hijinks immediately ensue, resulting in another crazy joyride around NYC. Everything you could possibly want from a H&K film is here: Extreme raunchiness. Stoner humor. Political incorrectness. Gratuitous nudity. And of course, Neil Patrick Harris reprising the role he was born to play. The 3D is gimmicky and fun for the most part, though it’s actually kind of awesome how well it works when the guys are smoking (Smell-O-Vision would have been a great innovation here, if ya know what I mean). A fourth installment would probably be a bit much... but then again, it’s not like I wouldn’t see it. Though I think I’d prefer a feature-length version of Neil’s Patrick Harris’ Christmas Spectacular... or better yet, a live stage version on Broadway!

THE THING -- Yet another remake of an ‘80s favorite that is completely unnecessary but not completely awful. But this time, there’s the added twist that it is actually a prequel in disguise. I will not reveal where and how the transition from remake to prequel takes place, but suffice to say, it’s surprisingly satisfying if you are a fan of John Carpenter’s classic, which is widely considered to be one of the best sci-fi horror flicks ever. In the new version, a paleontologist (Mary Elizabeth Winstead, aka Ramona Flowers from SCOTT PILGRIM, with whom I am still in lesbians) joins a team of Norwegian scientists that has discovered an extraterrestrial spacecraft buried deep in the arctic. In the ship, they find a creature that appears to be long-dead. But when they get a little too greedy with the experimentation, the creature wakes up and starts killing everyone, one-by-one, using its ability to mimic anything (and anyone) it touches. It’s fairly straightforward modern horror, lacking the paranoid tension of the original, but adding some pretty cool Thing effects. As with THE KARATE KID and FOOTLOOSE remakes, THE THING is not required viewing -- but neither will it rape your childhood. Plus, any opportunity to help Joel Edgarton continue to make a name for himself in the U.S. is a worthwhile endeavor.

HUGO -- Martin Scorcese’s latest triumph is unlike any of his past triumphs. On the surface, it’s a 3D kids’ film, which is odd in itself, coming from the director of RAGING BULL and GOODFELLAS. But deep down, it is a tip of the cap to the magic of cinema and movie lovers in general, a tribe of which Scorcese himself is the supreme leader. It’s the story of a boy named Hugo (Asa Butterfield) who lives alone within the walls of a Paris train station in the 1930’s. He keeps a low profile while maintaining the station’s clocks and trying to fix a broken automaton with the hope that it may contain a hidden message from his dead father. One day, Hugo has a brusque encounter with a disgruntled old shop owner, which leads to a friendship with the man’s goddaughter, Isabelle (Chloe Moretz, who keeps getting better and better), who provides the key that helps Hugo complete the automaton, which unlocks a secret that sets the film off in an unexpected, but completely rapturous, direction. To reveal more than that would be criminal, but suffice to say, HUGO is an enchanting fantasy adventure, a heartwarming tale of family & friendship, a picture postcard of old Paris, a love letter to the art of cinema, a crash course in the history of motion pictures (particularly the films of Georges Méliès), a propaganda piece about the importance of film preservation and last but not least, a game-changer in the advancement of 3D technology. I don’t know if it completely does for 3D what THE WIZARD OF OZ did for Technicolor, but it comes closer than any movie we’ve seen thus far. Scorcese, a visual master under any circumstances, takes full advantage of the extra dimension, and for the first time, immerses us into a world in which wearing special glasses is actually NECESSARY for the full, true visual experience. (There were several moments -- for example, a scene in which an audience watches and reacts to the Lumière Bros.’ classic, “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat” -- that made me wonder how the heck they could possibly work in standard 2D.) HUGO is the kind of movie that works on so many levels, taps into every emotion and should appeal to different people in different ways. For me, it was a case of cinematic love at first sight, and the more I think about it, the more I love it. A truly extraordinary film and quite possibly my favorite movie-watching experience of the year.

THE MUPPETS -- Jason Segel has already been awesome for a long time thanks to FREAKS & GEEKS, all the Judd Apatow movies and HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER. But then he went and brought the Muppets back from oblivion... and now he has pretty much achieved god-like status. The first theatrical Muppet movie in 12 years may not the best of all time, but it is unquestionably the best one since before Jim Henson died, and one of the most fun, emotional and satisfying cinematic experiences of the year. Segel & Nicholas Stoller co-wrote the script with extreme care and adoration for the characters and absolutely nailed it, perfectly capturing that playful-yet-sentimental Muppet tone and all of their personalities. The plot is simple enough: The Muppets’ biggest fan, Walter, goes to Hollywood to find that the legendary Muppet Theatre has not only fallen into disrepair, but is about to be taken over & demolished by an evil oil magnate (Chris Cooper and his maniacal laugh). Walter, along with his friends Gary and Mary (Segel and the always-adorable Amy Adams), track down Kermit the Frog to convince him to reunite the old Muppet gang, all of whom have gone their separate ways. The plan? Put on the Greatest Muppet Telethon Ever to raise $10 million and buy back their beloved theatre! The film is rife with nods and references to Muppet movies of yore, and the recreation of the Muppet Show during the telethon is nothing short of breathtaking. The music is fantastic, with a great mix of new and classic songs -- if you don’t get all verklempt during “Rainbow Connection,” you may not have a soul. Jason Segel deserves unlimited credit for giving us this perfectly-realized, heartfelt, nostalgia trip -- on top of everything else, it was clear that he was having the time of his life and his joy was infectious. Mahna mahna.

A DANGEROUS METHOD -- The latest collaboration of David Cronenberg and Viggo Mortensen (following the overrated A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and very good EASTERN PROMISES) is a solid film, if somewhat lacking. It’s a fictitious look at the early days of psychoanalysis, in which Dr. Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) at first treats, then has an affair with, a sexy-but-mentally disturbed Russian patient (Keira Knightley). It’s more of a talk-fest than we’re used to seeing from Cronenberg, but that makes sense because this is a movie about ideas and the formulation and discussion thereof. These ideas are further amplified by three outstanding lead performances, starting with Fassbender, who continues his breakout year (see also: X-MEN: FIRST CLASS, JANE EYRE and SHAME, which I will write about soon). Viggo gives a larger-than-life performance as Sigmund Freud, chewing the scenery with gusto. The powerful relationship between Jung and Freud anchors the film and offers some choice back-and-forth dialogue. But surprisingly, it’s Keira Knightley who steals the show. Her Russian accent may be somewhat questionable, but holy shit, does she play one hell of a mental patient. It’s an over-the-top performance, but it’s so jarring and off-putting that it works in the context of the film. That said, the film is more methodical than dangerous and despite its provocative themes, ultimately fails to resonate as more than a mild curiosity.

Holy crap, the year is almost over! Time flies when you spend over 300 hours in movie theatres. Stay tuned for my December recap and then all sorts of year-end goodies including my hotly-anticipated (by me) TOP TEN OF 2011!

’Tis the Season for a Double-Dose of Spielberg

2011-12-18T22:01:00.001-05:00

Today is Steven Spielberg’s 65th birthday, so to celebrate, let’s take a look at the two newest additions to his filmography, THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN and WAR HORSE -- two completely different films which are examples of two genres in which the Beard has been particularly effective throughout his illustrious career, the action-adventure serial and the emotional war drama.

This isn’t the first time Spielberg has given us two of these kinds of films in the same calendar year. Back in 2005, he gave us WAR OF THE WORLDS and MUNICH. The former has its flaws and is considered to be a misfire, but it does feature some truly chilling post-9/11 imagery. The latter, however, is one of Spielberg’s most underrated and powerful works (and one of my Top 25 Movies of the ‘00s). And then of course there was the great year of 1993, when the world was graced with a couple of classics known as JURASSIC PARK and SCHINDLER’S LIST -- perhaps the single greatest year for a director since 1939 when Victor Fleming helmed THE WIZARD OF OZ and GONE WITH THE WIND.

Now, admittedly, this year’s one-two punch is not quite up to that level of mastery. But both TINTIN and WAR HORSE are both effective, entertaining and worthy additions to Spielberg’s oeuvre.

THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN is a joint venture from Spielberg and Peter Jackson, with a script co-written by Edgar Wright, Joe Cornish & Steve Moffat, based on a Belgian comic book that I have never read and know absolutely nothing about. Therefore I can’t comment on the film’s effectiveness as an adaptation, but as a film -- particularly one in which Spielberg harkens back to his RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK roots -- it is a ton of fun.

Tintin (Jamie Bell) is a young journalist/detective, always in pursuit of a hot story. One day he buys a model boat at the market, which turns out to be a much-coveted clue to untold treasure. Along with his faithful dog Snowy, Tintin gets kidnapped by the dastardly Sakharine (Daniel Craig), meets up with the drunken Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis) and gets involved in a winding plot involving pirates, treasure, mystery and journeys to exotic locales. There are some incredible swashbuckling action sequences (including one of the best pirate ship battles I’ve ever seen, and an awesome duel in which the participants use dockside cranes instead of swords), breathtaking animated cinematography and very solid use of 3-D. There’s still something about motion-captured human characters that seems... off... but the technology has certainly improved since the dead-eyed soullessness of THE POLAR EXPRESS.

Parents, if you’ve been thinking about introducing your kids to Indiana Jones for the first time, you might consider showing them TINTIN first to get them warmed up with what is essentially a kiddie version. The tone, humor and action are very much in the same vein -- hell, it feels more like an Indy film than CRYSTAL SKULL did -- and Spielberg clearly had a blast with it. Should be very interesting to see what Jackson does with the sequel.

Shifting gears, WAR HORSE is the tale of a boy and his horse and their bond that is put to the test of separation and the tribulations of war. If it sounds like a potential schmaltz-fest... well, yes, it kind of is. But if there’s one man who knows how to push all the right buttons, it’s Spielberg. The early scenes of earnest Albert (Jeremy Irvine) and an underestimated horse named Joey on their ranch in England are pretty cringe-worthy, with some questionable acting from anyone not named Emily Watson (who plays Albert’s mum). But once Joey is sold to the British cavalry to be used as an expendable tool, the film kicks into a whole other gear. It combines the underdog horse drama of SEABISCUIT with a PRIVATE RYAN-esque depiction of World War I that is both epic and gritty (a bit of E.T. sprinkled in there, too, obviously). Spielberg does an interesting job of depicting an extremely violent and bloody war through a PG-13, family-friendly lens while retaining the harshness of the situation.

As the war moves through the sweeping French countryside and into the trenches, Joey continually escapes danger and ends up serving both sides, making new friends and enemies in the process. He develops a reputation as a “miracle horse,” all the while never forgetting his best friend. Meanwhile, Albert also goes off to war and also keeps the memory of Joey close to his heart. We know that their experiences will inevitably bring them back together, but their respective odysseys are at times quite harrowing, with a firm grip on the audience’s heartstrings.

Ultimately, the film works because it is so sincere and unpretentious. It wears its schmaltziness on its sleeve and you have to respect that. The cinematography and dialogue are such that at times it looks and feels reminiscent of an old Hollywood epic, and for that reason, it may not play as well with today’s cynical audience. But let yourself get swept up in the Spielberg-ness and it’s a satisfying journey. Oscar-worthy? No way. But then again, far less deserving films have made Oscar cry.

Of course, two new Spielberg movies also come with an added bonus: Two new John Williams scores! No complaints with either of them; TINTIN is fun and adventurous and WAR HORSE is appropriately grandiose. Neither are particularly hummable as you’re leaving the theatre, and thus will not go down among Williams’ best, but they are effective within the context of the films and it’s always a nostalgic pleasure to hear his unmistakable style.

THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN opens on Dec. 21st, with WAR HORSE following on Christmas Day. There are a ton of great movies in theatres right now, including many that are more required viewing. But this holiday season, by all means see these and enjoy them for what they are: Two pretty good Steven Spielberg films. Happy holidays, indeed -- and happy birthday (and many more) to one of the all-time greats!

November Movie Nuggets, Part 1

2011-12-17T22:35:00.000-05:00

I know, I know. I’m not even going to bother apologizing for the severe lateness of this recap -- let us just be thankful that it’s here, because November was by far the best movie month of the year (and that includes the first half of December, but that is a story for another day). I saw a modest 11 movies on the big screen in November, and while my year-end list is not yet finalized, at press time SEVEN of them are sitting pretty in my Top 25. Not too shabby. Here are my reviews....

TAKE SHELTER -- Michael Shannon gives the year’s best male performance in this startling film that is part psycho-thriller, part metaphor for the mindset of America in this age of economic uncertainty. Shannon plays Curtis, a family man who has a solid job, a pretty wife (Jessica Chastain, who continues to be everywhere), good friends and a faithful dog. His daughter is deaf as a result of an accident, but it is not a hopeless situation thanks to some medical breakthroughs and a good insurance plan. But when Curtis starts having weird nightmares and ominous hallucinations, he can’t quite figure out if he’s having some kind of mental breakdown or experiencing legit, prophetic, apocalyptic visions. Knowing his family has a history of mental illness, he seeks help, but that only results in more frustration. The only thing that makes sense is to spend his savings to build an underground shelter to protect his family from whatever storm may or may not be coming. But that increases tensions with his wife, workplace and life in general, which in turn piles on the pressure. Masterfully crafted by writer/director Jeff Nichols, the film begins with a nightmare, maintains an ethereal feel as Curtis’ sanity frays, and culminates with a wallop of an ending that will stick in your gut for a long time. Shannon has been a great supporting actor for a while now (see: REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, where his few explosive minutes of screen time earned him an Oscar nod), but as of now he is my pick for Best Actor -- his performance is that powerful and haunting.

J. EDGAR -- The last great Clint Eastwood-directed film, on my list, is 2005’s LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA (particularly when paired with its companion piece, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS). Since then... wow, has it been a precipitous decline for the old man, as CHANGELING, GRAN TORINO, INVICTUS and HEREAFTER were all bad to varying degrees. His latest, a biopic of J. Edgar Hoover, starring Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role, is an improvement in the sense that it is not a completely terrible movie. It tells an intriguing story that doesn’t shy away from the more controversial aspects of Hoover’s life (i.e., his closeted homosexuality). It features some fine performances -- wouldn’t be surprised to see DiCaprio snag an Oscar nod, and possibly Armie Hammer, too. The problem is that it’s just so... pedestrian. The film looks drab, thanks to what is clearly a stylistic decision gone awry. Eastwood’s direction is plodding, and Dustin Lance Black’s script is ambitious but clumsy, with a narrative twist that just comes off as befuddling. Plus it uses every biopic cliché in the book: I don’t know if J. Edgar’s smothering mother (portrayed by Judi Dench) really portended that he would become “the most powerful man in the country,” but my gawd, that’s cheesy. And to top it all off, the old-age makeup is some of the worst I’ve ever seen. It’s unfortunate, because I’m sure there is a very good movie about this complex individual in there somewhere -- makes you wonder what, say, Oliver Stone might have done with the material.

MY WEEK WITH MARILYN -- This is the story of Marilyn Monroe’s infamous trip to England in 1956, where she filmed THE PRINCE AND THE SHOWGIRL with Laurence Olivier and supposedly had a brief fling with a lowly stagehand. This particular episode in movie history, in which the world’s most famous actress clashed with the world’s greatest actor, is interesting stuff. Beyond that, it is pretty straightforward, light-hearted fare -- the film doesn’t shed much new light on what even casual fans may already know about these legends. Still, it is pure entertainment at its finest, with sparkling performances that are among the year’s best. Michelle Williams is an absolute vision, reasserting herself as one of the best actresses of the day. She BECOMES Marilyn, perfectly capturing her look, mannerisms, quirks and complexities. It is really something to see. Who knows if the love affair really happened -- or at least, if it happened quite this way; feels more like someone’s embellished take on what it would have been like to have an affair with Marilyn Monroe. But regardless, it is hugely enjoyable. Kenneth Branagh may be Oscar-worthy, himself, as the grandiose Sir Laurence; Julia Ormond and Dame Judi Dench are great as Vivien Leigh and Dame Sybil Thorndike, respectively; and it’s interesting to see Emma Watson, as a lowly wardrobe girl whose relationship with Colin is disrupted by Marilyn’s presence, in her first major post-POTTER role. But really, this is Michelle Williams’ showcase through and through and will surely earn her another Oscar nod. Actually, MY WEEK WITH MARILYN reminds me of THE KING’S SPEECH in many ways: Last year’s Best Picture winner was also light-hearted, crowd-pleasing historical fare anchored by an outstanding lead performance. It’s the kind of thing that Oscar eats up... and MARILYN is way more enjoyable than SPEECH... so we’ll see what happens.

MELANCHOLIA -- The latest vision from Lars von Trier opens with a beautiful, slow-motion prologue set to Wagner's Tristan and Isolde that sets a bizarre, dreamlike tone for what is to come. As the narrative begins, Justine (Kirsten Dunst) is celebrating her wedding night at her sister & brother-in-law’s opulent mansion. But Justine is not happy. Why? It’s not entirely clear. But as her depression consumes her, in her mind the end of the world is nigh. This is paralleled by the appearance of a rogue planet called Melancholia that has entered Earth’s orbit. How is this possible? Again, not entirely clear... but while at first the phenomenon is captivating, it slowly becomes clear that the end of the world really IS nigh. At this point, Justine begins to take control of her sanity while her sister (brilliant Charlotte Gainsbourg) and brother-in-law (Kiefer Sutherland) unravel around her. On one level, von Trier’s uses the end of the world as an unsubtle metaphor for depression’s destructive power. On another level, it’s an honest-to-God disaster flick, art house style, that is more devastating than anything Roland Emmerich could ever imagine, with an ending that will absolutely knock the wind out of you. (Side note: It’s been a pretty great year for shocking endings between this, TAKE SHELTER and MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE. Years have been taken off my life.) And above all, it is a showcase for the talents of the lovely Kirsten Dunst, a longtime crush of mine, who has risen to new heights with a tour-de-force performance that has already earned her a Best Actress win at Cannes. The girl-next-door cheerleader from BRING IT ON is all growns up and she’s growns up and she’s growns up!

THE DESCENDANTS -- The one knock against George Clooney (though not by me) has historically been that it always seems like he’s playing “GEORGE CLOONEY.” And that is not untrue -- but it’s the nuances of his performances, from the ring-a-ding-ding coolness of OCEAN’S 11 to the brooding hitman of THE AMERICAN, that have turned him into one of the top three or four actors alive today. (Besides, he just plays “GEORGE CLOONEY” so damn well.) In the latest stroke of genius from Alexander Payne, Clooney plays Matt King, a sad sack from Hawaii, who must readjust his life after his wife suffers a tragic boating accident and falls into a coma. He has to reconnect with his young daughters, decide whether to sell his family’s coveted Hawaiian land AND deal with the possibility that his wife may not have been entirely faithful. The whole time, his wife’s unconscious, slackened face looms over Matt’s life like a spectre, weighing on him while driving him forward. Clooney is playing “GEORGE CLOONEY” again, but it’s a far more grown-up version than he’s ever tried before, and of course, he knocks it out of the park. Shailene Woodley, playing his rebellious teenage daughter, also gives a lightning performance that has already been recognized by the Hollywood Foreign Press. Fantastic, offbeat supporting players, too, including a nearly-unrecognizable Matthew Lillard in a key role. The film is a funny, poignant look at the complexities of family, love and death, and Alexander Payne once again proves that he has a firm grasp of the imperfections of humanity. The man has now made a Mike Nichols-esque five great films in a row to start his directorial career (CITIZEN RUTH, ELECTION, ABOUT SCHMIDT, SIDEWAYS and THE DESCENDANTS) -- time to start listing him among the best and most exciting filmmakers of this generation.

THE ARTIST -- A brilliant black-and-white silent film that is itself an ode to the silent era. Jean Dujardin plays George Valentin, a superstar of the silver screen in the 1920’s. He has a classic look and oozes charisma which he is confident will sustain him through the burgeoning “talkie” fad. On the set of one of his films, he meets a backup dancer named Peppy Miller (Bérénice Bejo, who lights up the screen), and they have a bit of a thunderbolt moment. But before long, talkies are all the rage, Valentin is on the outs, and Miller suddenly becomes the next big thing. Their destinies seem to set them on opposite paths, but really, they are intertwined -- she never forgets him, both on a personal level, and because of what he has meant to cinema, and the journey that brings them back together is one of the great feel-good stories of the year. It is an absolute joy to watch, with gorgeous cinematography, an amazing score and fantastic performances -- Dujardin (who won Best Actor at Cannes) & Bejo are perfect, and the more well-known faces, including John Goodman, James Cromwell and Penelope Ann Miller, blend in nicely. Actually, Goodman seems almost tailor-made for the silent era -- but then, he always seems like the right choice for whatever role he is playing. Second-best performance by a Jack Russell Terrier in 2011, too, trailing only Arthur from BEGINNERS. THE ARTIST is a charming, funny and heartwarming love letter to old Hollywood -- in fact, the best thing I can say about it is that it inspired me to load up my Netflix queue with silent films, a genre that I had never really explored. As we enter the heart of awards season, this is one film that will not be going anywhere anytime soon.

Stay tuned for Part 2, featuring HUGO, THE MUPPETS and more!

October Movie Overload, Part 2

2011-11-13T22:46:00.000-05:00

At last, the long-awaited conclusion to my October movie recap! LET’S GO!

MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE -- A haunting psychological thriller about a girl named Martha (Elizabeth Olsen) who tries to regain some semblance of a normal life after escaping from a cult where she spent two years being brainwashed -- and worse -- by its charming leader (John Hawkes, so creepy). But her psyche has been so deeply damaged that even after she seeks refuge with her older sister & brother-in-law, she is unable to tell them what happened to her and constantly suffers from paranoid delusions. Writer/director Sean Durkin has crafted a remarkably effective story that jumps back and forth in time and blurs the line between fantasy and reality, not to mention sanity and madness. The film is shot in a way that makes it feel almost dreamlike. Details of Martha’s experiences are peeled away little by little as she tries desperately to cleanse herself of the cult’s far-reaching influence. There’s palpable, ominous tension throughout, culminating with an ending that left me absolutely breathless. It is a profoundly brilliant, deeply unsettling film... and it is the mesmerizing Elizabeth Olsen who binds it together. The younger sister of Mary-Kate & Ashley, she seemingly has more talent (not to mention beauty) in her little finger than her much-more-rich-and-famous siblings have have ever displayed. (She kind of reminds me of a GHOST WORLD-era Scarlett Johansson, which is not a bad thing.) It is one of the most potent, nuanced, vulnerable and remarkable performances I’ve seen this year; hopefully the Academy will agree when the time comes.

PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3 -- Earlier this year, I declared that if the SAW series was this generation’s NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, then the FINAL DESTINATION series was FRIDAY THE 13th... so I guess that makes PARANORMAL ACTIVITY this generation’s HALLOWEEN? CHILD’S PLAY? HELLRAISER? Take your pick. All I know is that this found-footage haunted house series is now a solid three-for-three. What makes it so effective is not the scares so much as the ANTICIPATION of the scares. Loud noises, moving furniture and dark shadows in the background are all well and good. But sitting there in the dark, your eyes darting around the screen in a frantic attempt to figure out where the next scare is going to come from... that is some spine-tingling shit and these films have perfected the art. The third installment is a prequel that takes us back to the ‘80s, where, it seems, the oft-haunted sisters, Katie and Kristi, had some all-too-familiar scary experiences even as little girls. But there are some new twists: Kristi has an imaginary friend named Toby (an homage, I believe, to POLTERGEIST director Tobe Hooper) who may not be very nice. The girls’ bonehead dad devices a new oscillating-camera contraption that adds a new dimension of suspense as it moves back and forth. But mostly, the tried-and-true formula remains intact. Directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman have already proven that they have a knack for suspense with the film CATFISH and they put those talents to good use here. That said, I think this series has now gone as far as it can (or should). I’d hate to see the powers-that-be run it into the ground with more installments... but then again, there have been seven SAW’s, five FINAL DESTINATION’s, nine NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET’s, etc. So I guess the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY saga has some catching up to do.

THE SWELL SEASON -- Few movies have ever had such a profound effect on me as the 2007 indie hit, ONCE. It was cinematic love at first sight. I was struck by the thunderbolt, just as Glen Hansard & Marketa Irglova’s characters were as they played “Falling Slowly” together in that piano shop. From there, I became obsessed with all things Glen & Mar. I’ve watched the movie countless times, seen the Swell Season three times (and the Frames once, and I’m seeing Marketa solo later this month). And of course, I took solace in their real-life relationship, which was magical in the sense that it was like the happy ending we didn’t get in the bittersweet film. Eventually, though, their fairytale relationship came to an end... and this documentary tells that story. It follows Glen & Mar after they were thrust into the worldwide spotlight (especially after winning the Oscar for Best Original Song). Hansard, who had been paying his dues since quitting school to become a busker on the streets of Dublin, relished the fame and playing before huge crowds. But this new life took its toll on shy, soft-spoken Marketa, barely 20 years old at the time, which in turn took its toll on them as a couple. Unsurprisingly, Hansard gets most of the attention in this doc -- presumably because he is the more open of the two. We spend a lot of time with his parents, including his late, emotionally-detached father, which gives us some real insight into where his raw performance power comes from. The film doesn’t delve as much into Marketa’s life, which is unfortunate because her story is pretty intriguing in its own right. But her discomfort at the Swell Season’s stardom, and her desire to spread the wings of her life & career, so to speak, is painfully evident. If you love them as much as I do, this film -- shot in soft black-and-white which gives it an even more intimate feel -- will both fill you with joy and break your heart.

GHOSTBUSTERS -- That’s right, I saw GHOSTBUSTERS on the big screen and it was awesome. I don’t think I need to tell you about the movie itself, but suffice to say that it is still awesome and absolutely holds up both as a sci-fi comedy masterpiece AND a slice of ‘80s New York nostalgia. (However, I am now even more convinced that GHOSTBUSTERS 3 would be a terrible idea.) What I want to talk about is where I saw it -- a magical, wonderful world called the Sony Wonder Technology Lab, located at 56th & Madison in NYC. The facility is kind of like a Hall of Science, where kids can go and play with all sorts of fun gadgets and gizmos and games and robotics and computer programs and interactive technology. It’s all free! And yes, they have a screening room where they show free movie screenings every Saturday afternoon. It’s a very nice little theatre: Stadium seating, plush seats and a decent-sized screen (equivalent to, say, a typical art house theatre; certainly a heck of a lot bigger than your TV at home) and a Blu-Ray projector that provides a clear picture and booming sound. Very nice indeed... and again, it’s free! All you have to do is RSVP at the beginning of the week and then show up. The theatre was barely half-full for GHOSTBUSTERS so clearly this is still a hidden NYC gem and I am revealing it here against my better judgment -- use this information wisely, my friends. For a list of upcoming screenings, CLICK HERE and bookmark the page. Looks like a bunch of family/holiday stuff through most of November and December, but I am intrigued by Woody Allen’s MIDNIGHT IN PARIS on December 30th! Perhaps I’ll see you there.

THE WOMAN -- I have a confession to make: Though I’ve claimed to be a horror fan, I was not familiar with the works of Jack Ketchum before seeing this movie. But I now see that all of my experiences with the horror genre over the years were merely a tune-up for Ketchum’s madness. THE WOMAN is a story of perhaps the most dysfunctional family you will ever see. On the surface, the Cleeks seem nice and normal, like something out of a ‘50s sitcom (which the matter-of-fact dialogue also invokes). But under the surface simmers unspeakable horror. The patriarch, Roger, treats his wife and kids as his slaves, forcing them to do ridiculous chores and basically serve his every whim. One day, while on a hunting trip, he comes across a feral woman living in the woods (no explanation where she came from, but it’s beside the point). He decides to capture her, ties her up in the basement and plans to “civilize” her. He gets the whole family involved with the project. Mom and sis are appalled, but junior, who is just as twisted as his father, is into the idea. From there... I cannot begin to describe the brutality and degradation that takes place... increasingly disturbing and culminating in an astonishing final act bloodbath. I am typically as desensitized to extreme horror as anyone, but even I sat there completely aghast with what I was seeing. This is one of the very few horror movies to ever elicit such a reaction from me -- and for that, I must tip my cap to Jack Ketchum for coming up with such a tale and Lucky McKee for skillfully putting it on screen. Fine performances across the board, too, from the whole family. But special kudos to Sean Bridgers as Roger, one of the most twisted antagonists I’ve ever seen (perhaps topped only by Blanche Baker as Aunt Ruth in Ketchum’s THE GIRL NEXT DOOR... but I digress), and also to Pollyanna McIntosh who gives a fearless performance as the Woman. This movie is not for the faint of heart... but a must-see for fans of the genre.

LIKE CRAZY -- Based on the heartstring-tugging trailer, I had high hope that this movie would be this year’s great melancholy love story, following in the footsteps of such films as ONCE, (500) DAYS OF SUMMER and BLUE VALENTINE, all of which made my Top 10 in their respective years. Well, perhaps those expectations were a little too high. Indeed it is a melancholy love story, but it is in no way great. The story is simple enough: Jacob (Anton Yelchin) and Anna (Felicity Jones) meet in college and fall in love. But when Anna is deported back to the UK after screwing up her visa situation, they are forced to do the long-distance thing, which takes a toll on their relationship. There’s potential there because long distance relationships do indeed suck, but there’s one fundamental problem: I never once believed in their everlasting love. Seems like they could have pretty easily have made things work at any time; for example, why didn’t Jacob just move to England? Would have solved the problem right there. But he didn’t... perhaps because he wasn’t as invested in the relationship as he thought? Or perhaps because there wouldn’t have been a movie. Either way, it contradicts this supposed great love, because if it was really great, they would’ve done anything in their power to make it work. (Which also includes not being so stupid and letting the visa expire in the first place. I know all-too-well that the thunderbolt is powerful and can make you do dumb things... but that was pretty fucking dumb.) All that being said, the acting is very solid. Yelchin and Jones make a cute couple, and Jennifer Lawrence is excellent as a girl with whom Jacob tries to move on. Just wish they all had less-flawed material to work with.

Bring on Oscar season!

October Movie Overload, Part 1

2011-11-03T21:56:00.000-04:00

This monthly recap title is particularly appropriate because I really DID go a bit buck wild with the movies in October: I saw 19 of them on the big screen, which, believe it or not, is a NEW PERSONAL RECORD for a single month, snapping the previous mark of 17 (set several times, most recently September 2010). This was due to an influx of advance screenings (9), some freebies, a pair of triple-features and the simple fact that I am a movie-watching machine! I've already reviewed a bunch of the October offerings here, here, here and here; now let's take a look at the rest:

DREAM HOUSE -- This train wreck got off to a bad start when it revealed a major spoiler/plot twist in the very first trailer. But hey, I’m a sucker for a haunted house story, and the cast was strong and intriguing (Daniel Craig, Rachel Weisz and one of my favorites, Naomi Watts), and I’ve never been one to judge a book by its cover. I also couldn’t quite comprehend how a movie directed by Jim “IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER / MY LEFT FOOT / IN AMERICA” Sheridan could have a 7% rating on RottenTomatoes. Well, I should have taken the hint -- this is an epic failure on every level. It’s about a family that moves into a house where, they discover, a mass murder once took place. But things and people may not be as they seem. The plot moves slowly and awkwardly, utilizing pretty much every ghost story cliché in the book. There is some visual creepiness here and there that is constantly undermined by bad editing and sound effects. Finally there’s a second, much dumber twist that results in a laughably bad ending. Now, it seems that there were a series of production problems which caused the studio to re-cut the film, Sheridan to denounce it and the stars to not promote it. So who knows if Sheridan, left to his own devices, would have given us a deeper, scarier, more methodical character study and less of a schlocky rip-off of every thriller ever made. I'd like to think so, but I’m not so sure -- after all, you can’t polish a turd, and as it stands, this is one of the year’s biggest.

WHAT’S YOUR NUMBER? -- If there was any justice in this world, Anna Faris would have put “funny lady comedy” on the map years before Kristen Wiig and BRIDESMAIDS came along. Anna has been hilarious for a long time but has either been choosing her material very poorly, or simply not getting any offers. But why would that be? She’s funny, hot AND has the whole raunchy stoner thing going for her. It makes no sense! Unfortunately she is no closer to superstardom with this forgettable, boilerplate comedy, in which Faris plays a thirty-something woman who realizes that she is dangerously close to surpassing a milestone number of sexual partners, which, according to a magazine article, severely decreases one’s chances of settling down. So, she decides to delve back into her past love life, thinking that if she reconnects & hits it off with one of those guys, it won’t count against her. Could have been an amusing premise, I suppose, especially with the R rating, and Anna does her damnedest to conjure some mild laughs from some crappy material. But all in all, it’s a bad scene. And just to add insult to injury, there’s a wedding/bridesmaid subplot that almost feels like they shoehorned it in (or at least shifted some of the focus in that direction) sometime after mid-May. Anna Faris deserves better and I remain hopeful that one day she’ll star in a movie worthy of her talents -- but this definitely isn’t it.

REAL STEEL -- By all powers of the universe, this movie should not have been good. For God’s sake, the previews made it look like ROCK’EM SOCK’EM ROBOTS: THE MOTION PICTURE, the first instance of what will soon be a plague of movies based on popular games. So imagine my surprise when it turned out to be more like ROCKY meets THE IRON GIANT, resulting in one of the most purely enjoyable feel-good movies of the year. Sometime in the not-too-distant future, human boxers have been replaced by giant, human-controlled robots. Hugh Jackman stars as Charlie Kenton, a washed-up boxer-turned-smalltime promoter who hits rock bottom and begrudgingly reunites with his estranged son, Max. Together, they fix up a clunker of a robot named Atom -- and that's when it turns into a two-pronged underdog story, chronicling the little robot that could AND Charlie's redemption as a father. Atom climbs the ranks, endears himself to the world and challenges an unbeatable champion; meanwhile, Charlie and Max re-forge their bond. It’s a cheesy story, no doubt. But it’s also intense, poignant, exhilarating and practically bursting at the seems with heart and a complete lack of pretension -- not to mention some pretty awesome robot fight scenes. An exultant crowd-pleaser and well worth checking out.

FOOTLOOSE -- I have no real love for the original FOOTLOOSE, but I can sympathize with the furor that arose when this remake was announced. After all, just last year, the powers-that-be messed with one of my favorite ‘80s movies, THE KARATE KID. But while that remake was indeed completely unnecessary, I also found it to be neither terribly offensive nor as awful as expected (read my review HERE). The new FOOTLOOSE likewise follows the same exact plot as the original: Small town bans public dancing following tragic deaths; along comes orphaned bad boy, Ren McCormack (newcomer Kenny Wormald) to woo the preacher’s daughter (Julianne Hough) and get everyone to cut loose again. But what really struck me is how much more vibrant the remake seems compared to the drab, dated original -- full of energy, likeable actors who exude chemistry (particularly a supporting cast that breathes life into the dusty Southern setting) and a soundtrack that attempts to bridge the generation gap. Lots more dancing, too. Granted, kids today are too damn cynical for this version to strike a chord, as it did in the ‘80s. In that sense, yes, it’s probably just as unnecessary as THE KARATE KID remake. But it’s also fun in the moment, and if I were to choose one version over the other (not that I foresee a re-watch happening anytime soon), with all due respect to Kevin Bacon & co., I’d pick this one.

TEXAS KILLING FIELDS -- The most interesting thing about this otherwise-conventional detective story is that it is directed by Ami Canaan Mann, daughter of Michael Mann, and damned if she isn't a chip off the old block in terms of visuals and composition. This movie looks like the kind of gritty mystery her dad might have made in the '80s. Unfortunately, there's not much more to it than that. It follows two detectives -- one local boy (Sam Worthington) and one NYC transplant (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) -- as they try to track down a serial murderer who targets women and hides their bodies in a swamp called (wait for it) the Killing Fields. But the killer soon sets his sights on the detectives and those close to them -- particularly a young local girl (Hit Girl herself, Chloe Grace-Moretz). The plot is slow and convoluted and laden with red herrings, which I suppose are meant to intrigue, but are mostly aggravating because the mystery is pretty obvious. Hard to say if Mann was striving for a sort of police procedural, or mystery/thriller, or character study, but it never commits to any of those concepts and thus the whole thing falls flat. Performances are decent, though, particularly Morgan and Moretz. Would like to have seen more of Jessica Chastain (yes, even after already seeing her in however-many movies this year... she’s pretty good... and pretty). But couldn't get past Worthington's ridiculous combination Tex-Australian accent, which comes on the heels of his Israeli-Australian accent in THE DEBT and whatever accent that was in AVATAR. For God's sake, let him speak naturally from now on because this is just getting embarrassing for everyone.

THE SKIN I LIVE IN -- After I saw this movie, in my head I thought about writing a review entitled, “Pedro Almodóvar's Human Centipede”... but then Bret Easton Ellis, of all people, beat me to it with this tweet. Damn him! But it's true: Both Tom Six's cult classic and Almodóvar's latest vision are about diabolical scientists who perform transformative surgical experiments on unwilling victims with horrific and/or tragic results. The difference, of course, is that CENTIPEDE is a straight-up midnight horror flick whereas SKIN is more of a twisted-horror-mystery-love story with underlying themes of sexual identity, wrapped up with Almodóvar's signature stylistic flourishes. As the film opens in present-day Toledo, Spain, we are introduced to Robert Ledgard (Antonio Banderas), a brilliant cosmetic surgeon who lives in a huge estate/research facility with his maid and an attractive woman who appears to be held captive. As layers of plot are peeled away, we learn, among other things, that Robert has just created a synthetic, fire-resistant skin -- the culmination of an obsession he has had since his wife was horribly burned and committed suicide. We then jump six years into the past and... well, I’ve already said too much. This movie is best seen with as little spoilage as possible, because the twists are epic and truly mind-boggling. Banderas gives perhaps the performance of his life as the deranged doctor -- it’s been a while since they last worked together, but Almodóvar clearly brings out the best in him (as he does with Penélope Cruz). It’s a gleefully macabre, somewhat campy, perversely sexy melodramatic trip of a film, and further proof of Almodóvar’s mastery of his craft.

THE MIGHTY MACS -- Something just doesn’t seem right about seeing ultra-sexy and oft-nekkid Carla Gugino in a G-rated family film... but, well, here we are. She stars as Cathy Rush, coach of the Immaculata College women’s basketball team that overcame tremendous odds in the early ‘70s to win the sport’s first-ever national championship. It’s your basic underdog story: Rush, a former college player, starts coaching at a tiny all-girls school run by nuns, with no practice courts and one half-inflated ball. Her players are a ragtag bunch of underachievers. There are challenges involving school financial woes, lack of moral support from family & schoolmates, and run-ins with a crusty old Mother Superior (Ellen Burstyn). But Coach Rush, determined to turn things around, instills her players with a winning attitude and unorthodox training tactics that help them overcome the odds. She is helped by a band of friendly nuns, including rebellious Sister Sunday (Marley Shelton), who turns out to have had some basketball experience before donning the habit. There are absolutely no surprises in this movie -- it utilizes every sports movie cliché ever devised and things turn out exactly as you might predict. And yet... it’s so damn heartwarming that it manages to suck you in. Personally, though, I’d like to see a Sebastian Gutierrez remake, with the ridiculously hot Gugino and super-cute Shelton reprising their roles from WOMEN IN TROUBLE and ELEKTRA LUXX. That would REALLY warm my heart... among other things.

More movie words to come -- stay tuned!

TOWER HEIST Has Its Moments

2011-11-01T19:50:00.001-04:00

TOWER HEIST is high-stakes action comedy from Brett Ratner that plays like OCEAN’S 11 meets RUSH HOUR, with the all-star cast plotting a big score against an evil bigwig and the fast-paced, interracial buddy humor. The result is a perfectly serviceable, harmless lark -- entertaining in the moment, but ultimately forgettable, which pretty much sums up Ratner’s filmography (which also includes such good-but-not-great films as RED DRAGON and X-MEN: THE LAST STAND) in a nutshell.

Ben Stiller stars as Josh Kovacs, general manager of the Trump Tower in NYC (though the “Trump” name is ever shown or uttered), who, along with his crew of concierges, maids, doormen and elevator operators, lives to serve the ultra-rich residents of the luxury condo. The richest of the rich is Arthur Shaw, played with convincing craftiness by Alan Alda -- a Madoff-esque billionaire who gets busted for swindling untold sums of money, including the hard-earned pensions of everyone working at the Tower. Needless to say, the workers are pissed... so Kovacs decides to take matters into his own hands, along with cohorts played by Casey Affleck, Matthew Broderick, Michael Peña and Gabourey Sidibe and with assistance from wise-cracking ex-con named Slide (Eddie Murphy). The plan: (1) Sneak into the most heavily guarded residential building in the world. (2) Break into the penthouse apartment where Shaw is being detained under FBI supervision. (3) Steal $20 million in cash that may or may not be hidden there. Should be no problem for the people who know the inner workings of the building better than anyone else... right?

I particularly like how the movie is something of a love letter to the bustling Columbus Circle section of Manhattan -- an area that I pass through often (it’s situated halfway between two of my favorite movie theatres, Lincoln Square and the Zeigfeld) and don’t recall ever having seen so well-represented on the big screen. The Tower is depicted as the height of New York luxury, and the sweeping shots of the vicinity do for its signature silver unisphere what OCEAN’S 11 did for the Bellagio fountains. The comedy only inspires mild, sporadic chuckles but dialogue is rapid-fire and the heist action is solid. The plan is, of course, preposterous, but it’s fun to see it unfurl, with a couple of twists sprinkled here and there to keep us engaged.

Performances are fine, too, though it remains to be seen whether or not this will finally be the comeback vehicle that Eddie Murphy has been seeking. For that to happen, I think he really needs to be in an old-school comedy, a la TRADING PLACES or COMING TO AMERICA. Frankly, anything less than an R rating does him no favors -- and here, he seems to be invoking Donkey more than, say, Axel Foley, which is most unfortunate. (Also interesting to note that ever since I first saw the trailer, up until the closing credits, I seriously thought it was Lauren Graham playing the FBI agent / Stiller’s love interest... but turns out it’s Téa Leoni! Silly me. But tell me they don’t look alike these days.)

TOWER HEIST opens this Friday and I don’t mind recommending it if you have two hours to kill, $13 burning a hole in your pocket and you’ve already seen DRIVE, THE SKIN I LIVE IN, MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE and any number of far more worthwhile films. It’s certainly no OCEAN’S 11 (or even FAST FIVE) as far as recent, star-studded, over-the-top heist flicks are concerned... but at least you won’t walk out feeling like you were the one who got fleeced.

Occupy the Future with IN TIME

2011-10-30T16:42:00.001-04:00

As we speak, thousands of people are occupying Wall Street to protest the social and economic inequality between the richest top 1% and the remaining 99% of the people. IN TIME, a sci-fi thriller from Andrew Niccol (writer of such excellent films as THE TRUMAN SHOW and GATTACA) tackles this subject in a unique way: It is set in a future in which the aging process has been engineered to end at 25 and currency has been replaced by time that people must earn in order to continue living. The super-rich can therefore live forever, while the poor struggle to earn enough minutes to make it through the day. The world has been segregated into “time zones” comprised of desperate ghettos and opulent utopias. “Timekeepers” monitor the distribution of time to make sure the status quo remains intact.

Along comes Will Salas (Justin Timberlake), a working stiff who has managed to survive three years past 25 by the skin of his teeth. After watching his mother’s (Olivia Wilde, the ultimate MILF) time expire in front of his eyes, a typical result of the system working against the impoverished, Will vows revenge -- and gets the opportunity when a wealthy stranger, tired with immortality, bequeaths him an astonishing 116 years to play with. Will crosses over to the richest zone with the hope of shaking things up -- which he does, especially after hooking up with a rebellious daughter of an aristocrat (Amanda Seyfried, smoking hot) -- but little does he know that the Timekeepers (led by Cillian Murphy, invoking Mr. Smith from THE MATRIX) are on his trail.

It’s an original, fascinating, Philip K. Dick-ian concept -- made even more intriguing when Salas decides that his true calling is to steal time from the rich and distribute it to the poor, thus making him some kind of futuristic Robin Hood. Unfortunately, the film is thwarted by some pretty horrible execution. Story aside, it’s flawed in pretty much every other way a movie can be flawed.

There are three particularly glaring problems. First, we are given no real foundation for what the heck is going on in this society. Not a single expository explanation as to how this dystopia came to be. (In fact, Niccol goes out of his way to brush off the explanation early.) That in itself would have made a fascinating movie -- and at the very least would have helped to ground the story in some semblance of reality. Along those lines, it’s hard to gauge exactly when the film takes place. I assume it’s the distant future, but aside from the glowing green time stamp on people’s wrists, there is little evidence of advanced technology -- people still use pay phones, shoot guns with bullets, etc. -- so perhaps it’s an alternate version of the past.

Secondly, the script is pretty bad. I can forgive a few “time is money” puns, but in general, cringe-worthy dialogue is rampant. More than that, the story is all over the place. Clearly Niccol was bursting at the seams with ideas and he tried to cram all of them into the film. The result is that there are a lot of potentially interesting details -- the roving band of time thieves, for example -- that just feel half-baked.

Third, for a movie so concerned with the preciousness of time, it sure does drag at times. Just saying.

On the plus side, it seems like Justin Timberlake has the makings of a believable action star. That does not surprise me, since he was already kind of an action hero (or anti-hero) in THE SOCIAL NETWORK, using words as weapons. Amanda Seyfried, meanwhile, does an okay job as Bonnie to JT’s Clyde. The two of them seemed to have legit physical chemistry, which helps distract the viewer from the dialogue -- or maybe it’s just that she is pretty much the hottest thing on the planet.

All in all, despite its problems, IN TIME still features one of the better and more thought-provoking concepts I’ve seen in a movie this year. Not necessarily a must-see, but if you’re jonesing for a interesting dose of sci-fi mixed with relevant politics, it’s not an awful way to spend your time. (Sorry, couldn’t resist!)

PUSS IN BOOTS Doesn’t Land on Its Feet

2011-10-26T23:09:00.000-04:00

It is pretty safe to say that the character of Puss in Boots is the only thing that saves the Shrek films from being a complete waste of time. Introduced in the second installment, Puss is legitimately hilarious, fully-realized and breathes life into what is otherwise a wasteland of dated pop-culture references. Turns out, though, that a little bit of Puss goes a long way -- and while PUSS IN BOOTS is considerably more entertaining than the series from which it has been spun-off, it still falls flat.

Granted, I may have had some unrealistic expectations floating around in my head. The film is, after all, very much for kids, as were the SHREK films. (Comparatively, I will always maintain that most Pixar films are actually themed towards adults, with a kiddie sheen.) But dammit, on some level, I was hoping for an edgy, more “adult” Puss in Boots story that fully embodies the reputation that has been established -- namely, that he’s a scoundrel and a womanizer. I realize that this was a silly pipe dream, and while there are certainly hints of adult themes and humor sprinkled throughout (for example, one of Puss’ aliases is “Frisky Two-Times”), there is only so much you can do with a PG-rated kiddie film. Doesn’t mean I have to like it!

It also doesn’t help that the plot is both lackluster and kind of a mess. Taking place sometime before SHREK 2 (I guess?), it tells the story of how Puss achieved notoriety as a outlaw, lothario and legend. Along the way he reunites with his childhood friend-turned-rival-turned-criminal mastermind, Humpty Dumpty, and a female feline thief named Kitty Softpaws who proves to be a match for Puss in more ways than one. Then there’s something about stealing magic beans from Jack & Jill (portrayed here as hulking Bonnie & Clyde-type outlaws) to find a goose that lays golden eggs... you know, the usual twisted-fairy tale stuff. But the story just feels slapped together, convoluted and never manages to get off the ground. Even the action sequences, which could have been filled with swashbuckling fun, are unmemorable.

Fortunately there are some pluses. Voice work is very solid. Puss remains one of Antonio Banderas’ most memorable roles, since he plays it as a pitch-perfect send-up of his own on-screen persona (well, except for when he joins forces with Almodóvar and achieves a whole other level of excellence). Can’t go wrong with Salma Hayek as Banderas’ love interest -- in a twisted way, Puss & Kitty bring to mind the awesomeness (and hotness) of DESPERADO. Zach Galifianakis does a fine job as the disturbed (and disturbing) Humpty Dumpty, and Billy Bob Thornton & Amy Sedaris chew the animated scenery as Jack & Jill. There are some funny gags -- Puss lapping at the leche makes me chuckle -- and it’s worth mentioning that there is nary a pop culture reference to be found. (Disappointing, though, that they kind of run the “Puss in Boots sad face” gag into the ground.) Animation looks lovely with some better-than-average use of 3D, though it is definitely not necessary to spend the extra bucks. Great score, too, which invokes Morricone and was actually was stuck in my head for a while afterward -- which is more than I can say for the movie itself.

PUSS IN BOOTS opens this weekend. Kids will undoubtedly love it and parents should find it inoffensive, painless and, at times, mildly amusing. But let’s hope that the SHREK series ends here once and for all. Seriously, Dreamworks... even if PUSS makes a ton of money, please know that no good could come from a Gingerbread Man movie!

September Movie Sustenance, Part 2

2011-10-17T20:45:00.001-04:00

More words about movies I saw way back in September. GO!

THE LION KING 3D -- For me, the biggest selling point for this highly-anticipated theatrical re-release was not the 3D conversion, but the mere fact that we would be able to see one of the all-time great Disney movies on the big screen once again. And indeed, it is just as magical now as it was 18 years ago (particularly at the hallowed Ziegfeld Theatre, where I saw it). The movie, of course, is pretty much cinematic perfection. Arguably one of the best collections of songs in any Disney movie. Featuring one of the most dastardly Disney villains and one of the single most devastating moments. The opening “Circle of Life” sequence remains the most majestic visual thing Disney has ever done. Happy to report that the 3D isn’t half bad, either -- Disney is one of the few companies who gets that technology right on a consistent basis -- though I’d be lying if I said that it added much to the film. Would have been very happy to see it in glorious 2D if it had been available. But since this re-release made a ton of money, it looks like we’ll be seeing a bunch more Disney films converted into 3D over the next few years, including MONSTERS INC., FINDING NEMO and my personal favorite, THE LITTLE MERMAID -- which, again, is fine with me since it means we get to see them on the big screen. Classic Disney rules!

DRIVE -- Ryan Gosling IS Driver. He drives Hollywood stunt cars for a living and moonlights as a wheelman for armed heists -- a job at which he particularly excels. He is a loner, an enigma, a man of few words. But when he gets involved with a pretty neighbor, Irene (Carey Mulligan, very pretty indeed), and her young son, he finds a new purpose. He agrees to help Irene’s ex-con husband pay off a debt to a local crime syndicate, but the heist goes horribly wrong, and suddenly, Irene is in danger and Driver is forced to take matters into his own hands. And that’s when shit really gets heavy. Director Nicolas Winding Refn has crafted a gripping cinematic experience, featuring a cluster of homages spanning several decades: There’s the pulsing retro soundtrack. The pink COCKTAIL-esque title font. A grittiness that invokes old-school Michael Mann. The obvious parallel to Eastwood’s Man With No Name trilogy. A slow-burning plot punctuated by moments of incredible, gory violence (not unlike the Coens’ NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN). Intense car chases -- not so much because they are fast, but because of Driver’s calculated precision and knowledge of the terrain. Indeed, Gosling’s performance invokes stoic Eastwood and cool-as-hell Steve McQueen. In fact, “cool” may be the best word to describe this movie -- it just oozes coolness from every frame. Gosling has been on fire over the past few years (hell, he’s got three great performances this year alone) but this could and should be his real star-making turn. He’s backed up by a stellar supporting cast including Albert Brooks, Brian Cranston and Ron Perlman; Mulligan is also great if somewhat underused. This is the rare movie that lives up to all the hyperbole that inevitably surrounds it -- the kind of movie that sticks with you long after the credits roll. One of the year’s best and an absolute must-see, especially as Oscar season approaches.

RESTLESS -- Here we have a morbidly sweet story of two teenagers who fall in love under the shroud of death. Enoch (played by Henry Hopper, son of Dennis) likes to attend funerals for kicks. He has an imaginary friend/fairy godfather, the ghost of a dead Japanese kamikaze pilot named Hiroshi. He is still reeling from the tragic deaths of his parents. Basically, he’s obsessed with death. At one of his funerals, he meets Annabel (the lovely Mia Wasikowska), who is dying of cancer. She tries to overlook her condition and enjoy her remaining days to the fullest. She has a breezy attitude and positive outlook. Plus she’s real pretty. Enoch and Annabel are instant kindred spirits, their relationship blossoms, and while her life cannot be saved, his lease on life is renewed. It’s all very precious and while I enjoy a good whimsical romance as much as the next guy, this one is just a bit TOO quirky for its own good. As usual, Gus van Sant coaxes excellent performances out of his actors -- Wasikowska is particularly luminous, giving her three great performances in a row, following THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT and JANE EYRE (note that I don’t count ALICE IN WONDERLAND, though she WAS the best part of that god-awful dreck). But in the end, the film suffers from a case of twee-overload and thus, is aptly named because “restless” is kind of how I felt while watching it.

KILLER ELITE -- It’s been a while since Robert De Niro has been the best part of a movie, as the latter part of his illustrious career has been, shall we say, somewhat uneven. Well, he is most definitely the best part of this action thriller -- but that’s kind of like saying that the kernels of corn in your shit are the best part of the shit. In what will surely rank as one of the worst movies of the year, this film pits Jason Statham (as an ex-special ops agent who is drawn back into the game) against Clive Owen (as the leader of a secret military society and sporting a terrible mustache). I suppose this could have been a fun battle of bad-asses; unfortunately, the result is a convoluted, over-plotted, poorly-written, dull mess involving oil tycoons, secret societies, a tell-all book and various levels of deception. I generally like Statham, but he’s pretty much a one-trick pony; if the trick doesn’t work, then it’s a bad scene. As for Owen, the only reason I haven’t given up on him completely is because I recently watched a movie called TRUST in which he displays legit acting talent beyond his usual shtick (first time that’s happened since CLOSER; note that I’m one of the few who doesn’t worship at the altar of CHILDREN OF MEN); would love to see more of that and less of this bullshit. Apparently the story is inspired by real events -- clearly they should have just made something up.

MONEYBALL -- A movie that does for the business of baseball what THE SOCIAL NETWORK did for the creation of Facebook, which is to say, it takes a potentially dull subject and turns it into a riveting adventure with memorable characters, snappy dialogue and exhilarating situations. Of course, the great Aaron Sorkin is once again responsible for a fantastic screenplay -- an adaptation of the Michael Lewis book that rocked the baseball boat and introduced the world to a whole new mode of thought in which traditional scouting tactics (often based on intangible player characteristics like “scrappiness”) were eschewed for a focus on pure statistical analysis. This theory was first adopted by Billy Beane, general manager of the Oakland A’s (portrayed here by Brad Pitt, who does a fantastic job). After the A’s lost some of their best players to free agency before the 2002 season, Beane, with the help of his wunderkind assistant (Jonah Hill in his best performance since SUPERBAD) and strapped by the team’s piddling small-market payroll, put together a ragtag group of players that, to most of the baseball world, seemed like a joke. But naturally, in pure baseball movie style, they shocked everybody and made the playoffs in a remarkable season highlighted by a league-record 20-game winning streak. On an emotional level, it’s as effective as any baseball movie I’ve ever seen and may rank among the best of ‘em. An outstanding film that breathes life into a subject that was once (foolishly) thought to take the heart out of America’s pastime.

50/50 -- Wow, second movie of the month about a character that has cancer! But this time, it’s not morbidly quirky but legitimately funny, heartfelt and poignant. Joseph Gordon-Levitt stars is Adam, a twenty-something guy who is diagnosed with a rare form of spinal cancer. His mom freaks out. His girlfriend can’t deal with it. Fortunately, he has a best friend, Kyle (Seth Rogen in a return to form), who rises to the occasion and gives Adam the support he needs. The film follows Adam as he goes through various stages of optimism and doubt, endures chemotherapy and attempts to live whatever life he may have left. There are some great episodic moments, such as Kyle coercing Adam to use his condition to get them both laid. Adam also develops relationships with a couple of Statler & Waldorf-esque fellow cancer patients, as well as a young, naive therapist (Anna Kendrick, great as always) who has been assigned to provide counsel. Characters are built nicely, setting the stage for a potent final act in which Adam learns that he must undergo potentially life-threatening surgery. Co-written by Rogen and Will Reiser, and based on Reiser’s real-life experience, the film toes the line between comedy and drama and packs an emotional punch -- at its core, it’s a story of true friendship and may well be the feel-good movie of the year.

By the way, gang, if you’ve seen any of these movies (or want to see them, or have zero interest in seeing them), please do share your thoughts, opinions, criticisms, etc. Movie discussion makes the world go ‘round!

September Movie Sustenance, Part 1

2011-10-09T16:11:00.000-04:00

*sigh*... yes, I am late with my monthly movie recap once again. What are ya gonna do? September was a very busy month at the cinema: I saw a total of 15 movies (that’s a lot) -- including my 100th movie of 2011 on Sept. 13th, by far the earliest I’ve ever reached the magical century mark. Clearly, I managed to overcome whatever mini-swoon I had in August and put myself back on potentially record-breaking pace. Go me! Here’s what I saw:

THE DEBT -- The latest entry in the much-heralded “ass-kicking Jews” sub-genre. Directed by John Madden, it’s an espionage thriller that spans four decades: In 1966, a team of Mossad agents (Sam Worthington, Marton Csokas and breakout star of the year Jessica Chastain) embark on a mission to capture an insidious Nazi war criminal. Things do not go as planned, but their mission is accomplished nonetheless... or so the world is led to believe. But decades later, just as a book on the subject is about to be released, the aging heroes (now portrayed by Tom Wilkinson, Ciaran Hinds and Helen Mirren) are presented with startling revelations that put their reputations -- and history itself -- at risk. The film builds tension nicely as it shifts between time periods and performances are excellent across the board. Unfortunately, the plot goes a little overboard in the final act and loses much of its potency. That being said, there has not yet been a bad “ass-kicking Jews” movie, and while this installment is not in the same stratosphere as such films as MUNICH and INGLORIOUS BASTERDS, it is still worth watching.

APOLLO 18 -- In space, no one can hear you scream, “THIS SUCKS.” Sorry, couldn’t resist. Yeah... I think we can all agree that the “found footage” faux-documentary has been, at best, a mixed bag over the years. THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT was the reigning king for a long time, though this year’s amazing TROLLHUNTER may very well have stolen that title. Personally, I’ve also enjoyed the hell out of the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY films and am psyched for #3. But there have been far more misses than hits, and this dismally dull dreck may be the worst of the lot. The footage supposedly shows us why we never sent man back to the Moon after the last official mission, Apollo 17, in 1972. Seems that a year later, a secret mission was commissioned by the Department of Defense to investigate some strange business on the lunar surface. The astronauts brought along a handicam and hijinks ensued, involving abandoned Soviet spacecraft, inexplicable footprints, creepy-crawlies and space madness. It’s terribly plotted, terribly acted, and worst of all, terribly boring and feels terribly long even at a mere 86 minutes. An unfortunate waste of what actually could have been a good idea if done right.

A GOOD OLD FASHIONED ORGY -- Jason Sudekis stars as Eric, a thirtysomething guy, known for throwing epic parties at his parents’ house with his group of friends who have known each other since high school. When they learn that Eric’s dad is selling the house, they decide to have one last sendoff... in the form of a full-fledged naked sex orgy! Now, for you readers who don’t know me personally: I’m a thirtysomething guy. For years, I threw epic parties at my parents’ house (first known as HANDS ACROSS BEN’S GRANDFATHER’S BASEMENT, a music fest for local acts, headlined by my own band; and later BEN’S BACKYARD BIRTHDAY BASH, a binge-drinking extravaganza featuring multiple tables of Beer Pong). And I’ve had the same primary group of friends since high school. Sooo... make of that what you will. Seriously, though, this is a funny movie, featuring lots of raunchy humor and starring lots of funny people. The build-up is great with lots of “will they or won’t they?” tension as the characters attempt to psych themselves up for the big day. Then, in the final act... well, there is, in fact, an orgy and it is funny and ridiculous and awkward. This is not a classic comedy by any means, but if you, too, are a thirtysomething guy (or gal) caught in the throes of the aging process, it might just hit the spot.

HIGHER GROUND -- I’ve been a fan of Vera Farmiga for a while now -- most notably her Oscar-nominated performance in UP IN THE AIR, in which she also provided that year’s hottest on-screen presence. But it turns out that she is also pretty talented behind the camera and pulls double-duty with this fantastic little film that explores one woman’s relationship with organized religion. Vera is outstanding as Corinne, a woman who has struggled to figure out her own spirituality since childhood. Over the course of her life, she experiences ebbs and flows of devoutness and doubt in her faith, often directly related to specific events and relationships with family and friends -- but the story (based on the memoir of Carolyn S. Briggs, who co-wrote the screenplay) never serves to judge the religious experience one way or the other. As a result, it can be interpreted in a number of ways depending upon your own views. Acting-wise, Vera is amazing and surrounds herself with a solid supporting cast, particularly Dagmara Dominczyk as her saucy best friend. It’s a well-crafted, heartfelt, thought-provoking film -- in a perfect world, Vera Farmiga would become the first woman ever to snag Oscar nods for both Best Actress AND Director. Here’s hoping it doesn’t fall too far under the radar when the time comes.

WARRIOR -- I don’t give a damn about Mixed Martial Arts, but somehow this movie managed to draw me in. It’s not exactly what you’d call “good,” but it resonates on a crowd-pleasing, emotional level in spite of its flaws, which include a cliché-ridden plot, generic dialogue and stock characters. But there’s also a heartfelt focus on family, the plight of the underdog, far more intense fights than any real-life MMA match I’ve ever seen, gratuitous patriotism, surprisingly-compelling drama and strong lead performances. Joel Edgarton (Owen Lars in the STAR WARS prequels) and Tom Hardy (The Forger in INCEPTION) are Brendon and Tommy, estranged brothers who took very different paths after their family fell apart due to their alcoholic father (Nick Nolte, who is terrible and perfect at the same time): Brendon dabbled in MMA and went on to become a schoolteacher; Tommy joined the Marines and experienced some heavy shit. A series of unfortunate life events bring them together as competitors at the world’s biggest MMA tournament in Atlantic City -- Brendon as a feel-good underdog and Tommy as an unstoppable force -- which, naturally, sets them (and dear old dad) on a collision course both in and out of the octagon. Sappy and melodramatic? You betcha. But it works. Edgarton is especially good and will hopefully get his due after this. Also worth mentioning that A.C. looked pretty good on the big screen for a change -- lots of sweeping shots of the Boardwalk and the casinos and beaches. As a frequent visitor, it was nice to see!

CONTAGION -- Steven Soderbergh gives us a compelling and downright frightening look at what might happen if a superflu threatened to wipe out a good chunk of humanity. Comparisons to Stephen King’s THE STAND immediately come to mind, but that was a story about good vs. evil and had a supernatural element, whereas this one is grounded in reality and focuses primarily on the scientists and government officials who race to find a cure and prevent worldwide panic. The pace is fast and furious and terrifying -- at times it feels like an action movie, but with science. The cast is the stuff that dreams are made of: Kate Winslet, Marion Cotillard, Laurence Fishburne, Matt Damon, Jude Law, Bryan Cranston... the list goes on. (Even Gwyneth Paltrow gives one of her most memorable performances ever, though it doesn’t hurt that she dies 10 minutes into the film.) Interestingly, with a fairly short run time and lots of intertwining storylines, most characters aren’t really given a whole lot of time to develop -- but because they are portrayed by some of the best actors on the planet, it adds a sense of gravitas that might not otherwise exist. Smart move on Soderbergh’s part. In the end, it’s a slick, effective film that suggests beyond a shadow of a doubt that if such a catastrophe ever struck in real life, we’d be fucked.

LOVE CRIME -- This French noir thriller pits the great Kristen Scott Thomas against the delectable Ludivine Sagnier in a game of corporate cat-and-mouse with increasingly costly consequences. Christine (Thomas) is a ruthless executive who takes pleasure in taking advantage of her protégé, Isabelle (Sagnier), toying with her naiveté and exploiting her skills under the pretense of teaching life lessons. But when Christine steals Isabelle’s ideas and passes them off as her own, she unwittingly awakens a hidden beast. The title actually refers to the film’s two distinct halves: “Love” deals with the rise & fall of Christine & Isabelle’s relationship and is intense and titillating; “Crime” deals with Isabelle’s quest for vengeance and that’s where the plot goes off the rails a bit. Co-written and directed by the late Alain Corneau, it strives to be Hitchcockian with its many twists and turns, but is a mostly laborious character study that feels much longer than its two-hour run time. Performances are excellent, though; this is probably Sagnier’s best work since the great SWIMMING POOL, though, honestly, she could sit there and read the Paris phone book for two hours and I’d walk out of the theatre a happy man. (Fun fact: This was my 100th movie of 2011. Random choice!)

Lots more September Movie Silliness to come -- stay tuned for Part 2!

Behold… The Cinematic Centipede

2011-10-08T20:25:00.001-04:00

If that madman Tom Six is trying to teach us anything with his controversial magnum opus, it’s that it takes at least three segments to make a centipede. With that in mind, to mark the release of THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 (FULL SEQUENCE), I decided to create a centipede of my own. But instead of stitching people together anus-to-mouth... well, I stitched together three movie screenings. Why? Because this is the kind of shit I do. And so, my friends, I give to you... THE CINEMATIC CENTIPEDE.

FRONT SEGMENT

My triple-feature began at 6:15 p.m. at the AMC Empire with THE IDES OF MARCH, a tasty political thriller that serves to burst the bubble of political idealists by insinuating that no matter how great your candidate may seem, chances are he’s got skeletons in his closet that would rock the foundation of your moral fiber. In that sense, and considering the backdoor political shenanigans that are surely happening as we speak, this is kind of a depressing film. But I have a deep-seeded aversion to political discussion/debate, so we’ll leave that alone. Instead, let’s focus on how this film is carried by four outstanding performances from four of the greatest actors on the planet: George Clooney (who also directed & co-wrote), Ryan Gosling, Paul Giamatti and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Goddamn... watching these guys play games of political cat-and-mouse is nothing short of scintillating. Clooney’s Mike Morris is smooth, charismatic and perfectly believable -- if he (the character or the actor himself) ran for President, hell, I’d vote for him. Gosling is outstanding as Steven Meyers, a young press secretary who has devoted his life to Morris and everything he stands for, only to find himself drawn into a soul-sucking web of lies and treachery that ultimately transforms him into that which he once despised. In a sense, Steven’s character arc is similar to that of Michael Corleone in THE GODFATHER, drawn into the dirty family business in spite of his best efforts to not get his hands dirty. And then, of course, there’s Giamatti and Hoffman -- amazing as always, and on screen together for the first time ever (though they don’t actually share any scenes together other than a brief nod from across the room early in the film, which seems fitting). It’s a veritable acting clinic between these four guys, combined with solid direction and taut dialogue -- another fine effort behind the camera for Clooney, along with CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND and GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK. It’s not the kind of film that will blow the doors off of Washington or change the political climate (deep down, we all know what’s going on), but it’s a fine film nonetheless.

MIDDLE SEGMENT

Moving on, I went downstairs for the 8:25 p.m. showing of MACHINE GUN PREACHER, which, considering the fact that it stars Gerard Butler as a badass junkie criminal-turned-missionary freedom fighter, sounds like something that should have been shown at midnight at a seedy ‘70s grindhouse theatre. But in fact, it’s the remarkable true story of Sam Childers, an ex-con who finds God and goes to Africa to help the children of Sudan as a means of atoning for his sins. While there, he gets personally involved in the brutal civil war that has killed hundreds of thousands, defending his charges against the enemy with force and earning his titular nickname. For such an incredible real-life story, the film is fairly straightforward and occasionally bogged down by clichés. The scenes in Sudan are staggering at times, but whenever Childers comes home to the U.S. and deals with his family troubles and his drug-addict best friend, it takes on a movie-of-the-week feel. That said, performances are solid. Gerard Butler can definitely bring the badassery and he’s not terrible at the melodramatic stuff (though I do hope he has gotten past his ill-advised romantic comedy phase). It’s always nice to see the lovely & talented Michelle Monghan, and as usual, Michael Shannon steals every scene he’s in. Not a great movie, but not bad -- and it certainly means well, drawing attention to atrocities that we Americans don’t know nearly enough about. (Would still like to see the grindhouse version, though....)

REAR SEGMENT

At last, it was time for the main event. After lingering outside for a few moments to follow the end of the Cardinals-Phillies game on my phone (PHUCK PHILLY!), I headed downtown to the IFC Center for a certain midnight screening. Turns out I wasn’t alone -- there was a line that stretched down the block and I ended up with a not-particularly-choice seat in the second row. There was some pre-show horror film trivia and they gave away the greatest piece of movie swag ever: Official HC2 staple removers. And then, at last, the lights went down and part two of Tom Six’s epic saga began.

Now, let me just say that, despite my enthusiasm and the fact that I themed an entire night of movie-watching around it, I do not think THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE is a particularly great film. But it does have some great elements: Deiter Laser’s memorable performance as the sadistic Mengele-esque mastermind, Dr. Heiter. A wildly original idea. The fact that it is gross and over-the-top without really being gross and over-the-top -- much of its effectiveness is suggestive rather than overly graphic (quite an achievement, considering the subject matter). The mere fact that THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE has so engrained itself into American pop culture suggests that, like it or not, it has earned the right to be considered a modern horror classic in spite of itself.

THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 (FULL SEQUENCE), however, takes things in a completely different direction. Gone is the suggestive horror that straddles the line between subtle and in-your-face. What we have here is sheer, unbridled brutality, senseless slaughter, lingering shots of teeth being bashed in, tattered orifices, gushing blood and splattering feces, all bound together by Tom Six’s own inflated sense of self-importance.

This time, the “mastermind” is a grotesque, obese, sweaty, mentally challenged asthmatic named Martin. Poor Martin has endured a lifetime of sexual, physical and psychological abuse at the hands of his perverted father and homicidal mother, and, naturally, has become obsessed with the original HUMAN CENTIPEDE film. He watches it incessantly, masturbates to it, keeps a scrapbook of photos and diagrams, and, yes, dreams about someday creating a human centipede of his own. To this end, he uses his job as a parking garage night watchman as a means to capture potential centipede segments. He takes his victims to a dingy old warehouse and stores them there, bound, naked and face-down in their own filth. When he finally entices Ashlynn Yennie, the actress from the original film, to come to London (under the pretense that she is to audition for the new Tarantino film -- hilarious)... well, that’s when Martin’s work can begin.

Unlike Dr. Heiter, Martin does not have medical training and surgical supplies -- but he does have a variety of knives, pliers, a hammer, crowbar and staple gun. As Martin works, absolutely nothing is left to the imagination. Shot in stark black-and-white (with one creative use of isolated color, a la SCHINDLER’S LIST) and mostly dialogue-free except for the screams of the victims (in fact, Martin himself never utters a single word), the proceedings range from heinous to horrific to just plain gross. I have no idea where the hell Tom Six found this guy Laurence R. Harvey, but his performance as Martin is utterly insane and arguably more disturbing than that of Dieter Laser.

Honestly, while the original film may be a modern classic and a cult favorite, there is little redeeming value in THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2. Even the desensitized IFC Center midnight audience, who were hooting and hollering at the beginning, were mostly aghast by the end. And yet... Tom Six clearly has something grandiose in mind here. He is, after all, creating his own Cinematic Centipede. What the hell could he possibly have in store for THE FINAL SEQUENCE? All we know is that it will likely be set in the United States. Could we possibly see THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE ACROSS AMERICA? Tens of thousands of people stitched together, anus-to-mouth, from sea to shining sea? God help me, but I’m sure that come 2013, I’ll once again be there at midnight to find out.

It’s Official: I’ve Cancelled My STAR WARS Blu-Ray Pre-Order

2011-09-12T20:27:00.000-04:00

It gives me absolutely no pleasure to write this blog post. I am really, legitimately sad about this, and I agonized over the decision for some time before finally pulling the trigger a few days ago. And then I agonized even more before I could bring myself to write this essay. But it’s true: I have indeed cancelled my STAR WARS: THE COMPLETE SAGA Blu-Ray pre-order on Amazon in light of the news that the following alteration as been made to my favorite scene from my favorite movie of all time, RETURN OF THE JEDI:

Those of you who know me know that I have long been a huge Star Wars apologist, often to a fault. While I fully acknowledge that most of Lucas’ changes to the special editions have ranged from “unnecessary” to “completely and utterly senseless,” I have always been able to to focus on the positive. In my opinion, the things that I LOVE about the Star Wars saga have always vastly outweighed these few bad things. Yes, it’s stupid that Greedo shoots first in A NEW HOPE. Yes, the added dialogue between Vader and the Emperor in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK dumbs down the scene. Yes, the musical sequence in Jabba’s Palace in RETURN OF THE JEDI is a joke. But it’s okay -- I can close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears and go “LALALALA” during those scenes and still enjoy the remaining 99% of the films. (The prequels, of course, have far worse problems, but even they have their moments and while I have gone through various stages of prequel obsession and backlash over the years, I am now at a point where I can make fun of them AND enjoy them at the same time.)

I have also always considered the release of a new Star Wars trilogy box set to be a momentous occasion, especially in a new media format. I currently own five versions of the original trilogy: The pre-special edition VHS set from 1990; both the widescreen AND full-screen THX-enhanced VHS sets from 1995; the special edition VHS set from 1997; and the special edition DVD release from 2004. (I’ve never owned a laserdisc player or I’d probably own that legendary set, too.) I remember when the THX trilogy was released, my friend Nisha and I embarked on a quest all around NYC to track one down. It took all day, but we finally found it at some random store in the Village. It was a joyous moment (which we later celebrated by playing the Star Wars Drinking Game until we literally passed out, but that's a whole other story). So, needless to say, when it was announced that Star Wars was coming to glorious Blu-Ray in a nine-disc set with a wealth of bonus features including never-before-seen deleted scenes... well, I placed my pre-order immediately.

Of course, I figured that the original theatrical versions would NOT be included, which annoys me to no end and seems to go against everything George Lucas once stood for. Remember, this is a man who stood before Congress in 1988 (less than ten years before the special editions were released) and said this:

"People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as 'when life begins' or 'when it should be appropriately terminated,' but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race."

You can read the full text of his testimony here -- it gets even better and more mind-boggling, considering what he has become. He has been blatantly defying his own mandate for the past 20 years -- an unbelievable display of hypocrisy that would almost be comical if it wasn't so serious. I mean, it’s fine if he wants to consider the special editions as the “definitive” versions of the movies -- that's his prerogative. But dammit, you HAVE to include the original theatrical versions as a point of comparison and for the sake of preservation! All of his fellow contemporary filmmakers realize this: Spielberg included both versions of E.T. on the DVD release (and has since apologized for changing it at all and vowed never to mess with his movies again). Ridley Scott included FIVE versions of BLADE RUNNER on an incredible Blu-Ray release. The amazing ALIEN ANTHOLOGY contains multiple versions of all four films. James Cameron even included three versions of AVATAR on the deluxe Blu-Ray. There is simply NO reason for Lucas to not include the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy -- three of the most important and influential and beloved films of all time -- other than pure stubbornness and a complete lack of respect for the fans and film history.

There’s also a certain level of crazy vindictiveness on Lucas’ part. You may recall that when the trilogy was re-released on DVD in 2006, it was touted that they WOULD include the original theatrical editions. This is only half true. Yes, the pre-special edition versions of the movies were included as special features on those discs. But they were the shoddiest transfers possible, basically ripped from the laserdiscs that were released in the ‘90s (therefore using outdated transfer technology), and not even given the minimum anamorphic treatment that even the shittiest movies are given when released on DVD, let alone three of the most beloved movies of all time. Note that this had nothing to do with the fact that they were old films with matte lines, grain, etc. -- we’re talking about the most basic work that goes into putting a movie on DVD. This link goes into much greater detail about exactly what went wrong with this release -- a must-read. But the point is, it was almost as if Lucas intentionally released them in the worst possible quality so as to render them unwatchable, so that the general public would be like, “Wow, the special editions really ARE better!” The die-hards, of course, were not fooled, and a great furor arose.

But you know what? Whatever. Someday, you gotta figure there will be a super-duper ultimate edition in which the original versions will be given the proper treatment and all will be right with the world. For now, I still would have focused on the positive (as usual), bought the Blu-Rays and done the aforementioned “eyes closed, fingers in the ears” trick during the dumb parts just to be able to see my favorite films in high-definition. Not to mention all those bonus features, especially the deleted scenes -- some of which (like the Wampa attack on Echo Base in EMPIRE and the sandstorm scene in JEDI) we have heard about, but never seen, for decades. That alone is enough to get my geek heart aflutter.

But then came the announcement that Lucas had made more changes to the films. "I have a bad feeling about this," I thought. The first one we heard about was that the digital Yoda from Episodes II and III would be inserted into Episode I, replacing the puppet that was used in the original release. Now, granted, replacing the puppet in EMPIRE and JEDI would be grounds for assassination... but that PHANTOM MENACE puppet WAS pretty terrible. So far, so good.

I also saw that they have actually improved the infamous Han/Greedo scene in A NEW HOPE. Now, Greedo still gets a shot off, but it's cleaner and more simultaneous, like an old-west shootout. Still dumb as hell... but slightly more palatable. Fair enough.

But wait, there’s more. Seems Lucas has also decided to alter Ben Kenobi’s Krayt dragon impression in A NEW HOPE for no good reason, and now it sounds like something Yoko Ono would have recorded in the ‘70s. And he added extra rocks to the scene where Artoo is hiding after the Sandpeople attack, which makes no sense (how did he get back there? how does he get out?). And he digitally altered the Ewoks eyes so they now blink, because clearly, the non-blinking eyes is the reason why people don’t like Ewoks. Dumb, unnecessary changes, all... really just tinkering for the sake of tinkering... but still, harmless enough in the scheme of things. Wouldn’t have stopped me from purchasing the Blu-Rays if the changes ended here.

Sadly, they did not.

Darth Vader bellowing a cheesy-sounding “NOOOOO” as he hurls the Emperor to his death in what is arguably the seminal moment of the entire Star Wars saga??

That, I cannot forgive.

We can all see why Lucas did this, cinematically speaking. Vader bellows “NOOOOO!” as he comes to life at the end of REVENGE OF THE SITH. So, in George’s clueless mind, it makes sense to parallel that with Vader bellowing “NOOOOO” as he finds redemption at the end of RETURN OF THE JEDI. It makes sense, from a certain, twisted point of view. Except for two things:

First, the “NOOOOO” in Episode III was one of the most reviled moments of the entire prequel trilogy (which is really saying something). It turned what should have been Anakin's lowest moment of despair into... well, a joke. Actually, it wasn't even the "NOOOOO" itself that was so bad (hell, Luke screams "NOOOOO" when he learns Vader's identity in EMPIRE and it works), but the execution of the scene and the delivery of the line is just... so... bad. Fans made no secret of their feelings, and we know that Lucas is a stubborn, touchy bastard, so it's almost as if he is now saying, "You hated the 'NOOOOO' in SITH, did ya? Well, you're really gonna hate this." It's like he is sending a blatant, rousing "FUCK YOU" to all of Star Wars fandom.

Second, and most important: Sure, JEDI is a flawed film at times, and one that first raised the red flag that maybe Lucas was beginning to lose touch with reality as a result of his massive success. But whatever -- from the Rancor to Luke’s green lightsaber to the speeder bike chase, the movie rules. But the REAL reason it stands as my all-time favorite movie is because the last forty-five minutes. The Battle of Endor, the assault on the Death Star, and Luke’s duel with Vader as the Emperor looks on... quite simply, that is cinematic perfection. Especially the duel. I love everything about those scenes. Luke’s turmoil. “Your overconfidence is your weakness / Your faith in your friends is yours!” Luke finally giving in to the Dark Side as John Williams’ score swells. “I am a Jedi, like my father before me.” “So be it... Jedi.” The Emperor unleashing Dark Side energy (remember, at the time, we had never seen Force Lightning until that moment, so it was like HOLY SHIT). “Young fool, only now at the end do you understand.” And then Vader’s silent turmoil as he looks back and forth between his dying son and his vengeful master... and his ultimate, wordless decision to come back to the good side. A lump is forming in my throat as I write this, and it is two-fold: The scene is so powerful and I love it so much AND I hate that Lucas has turned it into a joke by adding that “NOOOOO.” This is NOT a change for which I can close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears and go “LALALALA”... because goddammit, I don’t WANT to have to do that during my favorite fucking movie moment of all time!

And so, here we are. After all these years of defending the Star Wars films and loving them unconditionally, George Lucas has finally pushed me too far. He finally messed with something he really shouldn't have messed with, to the point where it renders my favorite movie unwatchable. It's clear that he is more machine now than man; twisted and evil. And unfortunately, the only thing that we, the fans, can do in protest is simply not buy it.

That I will not be receiving the Star Wars Saga on glorious Blu-Ray this week makes me very sad. I’ve never been more depressed about not spending $80. I had planned to spend the coming weekend watching all six films in one sitting for the first time ever, digging through the bonus features, basking in the high-def experience... that's out the window now. And the worst part is, it will probably make no difference. The geeks have come out en masse to protest on Amazon.com, where the set currently has a dismal two-star rating (with 753 out of 1,035 giving it a one-star thrashing), but it will probably still sell like hotcakes to the general public who either don't know or don't care as much as the die-hards. Meanwhile, Lucas will sit up in his tower, oblivious to the fact that, while the dollars are still rolling in, he has alienated his most loyal and important fan base.

Regardless, I strongly urge my fellow Star Wars fans to follow suit and cancel your pre-orders if you haven't already done so. Might as well do what little we can. And maybe someday Lucas will come to his senses and have Han shoot Greedo in cold blood, remove those ludicrous "Vader shuttle" scenes from EMPIRE, and above all, get that God-forsaken "NOOOOO" out of JEDI... or at the very least, give us every version of the films (theatrical, special edition, super-special edition, etc.) to both preserve their evolution for history's sake AND allow us to choose which ones we want to watch. But until that happens, George Lucas... you have failed me for the last time.

August Movie Amusement, Part 2

2011-09-11T12:29:00.000-04:00

Finally, the rest of the stuff I saw in August. GO!

ONE DAY -- A lot of people may consider this movie a sad but touching story of love and the trials and tribulations people must go through in order to discover who they truly are. But I’m not so sure. To me, it’s more like a devastating tale of squandered lives and missed opportunities. Emma (Anne Hathaway, sporting a questionable British accent) and Dexter (Jim Sturgess) meet cute following their college graduation on July 15th, 1988. After a near-hookup that night, they keep in touch, and the film touches upon the state of their relationship on every July 15th for the next 20 years. At times they are friends... not friends... more than friends... but regardless of what else is going on, they are the one constant in each other’s lives. Gimmicky, sure... but Anne and Jim are both incredibly charming and make the material work. I can appreciate the commentary on the power of friendship -- but a surprising plot twist changes the entire tone of the movie. When all is said and done, there is not really anything happy or hopeful unless you are an unconditionally, perhaps foolishly, optimistic person. But either way, it’s a solid romance. (Though it DOES overlook another important event that occurred on July 15th in the year 1995: The serendipitous formation of my old band, The Gravity! Come on, that was huge!)

THE HELP -- Seems this movie has become a bit of a phenomenon, having topped the box office for three consecutive weeks as of this writing, and the popularity it has achieved has been matched only by the controversy it has stirred. It is the story of several women in 1960s Mississippi who undertake a secret project that allows African-American housemaids to tell their personal stories; tell the truth about their employers, their treatment and their living conditions; and basically blow the roof off of one of America’s most despicable racist societies. Say what you want about how the film handles its racial themes: Yes, it glosses over such issues as the physical abuse and extreme degradation that these women probably experienced on a daily basis. And perhaps the characters are mostly archetypes and everything is sugarcoated with candy-colored images and humor. But just because a rape, for example, isn’t shown on screen doesn’t mean that the message isn’t getting across to the viewer. (That’s like saying that a World War II movie can’t be effective unless it has an obligatory shot of concentration camp victims.) Certainly, a more visceral and perhaps more important movie could be made -- but this is not that movie and I don’t think that necessarily detracts from its effectiveness. Above all, there can be no denying the courage that these women had to display in order to tell their stories -- just as there can be no denying the power of the lead performances, starting with Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer, both of whom are just astonishingly good. Emma Stone, meanwhile, continues her run of extreme likeability, while Bruce Dallas Howard makes Hilly Holbrook one of the year’s most despicable villains, and Jessica Chastain continues her breakout year (also see: THE TREE OF LIFE and THE DEBT) with a great turn as an outcast socialite. These performances carry the film to great emotional heights and help it to overcome its occasional lack of focus and socio-political shortcomings. I’ve little doubt that we will we will see several Oscar nods come out of this group in a few months.

FINAL DESTINATION 5 -- At this point, there can be no denying this series’ place in the pantheon of modern horror. If SAW is this generation’s NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, then FINAL DESTINATION is definitely FRIDAY THE 13th. Granted, neither is as good as its ‘80s counterpart, but the cultural impact, and certainly the longevity, is most certainly there. In my opinion, the first FINAL DESTINATION can safely be considered a classic, and although the films have declined in quality with each passing installment, at least they’ve always provided an original gimmick and gruesome, creative kills. (I’ll take that over wretched, unnecessary remakes any day.) Everyone groaned when #5 was announced, since the fourth one was supposed to be the end... but really, we shouldn’t have been surprised about that. The surprising thing is that it’s actually pretty good! Easily the best since the original, as it tweaks the gimmick a bit to keep things fresh (turns out that you can transfer your place on Death’s list by taking another person’s life). Characters remain dumb archetypes, but kills are strong, and there is a jaw-dropping twist at the end that pretty much redeems the entire series. If they’re smart, they’ll REALLY end it here and go out on a high note.... hey, why is everybody laughing?

DON’T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK -- Guillermo del Toro has already asserted himself as the king of the “adult fairy tale,” as proven by his masterpiece, PAN’S LABYRINTH (my #1 movie of 2006 and one of my top 25 films of the ‘00s). He is also a master of setting the horror-fantasy mood -- which he does with great success in this haunted house story that he co-wrote (and probably unofficially did more than that). The story is simple: A family moves into a big, creaky mansion, where a little girl, out of loneliness and curiosity, uncovers an ancient evil. She is then terrorized by hungry, mischievous, deadly little beasties... but of course, no one believes her when she tries to explain. Visually, aurally and psychologically, the film is very strong and pretty damn creepy at times. Bailee Madison gives a believable performance, though Guy Pearce and Katie Holmes seem a bit out of their element. The fatal flaw is that the plot gets silly and the beasties even sillier, which detracts from the creepiness. Wouldn’t be a stretch to call it a mix of PAN’S LABYRINTH and GREMLINS... albeit nowhere near as good as those films, but an interesting mix nonetheless, and worth checking out if you’re a fan of del Toro’s work. (Note that I have not seen the original ‘70s TV movie, so I cannot comment on how this works as a remake.)

COLOMBIANA -- The prevailing theory is that Luc Besson wrote this movie about a sexy ass-kicking female assassin with the intention that it would be the sequel to THE PROFESSIONAL, with grown-up Natalie Portman reprising her (best) role... but when that plan fell through, they tinkered with it and came up with this. If that is true, it is a great misfortune for Besson, Portman, and especially for us, because as it stands, this result is not very good. Which is a shame, because I am a fan of Zoe Saldana -- in fact, before Ron Howard’s DARK TOWER project fell through, I was championing for her to be cast as Susannah Dean. She definitely has great screen presence (and I’m not just saying that because she is ridiculously hot), but she is completely undermined by a dopey plot. It’s just a big, loud mess. If you’re in it for Zoe’s pulchritude and a couple of decent action sequences and explosions, then it is probably worth a rental -- otherwise, re-watch THE PROFESSIONAL instead, and ponder over the sequel that might have been.

OUR IDIOT BROTHER -- I’ve had a man-crush on Paul Rudd for a long, long time, and this loveable movie about a loveable guy has done nothing to abate that. Rudd plays Ned, a stoner with a heart of gold. It’s not that he’s an idiot, so much as he has a lack of common sense and is so innately good-hearted that he always expects kindness from everyone else, whether it’s a stranger on the subway or his own flesh and blood. After being released from jail for selling weed to a uniformed police officer (an infuriating case of entrapment, by the way), Ned finds himself homeless and alone when his girlfriend kicks him off their farm and keeps his dog. He goes back to live with his mother for a bit, but ends up crashing with each of his three sisters, all of whom have issues of their own. Miranda (Elizabeth Banks) is an overly-ambitious career woman; Liz (Emily Mortimer) is unhappily married to a philandering jackass (Steve Coogan); Natalie (Zooey Deschanel) is a crappy stand-up comic and kind of a slut. Unfortunately for the sisters, Ned’s easy-breezy attitude ends up causing more than a few headaches for them, despite his best efforts to make everybody happy. Is the family headed for disaster? Or will Ned prove to everyone that believing in and trusting humanity isn’t such a bad thing? The movie is funny, heartfelt and surprisingly poignant. The story and characters are built so nicely that by the time (highlight invisible text for mild spoiler) Ned has an uncharacteristic outburst late in the film, it hits a much bigger emotional chord than expected. The cast is fantastic (clearly there are some damn good genes in this good-looking family), but obviously this movie belongs to Rudd, who carries the proceedings with irresistible, loveable charm. It’s not a flawless movie, but it will definitely put a smile on your face. It also features a good old fashioned “outtakes” sequence during the closing credits, which has one particularly awesome moment -- you’ll know it when you see it!

STRAW DOGS -- This remake of the ‘70s classic (which, to my discredit, I have not seen... but is at the very top of my Netflix queue) stars James Marsden and Kate Bosworth as David and Amy, an L.A. film writer and his actress wife who move back to her hometown in the deep South following her father’s death. There they encounter Charlie (Alexander Skarsgård), a local construction worker who also happens to be an ex-flame of Amy’s, and who still carries a torch for her. David, of course, is a fish out of water in this backwater town, and Charlie and his buddies don’t make it easy, antagonizing him and Amy at every turn. This puts a strain on their marriage: she wants him to stand up for himself and be a man, while he prefers a non-confrontational approach. Writer/director Rod Lurie gives us an intense, slow burn of a plot, constantly peeling back layers of character development that make things more and more complicated (this is particularly true during and after the film’s most disturbing and controversial scene). All of this tension culminates in an explosive final act in which David is finally pushed to his breaking point. It’s unsettling, well-acted (particularly Marsden and Skarsgård, though Bosworth holds her own), perhaps a bit over-plotted at times, and though I hear it doesn’t carry the same heft as Sam Peckinpah’s original, it is nonetheless thought-provoking. In fact, it sparked one of the more in-depth conversations I’ve had about any movie so far this year, in which my girlfriend and I discussed the nature of cowardice vs. civility -- specifically, is Amy right to call David a coward for not standing up to Charlie and his goons from the start? Or can we cut him some slack for being a regular guy from a civilized society who isn’t used to dealing with these redneck assholes? It’s a tough call. (STRAW DOGS opens nationwide 9/16.)

And with that, we can close the book on the summer movie season. Bring on Oscar season!

FORUM: My Most Random 9/11 Memory

2011-09-08T23:45:00.000-04:00

When the subways started running again at around 1 p.m. on September 11, 2001, and I was able to make my way back up to my apartment in Washington Heights, I immediately turned on NY1 and, along with my roomies Jess and Katrin, was glued to the TV for the rest of the day, night and the next few days. NY1’s coverage of the terrorist attacks and the aftermath was relentless and vital and nothing short of amazing. It was a harrowing day, but would have been much more difficult to endure without NY1’s efforts to keep us constantly informed. To this day, I am a loyal NY1 viewer and (I admit) fanboy, and though I watched the channel regularly before 9/11, it was that day that really sealed the deal.

But there was an odd moment, sometime during the evening broadcast, that Jess, Katrin and I have puzzled over for nearly ten years. By then, Lewis Dodley had taken over behind the anchor desk, his commanding presence and distinctive voice easing us into the unsettling night. At one point, they cut away to what I believe was a Rudy Giuliani press conference, as they had done many times throughout the day. But this time, as the press conference began, we were jolted by a single word that rang out, suddenly and inexplicably, in Lewis Dodley’s booming voice:

FORUM.

Wait... what? Forum? What forum? Who forum? Why forum? What the heck just happened? Was that an audio malfunction... or something more?

We didn’t know... but for pretty much the first time that day, we burst out laughing at the sheer absurdity of the moment. It provided some much-needed levity and we reveled in it, pondered over it and tried to find hidden meaning in it for... well, pretty much the next ten years.

Which brings us to today. Jess and I, along with Rachel (my lady friend) and Joe (Jess’ husband), attended a 9/11 retrospective featuring members of the NY1 news team who covered the tragedy, including Pat Kiernan (who served as moderator), Kristen Shaughnessy, Annika Pergament, John Schiumo, Cheryl Wills, Steve Paulus, Bobby Cuza, Andrew Kirtzman... and of course, Lewis Dodley. The event, entitled “Bearing Witness: 9/11 Through the Eyes of NY1,” offered a panel discussion about the role of the media, and NY1 in particular, on 9/11, as well as an opportunity for them to share their own experiences, mindsets and insights. It was excellent, fascinating and emotional -- but I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t geeking out pretty hard at seeing so many of my favorite NY1 personalities sitting there together. Hey, if I hadn’t, then the terrorists would’ve won, right?

Now, before the show (and indeed, over the past 10 years), we mused about how funny it would be to meet Lewis and tell him the “FORUM” story. Not that he would be able to shed any light on what the heck he was talking about at that moment... but at the very least, we figured he’d like to know that his audio slip single-handedly brought some laughter into our evening. But when the panel ended and the moment of truth was presented to us... well, we very nearly punked out! We were nervous! And maybe a little star-struck!

But guess what? In the end, we did it. We made our way to the front and Jess struck up the conversation with Lewis Dodley (who, I might add, is quite a jovial fellow in real life -- a vast difference from his no-nonsense TV persona, though his distinctive voice is still there). We introduced ourselves and basically told him the story as I have recounted it here. And... he got a huge kick out of it! The man laughed his ass off. Turns out he was expecting us to tell him some generic “your broadcast helped get us through the night” story... but our version was completely out of left field! We all had a good laugh and pondered over what it could have meant. Even a couple of NY1 producers overheard us and wondered whether they could dig into the archives to find the mystery clip -- a joke, of course, but how awesome would that be? Oh, and we also took a photo together:

For the record, Lewis said “FORUM” instead of “cheese,” which is why Jess is in hysterics. Somehow I held it together. It ruled.

And that, my friends, is the story of FORUM -- my most hilariously random, bizarre, and indeed, oddly important 9/11 memory. Maybe you had to be there. But regardless... thank you, Lewis, for providing that moment and this awesome epilogue. And thanks to the entire NY1 crew for everything you did that day and for being my #1 source of news (and a particularly integral part of my morning routine) every day since.

FORUM.

August Movie Amusement, Part 1

2011-09-03T21:33:00.000-04:00

The month of August featured my triumphant return to movie-going form: I saw twice as many movies as I saw in the lost month of July, and despite the fact that the end of the summer is generally a cinematic dumping ground, the overall quality was not half bad... though, not exactly great, either, as there is nary a top-ten worthy film in the bunch. Still some stuff worth your time, though, so let’s take a look at the August crop....

RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES -- While I am not exactly what you’d call an APES geek, I do like the original films and I can honestly say that I can’t imagine a better APES prequel than what we got this summer. The solid plot involves a group of scientists who may or may not have uncovered the cure for Alzheimer’s. But after James Franco tests the vaccine on baby ape Caesar, he finds that the effect is far more significant. Performances are fine as far as the humans are concerned, but the real star of this film is Caesar, portrayed by the undisputed king of motion-capture technology, Andy Serkis (aka Gollum and King Kong). I’m sure the world isn’t ready to honor such work with, say, an Oscar nod... but honestly, Serkis’ performance is more than deserving of such accolades. In fact, it’s probably one of the finest performances of any kind I’ve seen all year, single-handedly carrying the film to unthinkable emotional heights. A fun film that (unlike the horrific Tim Burton remake) also manages to recapture the socio-political commentary of the original. Some winks and homages to the original film, too, with mixed results: Caesar playing with a toy Statue of Liberty is funny, though I suppose I could’ve done without some of the more blatant and cringe-worthy dialogue references (did we really need BOTH the “damn dirty ape” and “maaaaadhouse” lines?). One last observation: After portraying the greasy Draco Malfoy in the POTTER series, and now the sniveling villain in APES, is Tom Felton setting himself up to be this generation’s Billy Zabka? I think so!

THE CHANGE-UP -- In my July movie recap, I reviewed HORRIBLE BOSSES and warned Jason Bateman that the expiration date on his signature role as the “straight-laced family man” was rapidly approaching... but after seeing this movie, I now see that his judgment day is even closer than expected. Now, we all know that the personality-switch formula has been done time and time again, ranging from FREAKY FRIDAY to LIKE FATHER, LIKE SON to FREAKY FRIDAY again. The results have been mixed, at best, as it is a slippery slope of a plot device -- and this new installment to the sub-genre, with straight-laced family man Bateman switching roles with horn-dog bachelor Ryan Reynolds, may be the worst of the lot. It’s just not very funny, and I’m pretty sure Bateman and Reynolds never actually studied each other’s mannerisms and vocal inflections because most of the time, you can barely tell that they’re supposed to be portraying the other’s character. This is a step backward for Reynolds, who has proven with such films as BURIED that he is capable of far better things. On a slightly more positive note, it IS pretty raunchy and features some gratuitous nudity from both Leslie Mann and Olivia Wilde. Granted, there is some question as to whether or not the nudity is 100% legit... but either way, it’s nice.

THE DEVIL’S DOUBLE -- This is one of those movies that lives and dies by the power of its lead performance -- or in this case, two lead performances by the same actor. Dominic Cooper is outstanding as both Saddam Hussein’s crazy son and his unwillingly-appointed security double, deftly handling both very different personalities. Latif is mild-mannered, loves his family, doesn’t want any trouble and is at first overwhelmed by the world he has been dragged into; Uday Hussein, of course, is a lunatic, rapist, murderer, drunk on power and wealth and opulence. Naturally, f’d up hijinks ensue. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie doesn’t quite live up to the lead performance(s). While I’m sure Uday’s crazy antics may not be too far removed from reality, he is portrayed in such an over-the-top and cartoonish way that he reminded me more of Saddam’s character on SOUTH PARK -- I half-expected him to be like, “Heyyy, relax guy!” In the end, this sort of detracts from the underlying seriousness of the story (since, y’know, Uday really DID kill people on whims and snatch young girls off the street to rape them and etc.) and essentially turns it into IRAQI SCARFACE, as written by ADAPTATION’s Donald Kaufman. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. (Also always nice to see the luminous Ludivine Sagnier on the big screen, this time as Uday’s favorite sex toy who ends up falling for Latif. Awkward!)

CRAZY, STUPID, LOVE -- This movie isn’t really that crazy, certainly isn’t stupid, and while I wouldn’t say that I loved it, I also can’t remember the last time I saw a more flat-out likeable romantic comedy. Everything about it, and everyone in it, is so damn likeable. Steve Carell is likeable as Cal, a sad sack family man who finds himself alone and back on the market after his marriage falls apart. Julianne Moore is likeable as Emily, Cal’s estranged wife (who, I might add, cheated on him with David, played by Kevin Bacon, who is also likeable even though he’s a homewrecker). Ryan Gosling is likeable as a young lothario who takes Cal under his wing to to build his confidence and teach him to get chicks. Emma Stone is likeable as a frazzled young career woman, and her love story with Gosling, in which they both thaw each other’s stony hearts, is particularly likeable (and makes for one of the most likeable “falling in love” montages in recent memory). Marisa Tomei is odd but likeable as Cal’s first pickup attempt, and their shenanigans are equally likeable. Jessica Riley is likeable as the babysitter of Cal & Emily’s kids, who also happens to have a schoolgirl crush on Cal. The kid who plays Cal & Emily’s son, Robbie, is likeable -- he has a huge crush on the babysitter and continually makes grand public gestures to express this love. There’s even a big, likeable plot twist towards the end that actually had me fooled. It’s no LOVE ACTUALLY as far as these kinds of romantic comedies with multiple interweaving storylines are concerned, but simply put, there is nothing in this movie not to like.

THE FUTURE -- Miranda July already proved that she is weird with ME AND YOU AND EVERYONE WE KNOW, a film that gave us the greatest emoticon in the history of the Internet -- ))< >(( -- which of course stands for “back and forth forever.” Her long-awaited follow-up pretty much confirms that she is, in fact, weird. It’s about a couple, Sophie and Jason (July and Hamish Linklater), who are stuck in a rut. They sit on the couch with their Macbooks and have all sorts of preciously quirky mannerisms and habits and they’re horrible hipsters and I kind of hate them (but I digress). They’re not yet too old but no longer young, and as a means of feeling responsible for something, they decide to adopt a stray cat who, they think, only has a short time to live. But when they are informed that the cat could potentially hold on for much longer, thus turning this lark into more of a commitment than they imagined, it causes them to reassess their stations in life. Sophie has an affair. Jason befriends an old man. Time & space are manipulated. The moon speaks words of wisdom. And the proceedings are narrated by the adopted cat, Paw-Paw, who can’t wait to be taken home by her new people. The whole thing actually manages to be thought-provoking and even fascinating once you get past the obscene quirkiness... which, I guess, sums up Miranda July in a nutshell.

30 MINUTES OR LESS -- I’m one of the few people who didn’t love director Ruben Fleischer’s last effort, ZOMBIELAND, but I rather enjoyed this dark stoner heist comedy about two slackers who kidnap a pizza delivery boy, strap a bomb to his chest and force him to rob a bank for them as part of a master plan to achieve their dream of opening a tanning salon/prostitution ring. It’s incredibly lewd and refreshingly un-PC, with fast-paced action, snappy dialogue and a cast that is perfectly suited to those criteria. Jesse Eisenberg and Aziz Ansari both have a great frenetic energy to them, and as an on-screen duo, their combined talents are pretty much irresistible. Likewise, Danny McBride, with his hilarious misguided bravado, and dim-witted Nick Swardson make excellent wannabe criminal masterminds. Not a classic comedy by any stretch of the imagination, but fun in the moment and worth checking out if you like any or all of the actors involved. (Also, be sure to stick around for one of the better post-credits scenes I’ve seen in a while.)

FRIGHT NIGHT -- I have to admit that I barely remember the original ‘80s classic (I was more of a slasher film fan back in those days), so I can’t really compare the two -- but I very much enjoyed this remake on its own accord. The story involves a guy (Anton Yelchin, who played Chekov in J.J. Abrams’ STAR TREK) who comes to suspect that his next-door neighbor (Colin Farrell) is a vampire who has been feasting on local townsfolk, and takes it upon himself to uncover the truth. The film is smart, suspenseful, funny and contains some great stylized horror (the 3D is unnecessary, but also not terribly distracting if it’s your only option). Performances are fine across the board, particularly David Tennant as a flamboyant Vegas performer who may or may not hold the key to survival. I’m also quickly becoming a fan of the lovely Imogen Poots following her work in last year’s SOLITARY MAN and now this. But it’s Farrell, as Jerry the vampire, who really knocks it out of the park and makes this thing work, clearly relishing the role and playing it with a sort of creepy machismo and sexual hunger that has been sorely missing from recent vampire films (you know the ones I’m talking about). He makes an awesomely convincing old-school vampire and if he causes at least a few Twi-hards to come to their senses and switch their allegiances away from their sparkly heartthrob, then this fun flick will have REALLY been worthwhile.

Stay tuned for part 2 of my August recap, coming up whenever I get around to finishing it....

July Movie Jollies

2011-08-21T23:58:00.000-04:00

Yes, I realize this post is three weeks late, and by now, the movie reviews herein are old news and possibly irrelevant. But it’s not my fault! July was a crazy month that pretty much threw my whole movie-watching year for a loop -- I was coasting along at a record-setting pace through June, but then only saw SEVEN movies in July due to a variety of extenuating circumstances (vacations, sickness, Pottermania, etc.). But... better late than never, right? So at long last, here’s what I saw on the big screen last month:

LARRY CROWNE -- A completely unmemorable film in every way, except that it could very well go down as the Worst Tom Hanks Movie Ever. I’m sure it was lots of fun for Hanks and his good friend Julia Roberts to make this movie together -- he as a longtime department store employee who gets laid off and must go back to school to reboot his life; she as a jaded college professor who needs a life-reboot of her own -- but for the rest of us... not so much. It’s unfunny, hackneyed and ridiculously bland. Sure, it deals with timely subject matter (economic woes, job loss, getting one’s life back together, etc.) but sabotages itself with awful writing and performances that lead me to believe they were trying for a breezy, off-the-cuff attitude and just failed miserably. We know that Hanks, as a filmmaker, is capable of better and more enjoyable things -- THAT THING YOU DO! is one of my favorite movies of all time -- but this was a major misfire. It could be argued that this is a harmless lark of a film and shouldn’t be taken too seriously... but in my opinion, if we are now living in a world in which Tom friggin’ Hanks can make a movie this bad, then we, as a people, have more problems than we realized.

A BETTER LIFE -- Chris Weitz, director of such films as ABOUT A BOY and TWILIGHT: NEW MOON (plus he had his hands on the original AMERICAN PIE with his brother Paul), continues his journey through every movie genre with this uneven drama that tackles the subject of illegal immigrants living and struggling in Los Angeles. The story centers around Carlos, a single father who tries to keep a low profile while doing everything in his power to make a better life for his teenage son, Luis, who in turn appears to be heading down a questionable path. Eventually, Carlos gets the opportunity to run his own landscaping business, but when his truck & supplies are stolen, he and Luis search the rarely-seen L.A. backroads to try and gain back their livelihood. It’s a good, raw, potent story -- which unfortunately is completely sabotaged by some of the worst acting you’ll see in a motion picture this year. I mean... these guys are bad, to the point where it’s distracting. I understand that the guy who plays Carlos (Demian Bichir) is a famous actor in Mexico, so maybe the problem is that this was a mostly English-speaking role (similar to the problems Penelope Cruz had early in her Hollywood career, which she eventually overcame). Whatever the case, it’s a damn shame, because I liked the movie otherwise -- just would have liked it more if I didn’t cringe at every line of dialogue.

HORRIBLE BOSSES -- It’s been a pretty good summer for raunchy comedy, what with the BRIDESMAIDS and the HANGOVER PART 2 and the BAD TEACHER, but this one, about three schmoes who decide to kill their horrible bosses, mostly misses the mark. It’s raunchy, dark comedy... funny at times... but ultimately forgettable. The best thing I can say about it is that the cast is game, particularly the titular bosses, played by Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston and Colin Farrell, all of whom sort of play grossly exaggerated versions of themselves: Spacey, the ultimate douchebag; Farrell, the sleazy asshole; Aniston, the sex-crazed cougar. As for the would-be boss-killers: Jason Sudekis is generally a funny guy, though I can do without what’s-his-name from IT’S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA (which I’ve never watched). But let’s talk about Jason Bateman for a moment. Now, it is common knowledge that Michael Cera has been typecast in the same George Michael Bluth role for his entire career. But I think it might be time to say the same about fellow ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT alum Jason Bateman -- he’s been playing the same Michael Bluth / straight-laced family man character for a long, long time now. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t -- in this movie, it mostly works, but suffice to say, he’s treading a slippery slope. We’re watching you, Bateman!

CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER -- We’ve already seen a really good comic book movie this summer (X-MEN: FIRST CLASS) and a really bad one (THOR), but here we have not only the best of the summer, but the best in several summers. This direct lead-in to THE AVENGERS is as good as it gets -- a memorable mix of performances, action, story and sincerity, expertly crafted by Spielberg/Lucas protégé Joe Johnston, who has been on the cusp of directorial greatness for a long time (see his excellent THE ROCKETEER way back in 1991; even JURASSIC PARK III was well-made in a pulp/serial sort of way, albeit thwarted by bad writing which wasn’t his fault). Chris Evans is great as the titular captain; the special effect of him as scrawny Steve Rogers looks a world better than it did in the trailers (remember, kids, wait for the finished product before passing judgment) and makes for one of the best origin stories we’ve ever seen. In particular, the montage of Captain America as a propaganda tool is nothing short of brilliant, and his transformation to “super soldier” is appropriately epic. No surprise that Hugo Weaving makes a fantastic villain, once again confirming the theory that a superhero movie is only as good as its villain. Loved Tommy Lee Jones as the gruff-but-fair colonel, as well as Hayley Atwell and Sebastian Stan as Cap’s love interest and best friend, respectively. And I especially enjoyed Dominic Cooper as playboy inventor Howard Stark, aka the father of Tony Stark -- a prime example of great continuity with the other AVENGERS films to the point where it actually makes the crappy THOR a thousand times better, and even adds more depth to the already-awesome IRON MAN. CAPTAIN AMERICA is, quite simply, superhero movie perfection and one of my favorites of the year so far.

ANOTHER EARTH -- Admittedly, this movie requires some suspension of disbelief, since, y’know, if another Earth-sized planet suddenly appeared so close to home, it would wreak havoc on the gravitational pull and the tides and the climate and pretty much bring about the apocalypse. And while that sounds like it could be a good plot for the next Roland Emmerich film, it is beside the point here -- at its core, this film is about the curveballs and twists and turns of life, the search for forgiveness (from others as well as oneself) and the hope and possibility of redemption. Despite the looming “Earth 2” constantly visible in the background, the sci-fi is very subtle and the focus is on the characters: Four years after a drunk-driving accident kills a young mother & child and sends her to prison, Rhoda (Brit Marling) is released back into the world with no real direction. She tracks down John, the husband/father of the victims, hoping to apologize for what she had done, but loses her nerve and instead pretends to be from a maid service. From there, the two lost souls develop a friendship and romance (which also kind of requires another suspension of disbelief, because I can’t think of a worse decision that she could have made in this situation). Meanwhile, on the day of the accident, a second Earth was discovered within travelling distance from our own planet, which threw all of humanity into a tizzy to figure out its meaning or even whether or not it really existed. Rhoda later enters a contest to win a trip to Earth 2, with the hope of starting her wrecked life anew, but her ever-growing, and increasingly-wrong relationship with John complicates matters. Directed by Mike Cahill (who also co-wrote, along with Marling), this is one of those movies that sticks with you and makes you think long after the credits roll.

COWBOYS & ALIENS -- I had high hopes for this one because Jon Favreau has already proven that he has his finger pretty firmly on the pulse of geekdom, and giving him free reign to make this kind of genre-bender seemed like a no-brainer. Unfortunately, the first two-thirds of the film are... kinda dull and listless. It’s odd to criticize a movie for having TOO MUCH plot and character development, but I think that applies here. I wanted less of that, and more of what the title advertises -- namely, COWBOYS vs. ALIENS. Fortunately, business picks up in the final act, which is an all-out cowboy assault on the alien stronghold. Fun stuff, and the fact that it is very clearly and directly inspired by the final act of RETURN OF THE JEDI makes it even more fun. Think about it: Cowboys (Rebels) join forces with natives (Ewoks) to take down a superior enemy (Empire) in a ground battle, which is intercut with a mission to destroy the giant alien spacecraft (Death Star) from the inside. Granted, there's no direct parallel to the Luke/Vader/Emperor scenes... but everything else has a distinct JEDI feel. Of course, Harrison Ford’s presence doesn’t hurt this connection -- he once again rocks the “crotchety old bastard” role that he has perfected at this stage of his career. (I also really hope there’s some extra footage of Olivia Wilde’s nude scene that will make its way onto the interwebs someday... yowza.)

Of course, I also saw HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2, my epic, rambling review/recap of which can be found HERE. And don’t worry -- movie business has picked up considerably in August as I’ve scrambled to make up for lost time, and I promise that this month’s recap will be posted on time! (Well, maybe.)

Okay, Let’s Talk About HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2

2011-07-17T19:04:00.001-04:00

*** SPOILERS ABOUND ***

I didn’t read my first HARRY POTTER book until a few months before the first movie came out. I picked up THE SORCERER’S STONE to prepare for the movie and was immediately hooked. I devoured the first four books (which were all out in paperback at the time), and saw the first film on Friday, November 16th, 2001 at 10:30 p.m. at Loews Lincoln Square on the big Loews screen. Thus, the seeds of my Pottermania were sown. Later, I did such crazy things as devoting entire weekends to reading the new books (most notably, THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, which I bought at midnight at Barnes & Noble and pretty much read straight through for the next 20 hours or so). I attended every movie on their opening nights, including midnight screenings of THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE and DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 1, and would have done the same for PART 2 if I hadn’t gotten sick; as it stands, I saw a mid-afternoon show on opening day, even though I was still reeling from an illness that has knocked me for a loop for the past week (apologies the guy sitting next to me). I’ve spent countless hours discussing, dissecting and debating the finer points of the books and films with other Pottermaniacs. I’ve probably written more Harry Potter-related blog posts than any other single topic, and this past week, I even re-watched the first seven films and live-tweeted the proceedings. And I’m not sure any other franchise has caused me to shed so many tears. Suffice to say, I love me some HARRY POTTER... and I can say without hyperbole that HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2 was one of my most anticipated movies of all time, up there with STAR WARS: EPISODE I and LOTR: RETURN OF THE KING.

So, did it live up to the hype? I’d say that it did. It picks up exactly where Part 1 left off and proceeds at a relentless, breakneck pace. There’s always something happening and it is a thrilling ride. It taps into every possible emotion and had me exulting, cringing and outright bawling (complete with full-body heaves) multiple times. It features a solid mix of devotion to the source material (perhaps a bit TOO much, as we will discuss) and thinking outside the box, which has been the forte of the David Yates-helmed installments. It is visually amazing (note that I saw it in 2D and can’t really imagine a post-converted third dimension adding much to the experience; probably best to save a few bucks and see it the way it was filmed). The writing is very good (if at times a bit sloppy, which we will also discuss) and appropriately epic. Performances from every single actor and actress, no matter how important or incidental, are absolutely top-notch across the board. Alexandre Desplat’s score is fantastic, too, often harkening back to some of John Williams’ older themes so as to go full circle. All in all, it is hugely satisfying finale to a decade’s worth of extraordinary filmmaking, which collectively should go down as one of the great cinematic achievements of our time.

That’s the overview. Now I am going to do the same thing I did last year for Part 1, and take a look at some specific scenes & moments that I loved (and even some that I didn’t). Join me if you please....

Gringotts Break-In -- Extremely well-done action sequence, mere minutes into the film. At first I scoffed at the rollercoaster-esque tracks down to the vaults that were probably thrown in specifically for 3D viewing, but then I remembered that we got a brief glimpse of that mine cart in SORCERER’S STONE, so why not take it to the next level. Everything else, though, is pitch-perfect, from Helena Bonham Carter’s performance as Hermione-as-Bellatrix, to the multiplying objects in the vault, and especially the dragon. Holy shit, that was a good-looking dragon -- a world better than the dragons in GOBLET OF FIRE. You can feel every bit of its pain, and its epic escape and flight are nothing short of majestic. Warwick Davis also kicks ass as Griphook.

Aberforth -- The HARRY POTTER series has featured a veritable who’s who of some of the greatest British actors of our generation, and in the finale, they found a role for one of my favorite actors of any nationality: CIARAN HINDS! He is awesome as Aberforth Dumbledore -- yet another triumph of casting, which has been this series’ forte. I don’t know what kind of recognition they give to casting directors, but the saga needs to get a special achievement award or something. I will, however, note that I would have liked them to delve a bit more into Albus Dumbledore’s history with Aberforth, his sister, Grindelwald, etc., as per the book. I thought they might start this movie with that backstory, a la RETURN OF THE KING which started with Gollum’s origin... but no. Granted, it’s not ESSENTIAL to the plot, but it would have been cool to see, especially since they briefly touched upon it.

McGonagall Rules! -- Of all the supporting characters we’ve come to know and love, the one who really got a chance to shine in the finale is none other than Professor Minerva McGonagall, played to perfection by the great Maggie Smith. Her confrontation and duel with Snape in the Great Hall... her dispatching of Slytherin House... taking charge of the battle preparations... bringing to life the Hogwarts statue guards, and her hilarious, tension-breaking line, “I’ve always wanted to use that spell!” Amazing moments for an amazing character.

The Battle of Hogwarts -- As awesome and epic and horrific as the Battle of Hogwarts is, my biggest problem with the movie is that the battle is just not epic ENOUGH. In fact, I’d go as far as to say that Yates & Co. really dropped the ball with this aspect of the film. Now, I realize that the films (like the books) have consistently chosen to focus on Harry and his actions whenever possible. And usually, that makes sense. But I see no reason why they couldn’t have given us a RETURN OF THE JEDI-style finale, interspersing scenes of Harry, Ron & Hermione trying to track down the last Horcruxes with scenes of the battle in progress around them. We’ve come a long way with a lot of these secondary characters, and it would have been cool to see them in action for more than a brief shot here and there. Or even worse, a stark shot of them lying dead on the ground. Granted, those shots pack great emotional punch -- Lavender Brown with her throat ripped out by Greyback, yikes -- but dammit, I want to see Fred, Lupin, Tonks, etc., go out in blazes of glory. This was Chris Columbus-level slavishness to the book, and I think it prevented the battle from being as epic as it could have been. That being said, when the battle does come front & center, it is awesome and devastating. The build-up is great, too, with the professors casting shield charms over the castle (only to be obliterated by the Death Eaters later). Love that they pretty much bring back EVERY secondary character from the previous films, ranging from Professors Trelawney and Slughorn and Flitwick (double-duty for Warwick Davis!) to Seamus and Dean and Colin and Cho Chang (who shares a couple of glances with Harry as if to say, “No hard feelings,” which is a nice touch). Even Filch gets a couple of fun moments (his attempt to clean the mess after the battle is fantastic). I also really like NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN’s Kelly Macdonald as Helena Ravenclaw -- yet another casting coup.

The Prince’s Tale -- Oh. My. God. This was my favorite chapter in the book and holy shit, did they do it justice on the big screen. First of all, can we agree that Severus Snape, as performed by Alan Rickman, is one of the all-time great characters in film or literature? Perhaps the most perfect casting in a saga full of perfect casting. Equally perfect is the way the films have handled his character arc, culminating with this transcendent sequence in which Harry delves into Snape’s memories and finally learns whose side he has been on and why. Utterly tragic, beautiful, magical, emotional... I was seriously a blubbering wreck from the moment Voldemort strikes Snape down, and especially once Harry comes in and Snape says, “Look at me... you have your mother’s eyes.” Absolutely brilliant. I’d go as far as to say that this may be the single most brilliant sequence in the entire series. I love it so much.

The Kiss -- Not sure what is better: Ron & Hermione finally locking lips, or their little incredulous giggle afterward. Brilliant moment. Very nice touch actually showing their journey into the Chamber of Secrets, too. In fact, I think their film kiss actually works better than in the book. (Does anybody really miss the S.P.E.W. / house elf stuff, by the way? Best omission from any of the books, by far.)

Harry’s Death -- Another scene I was really looking forward to. As I re-watched all the movies this past week, I got verklempt literally every time Harry saw/communicated with his parents. So I knew that I was probably going to lose it when Harry is visited by the spirits of James, Lily, Sirius and Lupin just before he confronts Voldemort. And lose it, I did. “Stay with me?” “Always.” God, I’m getting choked up just thinking about it. The death scene itself was well done, too. I particularly like (and also got choked up by) the reveal of Hagrid, captured by the bad guys. Powerful scene. And incidentally, how awesome is Ralph Fiennes in this movie? Voldemort finally has a chance to come front & center and Fiennes eats it up -- a brilliant performance, except maybe for his strangely goofy laugh after announcing that “Harry Potter is dead,” not to mention the awkward hug with Draco... that was a little weird. But chalk that up to Fiennes portraying Voldy as a gleefully gloating sonofabitch. I also didn’t notice his NYYYEEEEAHHH’s as much -- I think there were fewer of them in the movie than there were in the trailer.

King’s Cross -- A weird scene in the book, and a weird scene in the movie, but packs an emotional punch nonetheless because it brings back Michael Gambon as Dumbledore for one last hurrah. “Is this real, or is it all in my head?” “Well of course it’s in your head... but that doesn’t mean it’s not real.” Good stuff. And Voldemort’s embryo soul is creepy as fuck.

Neville Kicks Ass -- After LOTR: THE TWO TOWERS, my rally cry for the next year was “SAM IS GOING TO KICK SO MUCH ASS IN RETURN OF THE KING!” And he did. Well, after HP7.1, which contained one brief scene in which Neville mouthed off to the Death Eaters on the Hogwarts Express, my rally cry became, “NEVILLE IS GOING TO KICK SO MUCH ASS IN PART 2!” And he most certainly does. From the moment he shows up to lead Harry, Ron & Hermione back into Hogwarts, with his bruised face and ready-to-fight attitude, you knew he is a changed man. I love when, in the heat of battle, he declares that he “has the hots” for Luna (don’t we all?). And of course, his climactic slaying of Nagini. (Side note: See, George Lucas, THIS is how you do the buffoon-turned-hero character arc! Could’ve had Jar-Jar do something heroic in EPISODE III and it would’ve made a world of difference!) Maaaaaybe could have done without his cheesy and overlong BRAVEHEART speech in front of Voldemort, but that is a minor quibble. I also kind of prefer the way Neville kills Nagini in the book: right in front of Voldemort’s face, in the blink of an eye, as opposed to the more drawn-out, horror-movie sequence in the movie. But it works well both ways.

Molly Weasley’s Moment -- So glad they kept this moment intact, because it was perfect in the book and equally perfect on screen. “NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!” Sigourney Weaver in ALIENS would be proud!

Harry vs. Voldemort Smackdown -- Not sure how I feel about what they did here. Obviously they expanded the action to have Harry & Voldy dueling and flying around and crashing through the Hogwarts grounds, with the two of them ultimately squaring off in a deserted courtyard, while the Battle of Hogwarts continues to rage elsewhere. In the book, they face off in front of everyone, which I think I like better. And I DEFINITELY like Voldemort’s book death better, when his body simply falls to the ground and the crowd cheers. This was meant to show that he is, after all, only human. In the movie, his body sort of disintegrates into black ticker tape, which completely loses sight of the message that Rowling was trying to convey. Still, the film version is suitably epic and visually awesome and exultant, so I can’t complain. (I was also later reminded that in the book, Harry uses the Elder Wand to repair his original wand, and then sends the Elder Wand into hiding, presumably forever. In the movie, he does not repair his original wand, which is an unfortunate oversight, and then breaks the Elder Wand and throws it away. The book wins this round for sure.)

Nineteen Years Later -- Wasn’t a huge fan of the epilogue in the book, and the movie version doesn’t do much to change that, though it is funny to see Ron with a big ol’ butterbeer gut. (Hehe, I also just reminded myself of when Harry, Ron & Hermione return to Hogwarts, and Ginny rushes to greet Harry and ignores her brother even though she hasn’t seen him in six months. Funny moment.)

A couple more nitpicks that are kind of significant and may annoy me more as time goes on, especially if there are no deleted scenes that correct them: Um, hello, what the fuck happened to Wormtail? In the book, he dies at Malfoy Manor, strangled by the silver hand given to him by Voldemort after he repays his life debt to Harry. This was not mentioned in HP7.1, and I’m pretty sure we only see Wormtail get knocked out when Harry & Ron escape. And he does not appear in HP7.2 at all... so either there is a critical deleted scene somewhere, or this is a pretty massive oversight!

Secondly... Lupin & Tonks had a son. We who read the books know this. In the films, there is a brief moment at the beginning of HP7.1 where Tonks is about to announce the news to the group, but Moody cuts her off. If you don’t already know what she’s about to say, you’d have no idea -- so when Harry mentions their son to the vision of Lupin before he faces Voldemort, it’d be like, “...say what?” And it’d definitely take away some of the emotional jolt from the sight of Lupin & Tonks’ dead bodies lying next to each other with their hands nearly touching. Severe case of sloppy writing here. (And once again, Tonks remains the most grievously-underused character in the series. Did we see her in action at all in the final battle? Can’t remember, but I’m guessing not.)

Fortunately, these and most other nitpicks came to me after the fact. While watching the movie, it was a tremendous, thrilling, hugely emotional and fulfilling experience. Is HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2 the best Potter film? No... that title still belongs to ORDER OF THE PHOENIX on my list, closely followed by PRISONER OF AZKABAN. In fact, I’m not even sure I’d say that HP7.2 is better than HP7.1. But it is damn good and I loved it and can’t wait to see it again. (Though now that I think about it, perhaps if you watch Parts 1 & 2 as one massive 4 1/2 hour extravaganza, it suddenly becomes the best Potter film? We’ll find out in a few months when I can watch them back-to-back on Blu-Ray; for now, I digress.)

I’m sure that in the course of this rambling, gushing mess of a “review,” I’ve left out plenty of other details/moments/bits of awesomeness worth discussing, so by all means let’s discuss them below. Other than that, not sure there’s much else for me to say except...

Mischief managed!

A Week’s Worth of HARRY POTTER Tweets

2011-07-14T23:20:00.000-04:00

So, I re-watched HARRY POTTER 1 thru 7.1 this past week and live-tweeted the whole shebang. If for some silly reason you don’t follow me on Twitter (screen name: @benlikesmovies), here’s what I had to say:

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER’S STONE (7/10/11)

Okay, time to re-watch all the #HarryPotter films in preparation for HP7.2! Tonight: SORCERER'S STONE and CHAMBER OF SECRETS!

Thoughts about where Williams' main #HarryPotter theme ranks among his most memorable? Pretty high, I'd say. STAR WARS, JAWS, INDY, POTTER?

"His name is V... V....." "Maybe if you wrote it down?" "Naw, I can't spell it." Hagrid rules. #SorcerersStone

Little Ginny wishing little Harry good luck as he attempts to cross over to platform 9 3/4... awwww. #SorcerersStone

Love #SorcerersStone because every first appearance of a character, location, event & item is appropriately awe-inspiring & geek-out-worthy.

"Once you get hold of your broom, I want you to mount it, grip it tight - don't want to slide off the end." The #Potter porno writes itself!

The #LOTR trolls would kick the #HarryPotter trolls' asses.

Remember when House Points were, like, a big deal? Life was so much simpler then.... #HarryPotter #SorcerersStone

Harry seeing his parents in the Mirror of Erised makes me think of a scene that better be in HP7.2 and oh man... verklempt. #SorcerersStone

"As long as Dumbledore is around, you can't be touched." That's some eerie foreshadowing. #SorcerersStone

If George Lucas had directed #SorcerersStone, he would have gone back and CGI'ed Ralph Fiennes' face on the back of Quirrell's head.

I'm a fan of Gambon's Dumbledore, but gotta wonder how it would have been if the great Richard Harris hadn't died after #2.... #HarryPotter

HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS (7/10/11)

Heroic Dobby in HP7.1 > Annoying Dobby in #ChamberofSecrets > Jar-Jar Binks. #harrypotter #starwars

"Scared, Potter?" "You wish." Potter vs. Malfoy, round one... FIGHT! #ChamberofSecrets

Hilarious how Malfoy spits the word "Potter" with such disdain every time he says it. Felton plays a damn good scumbag in #ChamberofSecrets.

Man... first she's called a Mudblood, then turned into a cat, THEN petrified. Hermione can't catch a break in #ChamberofSecrets.

This whole business with the spiders is arguably the worst bit of the entire series. Yea/nay? #ChamberofSecrets #HarryPotter

#ChamberofSecrets remains the weakest installment, but it's much more interesting now that we know what we know about things & stuff....

Hehe, the end of #ChamberofSecrets is sooooo cheesy. "It's not Hogwarts without you, Hagrid." And then Dumbledore with the slow clap! Gawd!

HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN (7/11/11)

From the whimsical opening shot of #PrisonerofAzkaban, you can tell it's gonna be a different breed of Potter film. Cuaron raised the bar!

John Williams' #PrisonerofAzkaban score is the best of the series. Dig Desplat's HP7.1, too, but wish Williams had come back for the finale.

Love the cutaway shot of the bird flying into the Whomping Willow. Little bits like that were missing from the first two. #PrisonerofAzkaban

Scarier black hooded enemy: Dementors or Ringwraiths? GO! #HarryPotter #LOTR

"I solemnly swear that I am up to no good." #PrisonerofAzkaban

The dramatic shot of Harry, Hermione & Ron hugging after Buckbeak is executed? The #Potter Porno crowd must love that.... #PrisonerofAzkaban

Why couldn't Lupin & Sirius just immediately tell Harry, Ron & Hermione the truth, rather than act so vague and ominous? #PrisonerofAzkaban

Most sniveling misguided henchman: Wormtail or Wormtongue? GO! #HarryPotter #LOTR

The whole Time-Turner thing is kind of a cheap plot device, but somehow it works. #PrisonerofAzkaban

Gambon def. captures Dumbledore's mischievous side more than Harris did. "I'd like a nice cup of tea, or a large brandy." #PrisonerofAzkaban

So Hermione was incapacitated at the end of #ChamberofSecrets, and in #PrisonerofAzkaban Ron is out of commission. I see what JK did there.

HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE (7/11/11)

Hogwarts... Beauxbatons... Durmstrang... what, the American School of Witchcraft & Wizardry wasn't invited?? #GobletofFire

Moody showing the kids the Unforgivable curses..... so creepy. #GobletofFire

Cedric Diggory would kick Edward Cullen's sparkly ass. #GobletofFire #HarryPotter #Twilight

Years from now, long after JK and all of us are dead, someone will reboot Harry Potter, American-style. Then the world will end.

Harry & Ron's lovers' spats are so silly! #GobletofFire

Only problem with Hermione's appearance at the ball: She's ALWAYS been cute in the films. It's that SHE'S ALL THAT syndrome. #GobletofFire

I'm not sure how it would have worked, but Harry totally should've hooked up with Moaning Myrtle in the tub. She's a minx! #GobletofFire

That tongue-flicking thing that Barty Crouch Jr. does kinda freaks me out. #GobletofFire

OH MAN, THE GRAVEYARD SCENE. This is when shit gets real. #GobletofFire

"Kill the spare!" Harsh. #GobletofFire

Voldemort is the dark lord of monologuing. #GobletofFire

Anytime Harry sees his parents, I get verklempt. #GobletofFire

HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX (7/12/11)

Fun fact: #OrderofthePhoenix is the Potter film I've seen the most times on the big screen (3).

#OrderofthePhoenix contains my favorite Potter opening scene, with Dudley being particularly cruel and the Dementor attack. Stark & eerie.

Most grossly underused character: Tonks. Not even a single "Wotcher, Harry!" She's like the Darth Maul of this series. #OrderofthePhoenix

Love me some Luna Lovegood! #OrderofthePhoenix

I must not tell lies: In many ways, Umbridge is scarier than Voldemort. Yikes. #OrderofthePhoenix

Harry's speech to the potential recruits for Dumbledore's Army may be Radcliffe's best acting moment in the series. #OrderofthePhoenix

Best training montage: Rocky, the Karate Kid or Dumbledore's Army in #OrderofthePhoenix? It's a tough call!

Quick/subtle Ginny reaction shots every time Harry pays attention to Cho Chang... good stuff. #OrderofthePhoenix

Bellatrix licking her Dark Mark is one the best/creepiest/most strangely arousing character introductions. #OrderofthePhoenix

"You seem be to laboring under the delusion that I am going to -- what was the phrase? -- come quietly." GO ALBUS. #OrderofthePhoenix

Minor quibble, but I could've done without the Grawp business. Pretty bad CGI, too. #OrderofthePhoenix

Harry invading Snape's mind reminds me that I can't wait for the Prince's tale in HP7.2. But I'm getting ahead of myself. #OrderofthePhoenix

W! #OrderofthePhoenix

Dumbledore's Army vs. Death Eaters! FIGHT! #OrderofthePhoenix

The part where all the prophecies fall and shatter was one of the better big screen 3D moments. #OrderofthePhoenix

"Get away from my Godson!" Order of the Phoenix vs. Death Eaters! FIGHT! #OrderofthePhoenix

:( ..... #OrderofthePhoenix

DUMBLEDORE vs. VOLDEMORT SMACKDOWN! #OrderofthePhoenix

I'd totally watch #OrderofthePhoenix again right now. Could be my favorite depending upon my mood, time of day or alignment of stars.

HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE (7/13/11)

My body picked a really bad time to get sick. No HP7.2 midnight show for me tomorrow. Devastating.

Still gonna watch HALF-BLOOD PRINCE tonight, though, starting............................ now.

Wonder what Harry's plan was with the chick from the cafe? Not like he could've brought her back to the Dursleys' house. #HalfBloodPrince

Ron on what Malfoy might have been doing in Borgin & Burkes: "It's a creepy shop... he's a creepy bloke." Hehe. #HalfBloodPrince

Ginny on Harry: "He's covered in blood again. Why is he always covered in blood?" #HalfBloodPrince is really rockin' the good one-liners.

Hooray to #HalfBloodPrince for bringing back the old joke of every potion/spell blowing up in Seamus' face!

A little Japanese horror influence when Katie is cursed and gets flung into the air. Creepy. #HalfBloodPrince

Man, that Potter vs. Malfoy practice duel in #ChamberofSecrets seems like a long time ago. Sectumsempra is no joke. #HalfBloodPrince

I get chills when Tom Riddle first mentions the word "horcrux." #HalfBloodPrince

Dumbledore wielding the whirlwind of fire against the Inferi is one of the great visual moments in the series. GO ALBUS! #HalfBloodPrince

"Severus... please." #HalfBloodPrince

People question why Harry would stand there watching & not help. It's obvious: Dumbledore said, "Trust me," and Harry did. #HalfBloodPrince

Many people don't like #HalfBloodPrince because they made some extreme/questionable narrative changes... but I think it works.

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 1 (7/14/11)

Even though I've sold/returned all my HP7.2 tix, it hasn't completely sunk in yet that I will not be seeing it at midnight tonight....

Wolf whistle at bare-backed Ginny Weasley! #DeathlyHallowsPt1

"The Ministry has fallen. The Minister of Magic is dead. They are coming... they are coming." DUDE. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

Neville mouthing off to the Death Eaters on the Hogwarts Express reminds me that HE IS GOING TO KICK SO MUCH ASS IN HP7.2 #DeathlyHallowsPt1

Ja wohl, mein Umbridge! So... fucking... evil. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

A magical trinket on a chain that has an adverse effect on the person wearing it... where have I seen this before?? #DeathlyHallowsPt1 #LOTR

Love Harry & Hermione's dance. Perfect example of how not being too slavish to the book can be very good if done right. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

The crazy scene where Ron destroys the locket adds more depth to his character than the previous six films combined. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

Anyone else wanna see a spinoff short film chronicling Ron's adventures after he ditched Harry & Hermione? That'd rule. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

Animated Tale of the 3 Brothers sequence is brilliant. If Columbus had directed #DeathlyHallowsPt1, he would've just shown Hermione reading.

"Dobby is here to rescue Harry Potter, of course. Dobby will always be there for Harry Potter!" Oh man. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

Man, how can a character that kinda sucked five movies ago be so fucking awesome now, at the end? Yes, I'm crying. Again. #DeathlyHallowsPt1

#DeathlyHallowsPt1 is so freaking good. Now I SHOULD be heading to the Ziegfeld theatre for HP7.2... but no. God, this sucks.

Wow, that kind of ended on a low note, huh? Well, yes, it is true -- I got sick and thus am not seeing HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2 at midnight tonight even though I had scored sweet, perfectly-centered seats at the Ziegfeld Theatre. This fact is probably making me feel more sick than whatever is making me sick... but what can you do. I will probably end up seeing it sometime this weekend whether I feel better or not... no way I’ll be able to hold out for long. God, I love these movies, and watching them all together like this just makes them that much better -- it’s truly one of the great cinematic achievements of our time. So psyched for the grand finale!

June Movie Jambalaya

2011-06-30T22:57:00.000-04:00

At last, after a tumultuous first five months, business is really starting to pick up at your local multiplexes and art houses. June may have been the first month of 2011 in which the good outweighed the bad. Yet somehow, with 72 ticket stubs already in the books (literally -- I have albums full of’em), I am still ahead of last year’s record-breaking movie-watching pace. Go figure. Anyway... June movies... Ready? GO!

THE TREE OF LIFE -- It almost doesn’t seem right to use this small space to discuss Terrence Malick’s latest, Palm d’Or-winning effort, a film that juxtaposes one family's intimate story with nothing short of, oh, the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSE. Brad Pitt and the angelic Jessica Chastain play a father and mother whose differing parenting methods (he, harsh & disciplinary; she, warm & loving) leave an indelible mark on their son, Jack, who grows up to be a detached, reflective shell of a man in the form of Sean Penn. This family, of course, is but a tiny speck in the vastness of the cosmos, which we see develop through Malick’s customary lingering, ethereal, breathtaking visuals (we even get to see dinosaurs!). But the point of the whole thing is that this insignificant family and the creation of the universe are equally tumultuous, molded by a series of ebbs, flows, explosions, eruptions and constant flux. It's mad deep. On a more surface level, the film is gorgeous to look at and filled with fine performances. Despite its vast scope and ambition, it somehow feels more readily accessible than a typical Malick opus -- but still all-too-capable of keeping you up at night as you peel back the layers.

BEGINNERS -- Here’s a great little film that kind of came and went under the radar, and that is a shame because I loved it. It’s a story of life, love, family and identity, featuring the kind of whimsy, sincerity and underlying optimism that seriously reminded me of AMELIE -- which, as you may or may not know, is one of my favorite movies of all time, so I do not use such a comparison lightly. Ewan McGregor stars as Oliver, a lost soul who has never really had a meaningful relationship in his life. But that sad, lonely life is thrown for a loop when he meets a woman named Anna (INGLORIOUS BASTERDS’ Melanie Laurent, absolutely luminous) who at first can only communicate by writing because she has laryngitis (yes, they “meet cute” -- but even this movie’s cliches feel original and irreverent). She immediately senses that Oliver is sad (she is, too) and they connect. We also learn that several months earlier, Oliver’s father (Christopher Plummer in what should be an Oscar-worthy performance if the Academy actually sees this) died -- and a few years before that, came out of the closet shortly after Oliver’s mother died. In fact, he was always gay and married Oliver’s mother as a cover -- a fact of which she was well aware, and the discovery of which threw everyone, especially Oliver, for a loop -- especially when Hal began embracing a gay lifestyle, going to clubs and dating much younger men. These stories are told via intersecting timelines and Oliver’s own inner monologue, with occasional insightful, subtitled observations about the human condition by Oliver’s Jack Russell terrier, Arthur. So there’s a lot going on... and yet it’s all very simple: Oliver needs to find love & happiness. His father DID find love & happiness, but it took many more decades than expected. The moral of the story is that it’s never too late to get things right. A phenomenal movie featuring some phenomenal performances -- seek it out.

X-MEN: FIRST CLASS -- I gotta say, I like this current revisionist history trend in which superhero movies are merged with real-life events and, like, it’s cool. TRANSFORMERS 3 did it with the moon landing... CAPTAIN AMERICA is going to do it with World War II... WATCHMEN took it to a whole other level by completely altering the course of history... and this reboot/prequel to the X-MEN series does it with the Bay of Pigs invasion and it works wonderfully. Pretty much everything else in the film works, too -- at times far better than the hit-or-miss original trilogy. In particular, the casting is spectacular -- especially Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy as the future Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart. I also liked Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique -- she displays a perfect innocence that, as we know, will eventually become anything but (also, she’s a cutie). I didn’t even realize that Kevin Bacon was in the movie until I saw him on screen, but he chews the scenery with gusto. (Also, his character is named Sebastian Shaw, which, as STAR WARS fans know, is the name of the actor who played Anakin Skywalker in RETURN Of THE JEDI. What is the significance? Absolutely nothing.) Add in solid writing, stylish direction, excellent mix of mutants and powers and one hilarious surprise cameo, and the result is one of the better all-around comic book films we’ve seen recently, and certainly the best so far this summer.

SUPER 8 -- At this point, I don’t know what the heck to make of J.J. Abrams. Granted, I’ve still never seen a single episode of LOST... but I liked MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III, thought CLOVERFIELD was a piece of crap, and was very pleasantly surprised by STAR TREK (even if it did blatantly rip-off STAR WARS almost beat-for-beat). Though his films have been a mixed bag, his geek cred has never been in doubt, so when I heard he was making an homage to old-school Steven Spielberg films, with the assistance of Spielberg himself, it sounded like a great idea at the time. And indeed, in this film about a group of kids who, while making their own movie, witness a horrific train crash and subsequently investigate a wave of strange, other-worldly occurrences in their sleepy suburban town. Abrams perfectly captures the tone, look and feel of ‘80s Spielberg ranging from E.T. to CLOSE ENCOUNTERS to THE GOONIES to GREMLINS... but after about an hour of blue lens flares, it occurred to me that maybe it’s the kind of thing that works better as a two-minute trailer, or simply as a concept, but not so much as a full-length film. By the time it was over, I was wishing that I actually HAD been watching E.T. It’s just... too much. But still well done, and the kid-cast is outstanding, especially Elle Fanning in a performance that should catapult her past her older sister.

GREEN LANTERN -- Another week, another movie based on a comic book that contains an extremely dense backstory, of which I had little to no prior knowledge. Fortunately, this time, the filmmakers took a novel approach: Instead of dumping us right in the middle of some crazy convoluted universe, they gave us a trailer that provided a good deal of exposition and helped ease us into it. So when it came time to see the movie, we were (more or less) prepared. Unfortunately, for a tale involving strange alien worlds and magic rings and galactic guardians and unlimited superpowers... it’s just not particularly exciting. I like Ryan Reynolds, but he’s just too RYAN REYNOLDS to play a superhero. He’s a good actor, but he doesn’t quite have the subtleties of, say, Robert Downey Jr., who was able to hone his schtick to fit the role of Tony Stark. Also, while Blake Lively remains the hottest woman alive at the moment, she is WAY out of her element here. All that being said, the scenes on the planet Oa, the vastness of space, and, really, anything but boring ol’ Earth, are pretty impressive. Wish they had focused more on that and just gone crazy with the visual effects rather than give us the same old song-and-dance origin story. Seems like there’s probably a truly epic, exciting Green Lantern story in there somewhere -- next time, everybody involved needs to do some shots or something beforehand and live a little.

THE ART OF GETTING BY -- A coming-of-age movie in two respects. First, it’s about a lonely, disaffected, too-smart-for-his-own-good student who has coasted through high school without ever having done anything of substance, only to meet a kindred spirit who fills his life with meaning. Second, it stars two former child stars who are now all growns up: CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY’s Freddie Highmore as George and NANCY DREW’s Emma Roberts as Sally. Both give fine performances -- a little unintentionally awkward at times, but it fits the material. Roberts, in particular, has recently proven that she is more than just Julia’s niece with excellent turns in this, IT’S KIND OF A FUNNY STORY and even SCREAM 4. Story-wise, writer/director Gavin Wiesen is kind of all over the place and the movie is ultimately sabotaged by its own self-importance. Not to mention that, by my count, Wiesen blatantly rips off the following things: (1) Old-school Woody Allen, with the Manhattan love-letter setting and cute self-deprecation, (2) “The Catcher in the Rye,” with its stance against the establishment and phonies, (3) SAY ANYTHING, with the way George wears a trenchcoat for no apparent reason other than he’s probably imitating Lloyd Dobbler, and (4) BILLY MADISON, when George must complete an entire year’s worth of homework over three weeks in order to graduate. All in all, the movie is mildly enjoyable because the actors are endearing... but ultimately it’s a bit of a mess.

MR. POPPER’S PENGUINS -- Decent family fare about a successful Manhattan businessman/deadbeat dad (Jim Carrey) who... well, he inherits six penguins who turn his life upside-down. With their particular personalities and potent presence, the penguins turn Popper’s posh penthouse into a polar playpen. (I promise I’ll pull the plug on the P-words, pronto... perhaps.) With the penguins’ help, Popper realizes that he’s been missing out on the really important things in life -- namely, his kids and estranged wife (Carla Gugino, always a pleasure). It’s all very predictable, kind of bland, harmless and mildly enjoyable. But therein lies the biggest problem: It’s just not wacky enough. Lots of potential to really let Carrey go nuts (in a family-friendly way, of course), but he was pretty subdued for the most part. I mean, it's Jim Carrey and a flock of penguins in New York City -- turn him loose and see what happens! As it stands, there is nothing wrong with the film on a pure family level, but you definitely get a sense of the far zanier and more entertaining film that might have been. It was, however, interesting to see the landmark Central Park restaurant, Tavern on the Green, used as a plot device even though it is currently shut down. They even went so far as to recreate the restaurant as it once was -- which raises the question, was this whole movie just a veiled campaign to drum up support and bring the NYC institution back from the dead? And if it does ever reopen, will the penguins appear as a compensatory marketing tie-in? Let's hope so.

THE TRIP -- I remember seeing Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon in TRISTRAM SHANDY: A COCK AND BULL STORY a few years ago but not thinking much of it, but now I am pretty sure I would watch them in anything. This is one of the great road/buddy movies in recent memory. The premise is that Coogan has been asked to write restaurant reviews for the Observer, and after his girlfriend bows out of the trip, he reluctantly asks Brydon, his friend & rival, to join him. From there, the two spend the entire movie driving around, eating food, talking, bickering and trying to outdo each other's celebrity impressions. Their dueling Michael Caine voices are the stuff of legend (particularly Brydon's theory of how Caine's voice has changed after years of hard living), but I particularly love their take on the costume drama inspirational speech -- "Gentleman, to bed! For we leave at 9:30... ish." (I've been quoting that in my head for the past week.) The relentless back-and-forth is genius in itself, but throw in Coogan's self-absorption and resentment towards Brydon and you have a bit of a character study as well. Just an all-around hilarious and ridiculously entertaining film.

BAD TEACHER -- Looks like 2011 is the year that the ladies “Take Back the Raunch.” First came BRIDESMAIDS, in which Kristin Wiig & Co. proved that they could go up against the Apatow boys’ club and succeed. And now here comes Cameron Diaz as Elizabeth Halsey, a foul-mouthed, conniving, drinking, smoking, gold-digging, wildly inappropriate middle school teacher who just doesn’t care. Diaz’s most memorable comedic characters have had a certain naïve sweetness, like in THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and CHARLIE’S ANGELS (even BEING JOHN MALKOVICH to an extent) -- but there is nothing sweet about the comedy in this movie. It is very filthy, very un-PC and very much earns its hard R-rating. Characters don’t even necessarily learn any lessons or go through big changes -- any good that happens (a piece of good advice to a child, say), happens in spite of itself. The comedy is just pure, unadulterated filth -- and it works. Along for the ride is a game supporting cast, including Jason Segel as a sarcastic, non-sequitur-spouting gym teacher who s determined to get Elizabeth to go out with him; Justin Timberlake as a substitute teacher who becomes the object of Elizabeth’s scheming desires when she learns that he is rich; and the very funny Lucy Punch with a scene-stealing performance as Elizabeth’s nemesis, suck-up, and all-around do-gooder Amy Squirrel. (Not to mention appearances from Thomas Lennon, John Michael Higgins, and for God’s sake, Phyllis from THE OFFICE!) If you like a good, dirty comedy with zero moral value, this is the movie to see. Also doesn’t hurt to have an appreciation for Cameron Diaz’s legs... she’s still got’em.

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING (EXTENDED EDITION) -- I saw this on the big screen the other day as part of Fathom Events series to promote the new Blu-Ray release (my first time seeing a LOTR film in theatres since early 2004 when I saw ROTK for the third time) and it was just as powerful, epic, astonishing and emotional as ever -- if not more so. Not sure there's much more I can say about this movie -- one of the top three greatest final installments of a trilogy ever, along with RETURN OF THE JEDI and TOY STORY 3 -- that hasn't already been said, so let's just run through some parts that were particularly awesome on the big screen: The final confrontation with Saruman (Christopher Lee's voice is made for a booming movie theatre sound system). Gandalf & Pippin's arrival at Gondor, particularly their race up the spiral pathways with Howard Shore's magnificent "Gondor theme." The majesty of the lighting of the beacons ("Gondor calls for aid!" "And Rohan will answer!"). The Battle of Pelennor Fields -- quite possibly the most awe-inspiring battle that will ever be put to celluloid. Rohan's grand arrival. Theoden's anguished-turned-valiant expressions whenever some new evil rears its head. Legolas single-handedly taking down that oylphaunt ("That still only counts as one!"). Shelob's Lair, Gollum's treachery, Sam's heroics -- you could practically feel the breathlessness of the crowd. The vast desolation of Mordor looks even more daunting on the big screen. The Mouth of Sauron, meanwhile, looks even crazier and somehow scarier. "For Frodo!" "I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you!" "The Ring is mine!" And of course, "My friends... you bow to no one!" Just the tip of the iceberg, or we'll be here all night. God, I want to watch it again right now. Let's hope that they decide to re-release these movies in theatres every few years....

Also, in case you missed them, be sure to check out my reviews of CARS 2 and TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON, too! Yay, summer!

TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON -- More Than Melts the Eyes Out of Their Sockets

2011-06-29T23:55:00.003-04:00

Let me begin this review by reiterating the following disclaimer: I LOVE TRANSFORMERS. I love the cartoons -- I watched the entirety of the first two seasons in chronological order on the Hub network earlier this year, typically DVRing them during the week and watching them in two-hour clusters over the weekend, and it was an amazing nostalgia trip. I loved the toys -- had all of them as a kid and was pleasantly surprised to discover that I still have a bunch of them hiding away at my parents’ house. And yes, I even love the movies. The first time Optimus Prime reveals himself in 2007’s TRANSFORMERS was one of the great geek-out movie moments that I’ve ever experienced. Even 2009’s TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN, which even Michael Bay admits was a steaming turd, has its moments if you can ignore the racist Autobots and the giant clanging robot testicles. The TRANSFORMERS films are, quite simply, my biggest cinematic guilty pleasures of the past few years -- except that I don’t feel guilty about it at all.

Now, I honestly believe that Michael Bay has been on a mission to redeem himself after the much-maligned second film. The man may not be Orson Welles, but he takes great pride in his work nevertheless -- say what you want about Michael Bay flicks, but even the stinkers are always spectacles that few other filmmakers could even dream of accomplishing. He had something to prove with TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON... and prove it, he most certainly did. Michael Bay has officially out-Michael Bayed himself with this movie in terms of pure, unbridled robot carnage. If this is the last installment (and it kinda has to be... at least until someone inevitably reboots the franchise in a few years), he has brought new meaning to the phrase, "going out with a bang." But more than that, he fixed a lot of the problems that plagued the previous installments: Transformers are now much more recognizable. Action sequences are no longer completely incomprehensible. Silly comic relief is still there, but toned down considerably. As for plot and dialogue and human characters with some semblance of depth... well, hey, it’s Michael Bay, not Shakespeare. If you are watching TRANSFORMERS and looking for stuff like that, you probably shouldn’t be watching TRANSFORMERS.

But let’s talk more about the visuals and the action, because obviously, that’s what DARK OF THE MOON is all about. One key factor is that it was filmed using 3D cameras, which forced Bay to alter his style somewhat. Seems the human eye cannot register three-dimensional images if they are less than three seconds long. Now, Bay has made a career out of rapid-fire action sequences that could cause a person to go into epileptic seizures, but this time, he had to slow things down a bit. Not TOO slow, mind you -- but slow enough for the 3D to work, which in turn is slow enough for us to actually keep track of what’s going on, which Autobot is wreaking havoc upon which Decepticon, which Chicago office building is literally being ripped in half and used as a weapon, etc. To say that the action in this movie is an improvement over the first two installments is a vast understatement. In fact, everything that Bay has given us so far -- not just in the Transformers franchise, but in his entire career -- culminates with the climactic battle of this film. The last hour or so is nothing short of an epic symphony of destruction. All-out war between the Autobots (and humans) and Decepticons. Non-stop brutality and utter mayhem. Robots and people getting their innards ripped out, Mortal Kombat-style, or simply blasted to smithereens. I’m not joking when I say that the action does not let up for a second. Just before it begins, the screen goes black, as if lowering a curtain -- and when the curtain rises and the image returns, it’s just madness and carnage. And that carnage and madness continues and continues and builds and builds until it’s finished. And then the movie ends. It’s sheer insanity. It’s awesome. It’s everything you could possibly want in a Transformers movie. Every character -- good and bad -- gets a moment to shine. It must be seen to be believed, and the trailers have only provided a miniscule glimpse of what’s in store -- but I will say that Optimus Prime and Bumblebee have officially attained ULTIMATE BADASS status with some key moments that caused the audience at my IMAX 3D screening to roar its approval. There are some smaller action sequences throughout the first two-thirds of the film, but really, everything that happens is just one big build-up to the final spectacle.

That includes, like, a story and stuff. Remember the space race of the ‘60s that culminated with the moon landing of 1969? Turns out that was all the result of an Autobot spacecraft that crash-landed on the moon a few years earlier. This discovery was kept under wraps for a long time... even as the events of the first two films unfurled, which makes Optimus Prime none too happy. But he is now able to revive Sentinel Prime (voiced perfectly by Leonard Nimoy), the Autobots’ long-lost former leader and creator of some of their most prized technology. Meanwhile, the Decepticons, still led by Megatron, have been licking their wounds and biding their time to strike again... which of course they eventually do, with a few surprises up their robotic sleeves, including the deadly Shockwave, who kicks serious ass. Also meanwhile: Sam Witwicky (gigantic douche Shia LaBeouf, whose career will hopefully implode now that this series is done) has graduated college and is struggling to find a job, despite being a two-time hero of humanity, a fact that really sticks in his craw. But at least he has a new super-hot girlfriend, played by Rosie Huntington-Whitely, whose accent and lips help ease the pain of Megan Fox’s dismissal, and who doesn’t help Sam’s inferiority complex by making more money than him and having a cushy job with a pretentious, sleazy boss (Patrick Dempsey). Back for more fun & games are John Turturro, once again acting as if he’s in a whole other movie, and Josh Duhamel and Tyrese Gibson as soldiers who don’t have much to do other than run around and watch the robots kick each other’s ass. (Actually, that’s not entirely true -- the human soldiers DO get one pretty cool moment during the final battle. America, Fuck Yeah!) Somehow, Michael Bay convinced Frances McDormand and John Malkovich to be in this movie as the Secretary of Defense and Sam’s megalomaniacal boss, respectively -- seeing them is surreal, but they both add their own brand of screen presence and it works. Ken Jeong also makes a bizarre appearance, and Sam’s crazy parents are back for some comic moments, which is cool because they are strangely hilarious.

What it all boils down to is this: Do you like TRANSFORMERS? Do you want to see TRANSFORMERS bash the ever-loving shit out of each other and lay waste to a major American city for a solid hour? Do you want to applaud and cheer and go “HOLY SHIT!” many, many times? Then, my friends, TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON is for you. See it on the biggest, loudest screen you can find. Hell, even spring for 3D if you’ve got a few extra bucks in your pocket -- it’s probably the second-best use of the technology in a live-action movie after AVATAR (though in this case, I think it’s more the events that we are seeing in 3D that are eye-popping, not so much the 3D itself). Pound for pound, it’s clearly the best of the trilogy and some of the best work of Michael Bay’s career. Some might consider that light praise -- but those people, along with all other haters and curmudgeons and killjoys and negative nancies, can go F themselves. TRANSFORMERS, rule!