Blog Snapshot
Blog Entries
|
KNOWING: D
PUBLIC ENEMIES: B+ AWAY WE GO: B TRANSFORMERS 2: D- THE HANGOVER: B+ UP: C |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
SCORE: C- In the beginning of this film, Frank (Dicaprio) is consoling his wife April (Winslet) over her commendable performance in what he called a lousy stage-play. This pretty much perpetuates the way I feel about Revolutionary Road. Granted, the acclaim for both Winslet and Dicaprio’s performances is legitimate but as I said, the surrounding elements add up to a letdown. Frank and April’s sinking marriage is poorly examined beyond the obvious skirmishes and aggressive behavior. I would have liked to see more their past exposed rather than one bout after another in their present debacle. Some of their plight is totally irrational and unjustified. During one segment where Alice explains her absurd plan about relocating to Paris, I felt irritated at the notion that this set up was so tacked on. As if the only solution to marital problems is to dislocate the family to a foreign country. While I’m aware that this is the framework of the film’s premise, it always came of as tawdry and foolish. The supporting cast is consistent of some very talented players but their roles are so forced that they seem wasted in the end. Michael Shannon plays a mentally unstable mathematician who exudes craziness akin to Ledger’s Joker. Too bad it’s easily one of the most out of place performances I’ve ever seen. Again, that may be Mendes’s point but it’s just too awkward to bear. Even the script is a disappointment. On more than one occasion I found myself wincing at how contrived the dialog was. This downward spiral just keeps one-upping itself with gloomy symbolism topped with unbelievable events and actions. It’s 2008’s most overrated film, without such calibrated performances by Dicaprio and Winslet, this film would have sunk faster than the Titanic. I’m hoping The Reader deliver’s where this failed to |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
THE DUCHESS
SCORE: C I’m all for Keira Knightley in these type of roles, but, I can’t help but feel like she’s pigeonholing herself. At this point, it seems as if she’s played the same character in her past few films. She has found her niche or sorts and no doubt excels with these portrayals but I fear the word typecast may loom in her future. Granted, Atonement was one of my favorite movies last year but I would personally love to see her expand her pallet a bit. In the Duchess she plays Georgiana, the late Duchess of Devonshire in which she encounters a conflicted life of servitude. Does this sound familiar? Her passion for acting in these roles resonates just as it has in the past but I couldn’t help but feel bogged down while watching this. Ralph Finnes costars as the domineering duke and somewhat stereotypical overlord. Finnes is a terrific actor who transcends this film by delivering a cutting, intense performance. If only he had more to work with. Before watching this movie you should be aware that it is very slow and plotting. The plot mostly unfolds late in the game and the ending is underwhelming. During the trailers they made it look like the theme would predominately focus on the Duchess being a fashion icon and such. Instead, it’s a pretty cut and dry story. The costumes, setting, and make-up are all very well done but some of the cinematography is somewhat on the dry side. If you’re into 19th century, aristocratic, drama (and who isn’t…) this may be right up your alley, CONT… |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
APPALOOSA
SCORE: B+ When it comes to the Western genre, I tend to ease up on my critiquing approach. The reason is that I believe the structure for these films is inherently straight-laced in terms of their design. Where this could normally be a flaw in other genres, here, it’s accepted because the genre itself embodies it. Plus, there are so few western being made these days, it’s refreshing to see one hit the big screen. There are certain things you expect, and what really makes of breaks the outcome is the performances and dialogue. Both of which are excellent. Ed Harris directs and takes on the lead role with a terrific supporting cast. It seems like the idea here was a no-frills, old-time, picture that brings about a nostalgic vibe rarely felt these days. Harris plays Virgil Cole with his right-hand-man Everett Hitch (Viggo Mortensen), the two are hired guns or sorts employed by the town of Appaloosa to uphold the law and drive out a band of criminals led by Randall Bragg (Jeremy Irons). Bragg has murdered three lawmen and an entrepreneur from Chicago. Cole and Hitch are hired to put an end to him. They’ve been partners for quite some time and they possess an admirable camaraderie among each other. The acting chemistry between them is reminiscent of when they were opposing each other in A History of Violence. Throughout the film, the two characters ability to back each other up and be one’s “ying” to the others “yang” is the glue that holds the film together. They take on Bragg’s gang on more than one occasion and each time it’s exciting and interesting to watch them work together. Rene Zellwegger plays Alison French who is mostly nothing more than the typical female distraction/damsel-in-distress. This is one of the weaker aspects of the story in that she rarely adds anything when she appears. Again, this goes back to the western format being cut-and-dry inherently. Her actions are very predictable bogging down a few scenes. The film excels visually with superb costumes and a well-designed setting. It seems like it was shot with a gruff overtone to add to the dusty western feel. Harris has done a fine job with his second foray into directing. Viggo’s performance stood apart from the others as he once again delivers a smooth, brooding portrayal with his unique brand of edginess. It’s not groundbreaking or overly thought provoking but it does what it sets out to do. I enjoyed watching each scene unfold even if I could predict nearly every outcome. The stand-offs are exciting and the dialog (witch is largely pulled from the novel the film is based on) is very well done. Anyone who enjoys the western genre will appreciate this film. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
STEP BROTHERS
SCORE: C I don’t know what’s with all the “C grade” films popping up this summer but I’m hoping I’ll get to see a few more films that register above meritocracy (besides The Dark knight, of course) before summer’s end. Will Ferrell has played the same character almost as many times as Ben Stiller has. In fact, I think the only person that may give them a run for their money is John C. Reilley. Here they play hapless, childish, goons who still live at home at the ripe ages of 39 and 40. While watching things unfold I kept feeling like I’d seen the film before. Maybe it was the peculiarity of the talented Richard Jenkins who recently starred in an outstanding film called “The Visitor” playing such a whimsical character. He plays Brennan’s (Ferrell) Father and does nothing but shout and scowl throughout most of the movie. I’m still disappointed that Ferrell chooses these rolls time and time again. I really believe that he has the potential to do better projects after watching him in “Stranger Than Fiction.” Unfortunately it seems like these mindless romps are his bread and butter. It’s really nothing more than the usual high jinks involving a delicate mixture of slapstick and crude humor. Sure, I laughed when Brennan put his balls on one of Dale’s (Reilly) precious drums and during various other ridiculous moments. One of the later scenes involving them sleepwalking and hurling their father down the stairs had me fairly hysterical for a moment but it’s all so dim-witted. You’ll feel like you lost a few hundred brain cells by the time the credits roll (stay for a few minutes when they do because there’s a very funny scene). You can’t help but feel like you’ve been down this road too many times. If you’re still impressed by people getting whacked in the head and potty humor then by all means rush to the theater but otherwise; there’s really nothing significant about this film. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
“THE DARK KNIGHT”
SCORE: A+ Normally, when something is hyped to the degree of “TDK” there’s a wide margin for potential disappointment. Rarely are such unrealistic expectations met. Heath Ledger’s untimely death added to the mounting hysteria surrounding Christopher Nolan’s sequel thus vaulting expectations to a staggering plateau. When Ledger was originally cast, many reacted with a sense of speculation as to whether this seemingly unfitting actor could really flesh out such an iconic role. Ledger has gone up and above what anyone could have asked for. His show stealing portrayal is utterly haunting. It makes any previous incarnations seem like child’s play. His total dedication to this character presides every scene he’s in, from every eerie movement to each line of razor-sharp dialog he is nothing short of brilliant. In one scene he films himself verbally and physically emasculating a Batman impersonator to threaten and frighten the city. He’s absolutely terrifying in a way that I never imagined The Joker could be. Nicholson did the role justice but looking back his version seems futile. While some could downplay the performance due to the circumstances, I have no trouble calling it the best of 2008. It’s really more of a transformation than a performance. Beyond the cataclysmic rampage of The Joker, there is a deep, complex, brooding story that truly does the mythos justice. Originally, I was skeptical on Nolan’s design for the architecture of the Batman universe. “Begins” was a bit clumsy and came off feeling disjointed at times. The film was enjoyable but I just wasn’t completely sold on Nolan’s take on the series. His follow up thwarts all doubt due to the fact the he tosses aside inhibition and let’s the darkest sides of these characters show. “TDK” will ultimately be known as The Joker’s film. This is obvious to anyone who has seen the film or paid attention to the viral marketing. Bale returns as Batman/Bruce Wayne and picks up where he left off (raspy Batman voice and all) and he seems to have settled into the role. Maggie Gyllenhall replaces Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes in a definite trade-up actress wise. Holmes’ bland acting was one of the resounding complaints about “Begins”. I can’t say that Gyllenhall is astounding in any way but she gets the job done much less annoyingly than Holmes. Aaron Eckhart portrays the ill-fated Harvey Dent, which, will also likely be overshadowed by Ledger’s performance. Eckhart does a fantastic job with the much-conflicted character. After Tommy Lee Jones and co. destroyed the Two-Face character with his awful rendition in “Batman Forever”; Eckhart steps up to give the character a genuine, proper realization. He’s very convincing as both Dent and the gruesomely disfigured Two-Face. During the story as he’s built up to be Gotham’s true hero or as they call him: “The White Knight”. His fall-from-grace is both heartbreaking and grueling, equating to one of the best comic-book character translations out there. Nolan has crafted the best Comic-based film to date. This is essentially his unique take on the entire world of batman. It’s not meant to be an exact adaptation. Some fans have complained about The Joker’s redesigned origin story (or lack there-of) but you have to understand that this is Nolan’s interpretation of the character just like Frank Miller and many others have built and designed various outlooks on the characters often taking the series to new levels. His ability to bring the best of this franchise is now eminent. I was never much of a fan of his work before this movie but now I’m sold. How this film managed to remain marketable to kids and maintain a PG-13 rating is beyond me. There are a few scenes involving the age-old Batman gadgets and technology but all in all, it’s a sinister, often sadistic tale that could hold it’s own with many of the best crime drama’s out there. After viewing it twice I feel like I picked up on a few of the plot nuances I may have missed the first time around. “Iron Man” and “The Incredible Hulk” can’t even begin to tread in the realm that this material resides. It’s truly legendary. The last time I felt so enthralled with a film was the groundbreaking “Jurassic Park”. I remember feeling like the cutting edge effects were the absolute pinnacle of movie technology. The feeling is similar with “TDK” in terms of these much beloved characters coming to life. If they choose to make a third installment (judging by the massive box office return it’s almost inevitable) I honestly doubt if this can be topped. The Joker and Two-Face fit so well into Nolan’s dark devise where most of the Batman characters are far too campy and equivocal beyond their typical manifestations. Nolan would really have his work cut out for him for various reasons but as I said, my faith in him is now concrete so I believe he has the potential to make another outstanding sequel. From the bold and gutsy characterization, to the swooping, large-scale cinematography, “TDK” is all that any Batman fan could ask for. The action scenes are exciting and the intensity is through the roof nearly start-to-finish. Ledger’s final full performance will be talked about for years to come and hopefully will be recognized come award season. Much like Tim Burton’s Batman reinvented the genre back in 1989, Nolan has set the bar for what these movies can amount to and at the same time, he has successfully delivered 2008’s best film so far. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
"HELLBOY 2, THE GOLDEN ARMY"
SCORE: C There’s no question that Guillermo Del Toro is a mastermind when it comes to visual presentation. The heavily acclaimed” Pan’s Labyrinth” displayed his lush, imaginative, brilliance and he’s seen a large amount of attention even since. The first Hellboy flew under the radar as more of a cult style superhero film. Its appeal was evident but nowhere near as prominent as with similar comic-book translations. The sequel builds upon the first movie while expanding with new enemies and hero’s. Ron Perlman’s perfectly pitched portrayal of Hellboy remains untouched. Aside from him there’s really nothing worth mentioning performance wise. The visuals are, as I stated earlier, nothing short of masterful. The various incarnations are lustrous and vibrant. One scene where the characters visit a “Troll Market” you can’t help but see a definate George Lucas influence with the eclectic scenery and monstous characters. Sadly, this is all frosting on an otherwise unfulfilling desert. The plot and script are both clunky and predictable. Everything about the story feels standard-faire with various cliches at every turn. When the action slows, the flaws of the disjointed foundation appear. I also could have done without the opening sequence involving a flashback to Hellboy’s childhood. I’d of preferred a more action-oriented kick-start. Luscious imagery and a charismatic crew of hero’s are hampered by this sequels lack of polish. Hopefully the writing receives a major upgrade for the surely forthcoming third installment. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
"HANCOCK"
SCORE: C- Will Smith has become so huge that they’ve concocted up a new superhero just for him. His name is John Hancock, the unwilling, booze swindling, sap who just happens to posses superhuman strength and abilities. Sounds familiar yet amidst the numerous comic book translations popping up left and right it’s oddly distinguished. What most “Superhero” films strive for is exactly what “Hancock” opposes. The film starts off displaying the hero passed out on a bench in clothing you’d likely find on a hobo abruptly being awaken by a young boy who wants Hancock to help stop a dangerous high speed chase. The kid calls him an asshole as he walks away which leads into a running gag that’s unbearably overused throughout the film. Gags aside, there are some genuinely humorous moments such as Hancock being ridiculed after causing a train wreck to save P.R. man Ray (Jason Bateman) from being hit. Bateman is good though his role is very contained. His wife Mary (Charlize Theron) doesn’t seem to take too kindly to the idea of Ray helping Hancock with his public image. Theron offers very little in her role, though it is nice to see her looking normal again (it seems like they purposely try to make her homely in other films). The plot twists and confrontations add up to nothing more than cheap entertainment. That’s the only real reason this one keeps it’s heap above water. It’s brief and entertaining. Mostly credited to Smith ability to garner charisma in any role. A great Superhero needs a great villain and this movie is devoid of any villains beyond a few C-class, typical crooks. Whenever it’s writers attempt to infuse superhero values to the plot things begin to fall apart. The Greek mythology introduced in the later half feels incredibly tacked on. With a bit more guile and thorough outlining, “Hancock” could have been much better. Sadly, the result is a heartless sham that’s barely held together by Smith |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
WILD ARMS XF
_________________________________________________________________ GRAPHICS: C- SOUND: B- CONTROL: B FUN FACTOR: C- VALUE: C+ GRADE: C- I’m all for games being difficult. In fact, I think a glaring flaw in most games these days their overly easy game-play. Luckily, most games these days have various difficulty settings to allow for a more customized experience. Tactical RPG’s normally bare a certain level of initial difficulty due to their design such as: “Jean d’ Arc” for the PSP, which, I thought was well balanced with spurts of challenging moments and trials. Wild Arms XF is just plain unfair. It’s a vicious combination of irritating level design elements that are a prime example of poor execution. Layers of unnecessary hurdles often preside each mission making the experience way more frustrating than it’s really worth. “Ninja Gaiden” for the XBOX is easily one of the most challenging games I’ve ever finished but through all the controller tossing, cursing at the screen, and stomping rampages, I felt like the payoff was well worth it as the game itself was utterly gorgeous. XF is visually lacking and rewards the player with very little in terms of enjoyment. The creative missions are a great idea but like I said earlier, the execution is very poor. The designers really fumbled by adding cheap shot after cheap shot. For instance, during one mission you’re expected to critically wound three enemies, then defeat the remaining enemies plus five or six reinforcements, all while keeping every single ally from being KO’d. Let’s not forget about the stamina bar for each character (VP - Vitality Points bar) that will cause each member to lose health every turn if you take too long. This is way too much. I’m all for interesting missions beyond simply wiping out the enemies but why overload the player with nonsensical elements? It’s mildly rewarding to complete each act for the fact that they are a severe challenge but the boring cut scenes feel cheap and lifeless. The voice acting is atrocious to boot. Each character is flat and mundane to the point of wanting to mute the volume whenever there’s dialog. Fortunately, the soundtrack is great keeping with the tradition of excellent music in Wild ARMS games. All the little things I love about tactical RPG’s seem to be absent with this game. Sure there’s leveling up and job classes but they just don’t convey that feeling that games like “Final Fantasy Tactics” etc. do. There’s formation attacks and a few spells but don’t expect any big summons or screen enveloping magic. Part of the fun for me is getting weapons and armor that actually seem to boost your characters worth, XF’s upgrades are bland and fail to really interest the player. The only other positive things I can say about this title mostly deal with its intriguing job classes and decent characters. I liked the fact that they stray from the norm with classes like “Grappler” “Excavator” and “Gageteer”. It’s probably the only thing that kept me interested in the game. The skill system is great as is the ability to freely adjust your characters to your liking. Wild Arms fans will feel a tiny bit of nostalgia for the other ARMS titles (mostly the forth and fifth installments) but there’s almost a complete lack of a western vibe, I’d say it’s medieval if anything. It’s unfortunate that XF turned out so unpolished I really think there’s a great game beneath all the structual problems and shortcomings. If you’re up for a long, trying, tactical RPG then XF might satisfy your craving. Just be warned that many of the missions are trial and error based, so even the most skilled of gamers will have to play some of the levels multiple times to finally finish them. There’s no guidebook available (very strange) for any of you that might be curious. If you haven’t played “Jeanne d’ Arc” yet and are looking for a good tactical RPG for the PSP, I strongly suggest playing it instead of XF as it succeeds in many of the areas where XF fails. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
|
THE DARK KNIGHT: A+
DOUBT: A SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE: A- SNOW ANGELS: A- THE VISITOR: A- INDIANA JONES 4: A- THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS: B+ IN BRUGES: B CLOVERFIELD: B IRON MAN: B THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON: B- THE INCREDIBLE HULK: B IN BRUGES: B WANTED: B MARRIED LIFE: C+ ROLE MODELS: C+ THE DUCHESS: C FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL: C+ HELLBOY II: C HANCOCK: C THE SPIDERWICK CHRONICLES: B- 21: F |
|
0 Comments | |
|
Post a Comment
IGN RSS Feeds