 |
|
|
 |
|
Unbroken is worth watching, even if it isn't great (12/26/2014)
The true story behind "Unbroken" is spectacular and the man behind it, Louis Zamperini, is certainly is extraordinary. The telling of his tale, however, is less so. Director Angelina Jolie delivers a good-but-not-great final product which doesn't quite do the story justice. "By-the-numbers" is the best way to describe Unbroken, as it plays by every biopic rule you've come accustomed to. You know when you see them, even if you can't describe them and this familiarity certainly helps you like the film, but the lack of risk keeps you from loving it. The lead actor, Jack O'Connell falls right in line, giving a performance that is passable but not memorable. I wish I could recommend the movie more enthusiastically given the subject matter, but I still think it's worth watching. FINAL GRADE: B-
Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb ends the series in fine fashion (12/26/2014)
I laughed many times during this final entry into the Night of the Museum entry. I'm sure it was at gags and line deliveries most people would find stupid, but that's always been the fun with these movies. They never pretend to be anything more than a good time. Their simplicity is also, I suspect, why critics hate it so but if you leave your brain at the door, I think you can have a good time. As a bonus for "Secret of the Tomb," the ending is a bit more emotional then I thought, and it doesn't wrap up as neatly as you might think. This is good enough for a franchise that never worried about being great. FINAL GRADE: B
The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies brings the story to an end -finally (12/26/2014)
I'm convinced that if Peter Jackson had his druthers 15 years ago, there would be 6-8 Lord of the Ring movies. The talented filmmaker is many things but concise is not one of them. But with the 3 "main books" already burned off in the previous (already long) trilogy, he had to contend with adapting the much shorter "The Hobbit." Much has been said about him padding the book and I won't repeat those arguments except to say he does and it's unnecessary. But Jackson gets to do what he wants and what we get is good enough, if not great. Battle of the Five Armies starts with a spectacular sequence as Smaug lays down death and destruction with his hot dragon fire. It's a thrilling action sequence and one that most definitely ends with his death. Of course, this lasts about 10 minutes and this really should have been in the last movie so if you were left wanting as I was, you don't have to have to wait long to see the big guy bite it. After, the buildup to the next battle begins and it too takes too long, giving screen time to minor characters while not giving enough to Bilbo (Martin Freeman, who has been a saving grace for this trilogy). Jackson has no choice to do this however, because there just isn't enough story to tell so he pads and pads. But as far as padding goes, this is pretty great, because boy oh boy can he set up an action sequence. The battles feel as epic as anything in the Lord of the Rings original trilogy. But it's just too damn long, because again it has to be stretched. When you get to the end you're happy to be there, and if Jackson wanted us to feel as exhausted as Bilbo, then he certainly succeeded. It's a shame Jackson felt the need to craft a needless third movie. More is less and I can't help but feel that 2, 2 hour long movies could've done the story and characters justice. But Jackson did get his druthers and we are left instead with an overlong, much less perfect, "Hobbit," one that you will be glad you experienced but most certainly will never look forward to sitting through again. FINAL GRADE: B
Mockingjay Pt. 1 grasps at straws (11/26/14)
Like a doomed man in the final death throes, Hunger Games Mockingjay pt. 1 desperately grasps at anything and everything to save itself. In this case, what the film tries to reach for is a "something" in the first half of the relatively short source material to base a whole movie out of. To the screenwriter's credit (the very talented Danny Strong), he finds something relatively interesting in the propaganda Katniss and Peeta are compelled to make (for different reasons) for opposing sides of the war between the Capitol and District 13. This allows the film to make interesting, if not original, points about the media's formation of the "Truth" and the power that be's manipulation of the masses. Unfortunately this can't maintain our attention for a whole movie and the point the film is trying to make is hammered again and again all in service of padding the running time. Beyond the propaganda videos (or propos as the film nicknames them), nothing much happens in part one. Of course that's because this isn't meant to be a two part story but a succinct one. As presented, the story is stretched past the point of common sense all in service of collecting as much money from the audience as possible. It's cynical and insulting. The film isn't terrible, however, and for the most part well acted and directed. But it's all set up to a climax that we won't get to see for another year. There are also some strange choices in the film. The movie is desperate for onscreen action, yet the destruction of District 12 and the film's denouement all happen off screen. The movie tells but does not show. If they were going to try to make something out of nothing, at least have that "something" include more explosions. FINAL GRADE: C
Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas is crazy terrible (11/26/14)
Kirk Cameron has crazy eyes. I don't know when it happened, but somewhere between the teen idol and born again Christian, the man has booked a permanent ticket on the crazy bus. His reactions, mannerisms and tone of voice, all give off more than a whiff of instability. He brings his special brand of crazy to lecturing the audience about the meaning of Christmas and I do mean lecturing. The movie's introduction is him sitting down and speaking directly to the camera (again looking crazy) and what follows is like a Sunday school lesson where the audience is browbeaten into submission via its surrogate, Cameron's Doubting Thomas brother-in-law who is more than a bit of a Grinch. He thinks Christmas is too commercialized and removed from the real meaning, which is to celebrate Christ. He's wrong, Cameron argues condescendingly, but it's okay because he's going to set him straight. How he does is unintentionally funny and if you can follow the logic in Cameron's arguments then you might be developing the crazy eyes as well. As a movie, this fails miserably. As a piece of propaganda it fairs slightly better but still doesn't succeed because it preaches to the converted. Cameron doesn't try to sway the unbeliever. He is rallying the believers to believe the specific way he does and ignore the poor atheists and liberals who say otherwise. And what does Cameron believe? I'll just pick one point he makes: it's okay to be materialistic because Christmas is about celebrating Christ becoming a material human being. So spend, spend, spend, all for Jesus. See, I told you. Crazy. FINAL GRADE: D- (only because at the end there is hip hop Jesus music montage which is so crazy it's brilliant and yes, you read that right).
Interstellar sets its course for beyond the stars but comes up short (cause its about space travel...get it?) 11/15/14
Tars, the advanced robot from Christopher Nolan's new movie Interstellar, sounds like the penguins from Madagascar. I make this point for 2 reasons: the first, is to help anyone struggling with "I know I know that voice but can't place it" when watching this nearly 3 hour opus. Secondly, it shows the level of engrossment, or lack thereof, that I experienced while watching the movie. The fact that I even had this thought means the movie didn't take up my full attention. Interstellar tries to say much about life, love, and what it means to be a human being but doesn't quite connect. Part of this is the script. It's plain hokey, and although actors like McConaughey and Hathaway read the words beautifully, they don't really mean anything. "Love is the one thing that can transcend space and time" is actually uttered in the movie, almost exactly the way I just wrote it. If you're rolling your eyes, you had the same reaction that I did. There are scenes that made my eyes water but there is so much eye watering in the movie from the actors, that it feels manipulative. It's almost as if they're crying so we cry. But the story doesn't inspire the level of emotion that penetrates interstellar and I was left underwhelmed. However, this isn't a bad movie. It's a decent science fiction film with some exciting sequences accompanied by Hans Zimmer very loud score, which I don't mind but I understand why people do. Come in with low expectations and you will get the most of out of it. FINAL GRADE: B-
Big Hero 6 is simply neat (11/15/14)
There's a lot of gadgets, robots, and futuristic stuff in Big Hero 6 and it's all neat. "Neat" also describes the movie which tells a standard superhero origin tale with a couple of interesting twist. The film never gets beyond being simply "neat" however, and when I first saw it I couldn't figure it out. Days later, I now have concluded that the characters are just boring. Beyond the scene stealing Baymax, the boy genius Hiro, his older brother Tadashi, and their nerdy group of friends are very vanilla. The story, beyond the stunning visuals, is very plain as well and I guessed the ending very early on. I wasn't looking for a mystery but I was looking to be surprised and excited, and I was neither. "Neat" just wasn't good enough. But Baymax is very cool. So cool that the character single handily makes the film watchable. He's funny and sweet and will steal your heart. I know there will be a sequel, I'm just hoping they'll ditch everyone else and make it a Baymax solo production. Big Hero One anyone? FINAL GRADE: C+
Ambivalence rules the day in Gone Girl (10/12/14)
Ambivalence rules the day in Gone Girl, the adaptation of the Gillian Flynn 2012 bestseller. When we first meet Nick (Ben Affleck) he appears ambivalent about his marriage, work and life in general. He's not exactly a sad sack just missing any sort of spark, at least that's visible. His demeanor changes very little when he comes home to find a probable crime scene and his wife missing. He seems curiously unaffected right through questioning by the police and calling his in laws. The suspicion turns to him almost immediately and that too doesn't seem to bother him. Is he a heartless killer? A complete innocent? The answer is, unsurprisingly, more complicated than you might expect and it drives the plot through the first half of the movie when the movie takes a compelling turn. Nick, as it turns out, is not the only mysterious and ambivalent character, and the story begins to explore the titular gone girl (Roseland Pike). Is she a helpless victim? A cold hearted witch? The answer is...complicated and drives the second half of the movie. The flim is well crafted, directed, and wonderfully acted. Affleck and Pike play it just right. They're just ambivalent enough to be anything us, the audience, think they are, and also...not. The mystery is compelling and the ending is appropriate if not quite "happy." The ride, of course, is what matters and quite the ride it is. You won't feel ambivalent about this one. FINAL GRADE: B+
Annabelle is one step above junk (10/12/14)
Annabelle is a spinoff of the much better "The Conjuring." It lacks pretty much everything that made that film such an effective scare: good pacing, inventive scares, a compelling plot. It replaces it with a boring story about a newlywed couple we don't care about. It's worst mistake, however, is the acting. It borders on amateur, with the only really good performance coming from the always-great Alfre Woodard. I will give the film points for actually showing versus just telling however, but you have a feeling they resorted to that because they didn't have much else to work with. FINAL GRADE: C-
Alexander has a no good very bad day but I just have an okay one (10/12/14)
What could have been a very fun, amusing family dramedy only turns out to be a mostly forgettable PG comedy which only slightly memorable because it's the first Disney movie I can think of where the word "penis" is uttered more than one time. If you read the book you know the plot, and if you saw any of the previews you know the theme because they spell it out in each 30 second tv spot. I'm not going to blame the movie for badly handled advertising but I will blame it for poor pacing. That speech, where Alexander reminds his family that the bad days are needed to remind you why the good days are so important, occurs somewhere in the middle of the movie. It should have been toward the end. The effect is that the moral of the story or apex comes too early and what follows is neither exciting or particularly funny. But it isn't bad, it' just disappointing. I will say that the film is very well cast and everyone is very affable. I just wish they had better material. FINAL GRADE: B-
|
|
|
|
|
|