Apt Pupil, Paranoid Park, Young People Fucking
Apt Pupil (1998)
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
It’s a shame that Brad Renfro passed away a week before Heath Ledger’s death because he really was a talented actor that could’ve blossomed as he grew older. Upon watching his other films (“Ghost World,” “The Jacket,” “Bully,” “Sleepers,” “Tom and Huck”), including this one, he does a really great job getting into his character–who usually is psychologically tormented in some way. In this picture, he stars along Ian McKellen, Joshua Jackson, and David Schwimmer. The way this picture unraveled was interesting and some of the scenes were downright terrifying, such as the cat scene and when the old man realizes something in the hospital. You never really know where the story is going to go so I was engaged throughout. Directed by Bryan Singer and based on a story by Stephen King, this neo-Nazi picture can be a bit lowkey at times but that’s a good thing because it doesn’t glorify Nazism. It has a nice commentary about brilliant people being damaged in some unfortunate way, which nicely tied to the story of Icarus. What I thought it could have done better were the scenes that involve Renfro and his parents. What made this astute kid so messed up? Was he merely curious or was it something more dynamic? Questions like that take blows to this film’s core because those are questions that could make or break the picture’s thesis. Still, this is a strong, consistently interesting movie that deserves to be watched carefully since the characters were subtle at times.
Paranoid Park
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
The thing about apathy is that eventually either you wake up or you shut down. The apathetic main character (Gabe Nevins) in this picture woke up and it was an interesting journey. I found this picture, directed by Gus Van Sant, admirable in several ways. The poetic lyricism embedded in some scenes was appropriate when it comes to showing the character’s innocence; the scenes that most people will think are “pointless” are so close to real life and they made me laugh. Pretty much all the actors brought something natural to the table and made me wonder if the events in this film really happened to someone. Furthermore, I liked that the story was not told in chronological order so it forces the audience to pay attention and reward those who stuck with the characters from beginning to end. The most recognizable actor here is Taylor Momsen, for the fans of “Gossip Girl.” At first, I didn’t know it was her but the more she appeared in the film, the more I realized that it was really her. She was good as the annoying “girlfriend” of Nevins, and she reminded me of high school when everyone’s trying too hard too fit in. I think the breakout star here is Nevins because at first glance I thought he wasn’t really acting. But as the movie goes on, I noticed the little subtleties that he projected into his character, specifically the scenes just before the tragedy happened and the way he copes after that life-altering moment. As much as I like this film, I must say that this is not for everyone. If you’re a fan of Van Sant’s other film called “Elephant” (a personal favorite of mine), then you will most likely enjoy this film because they do have some similarities. It’s unfortunate because gems like “Paranoid Park” come out once in a while but not a lot of people bother to see them because most people prefer to watch Hollywood films. Well, at least I have something to enthusiastically recommend to friends on a boring weekend.
Young People Fucking
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I would have liked this movie more if it had been more daring. I thought that since “Young People Fucking” was a small film, I thought it would go the extra mile to be as offensive, sexually explicit, and experimental as it could to stand out against typical Hollywood teenage sex fares. Instead, we get a bunch of characters beginning with a “problem” and not learning anything from it in the long run–like most Hollywood teenage sex fares. Aside from Callum Blue, the rest of the cast are unknown to me: Aaron Abrams, Diora Baird, Sonja Bennett, Kristin Booth, Josh Cooke, Josh Dean, Ennis Esmer, Natalie Lisinska, Peter Oldring, and Carly Pope. Aside from Booth and Dean’s storyline–the married couple who are bored with their sex life–the rest are dull and uninvolving. I rarely get up to do something else while I’m watching a movie… I did so while watching this picture. But what I like about the movie is that the characters are allowed to talk even though they happen to talk about something deep and insightful only 10% of the time. Those moments made me think and I hoped there would be more of them toward the end of the film. One can tell that the filmmakers had a low budget and the director, Martin Gero, did not have enough experience because the style of the storytelling is stagnant. At times, the movie felt more like a play than anything. I think with a better group of writers to spice up the story and make the dialogue more snarky, this would have had the potential to become a cult film. Unfortunately, that is far from the case.
Out of Africa, Eagle Eye, Dorian Blues
Out of Africa
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
This film deserves its reputation for being one of the most sweeping romantic films of the 20th century. Directed by the great Sydney Pollack, this picture is grand in scope, not just when it comes to its cinematography, but also when it comes to complexity of its characters and emotions. Meryl Streep and Robert Redford lead the pack and they are nothing short of astonishing; from the moment they met until the end of the film, I thought they had chemistry and the scenes seem to pop whenever they would interact. I’ve always thought that Streep is one of the most elegant actresses to watch but she always surprises me, especially when I’d watch her older films. She has a way of making the audience like her character one minute but despise her the next. Her character here is a walking contradiction and I think that’s why I wanted to know more about her. This movie expertly tackles issues such as marriage, sense of belonging, the hardship of loving and being loved, freedom, education, women’s role in society, and race. Almost three hours long, this picture definitely took its toll on me, but the positive outweighs the long running time. I enjoyed the organic nature of it–how each scene seems to spill into one another in a very gratifying way. Some scenes that took my breath away include the plane cruising the African terrain, the nature of lions, and Streep and Redford’s discussion about marriage as either a want or a need. This is not the kind of film that I would recommend to people under 21, not because it’s explicit but because it’s the kind of picture that relates (and in turn appreciated) more to the older generation.
Eagle Eye
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I was surprised that I didn’t like this film as I thought I would, but I still liked it because it delivered what I wanted to see: insane action stunts, an interesting idea executed in an above average way, and a group of talented actors that made me laugh and feel concerned for their characters’ safety. It’s funny because I wanted to watch this movie not because of Shia LaBeouf (as my friends did), but because the executive producer was Steven Spielberg. And anything that Spielberg has something to do with, something inside me is convinced that it’s going to be great. Unfortunately, my expectations and reality were not on the same level. Still, the idea of big brother and machines in connection with moral and social questions reminded me of one of my favorite films, “2001: A Space Odyssey,” so I was engaged throughout. Not only that, Rosario Dawson, Billy Bob Thornton, and Michelle Monaghan were always a joy to watch for sheer star power. This is a typical “guy movie” because there’s a lot of loud explosions and the soundtrack was a bit too loud at times. Sometimes, those factors got in the way of the bigger picture because movies like this thrive on the idea more than the action sequences so I wish they had explored the idea of Eagle Eye a bit more. I certainly wanted to know more as the credits started rolling, despite the two hour running time. Directed by D.J. Caruso who also directed the surprisingly effective “Disturbia,” I think he needs a little more experience on how to focus on the characters and the ideas that should drive the film, not the fancy (but nonetheless thrilling) action sequences because stunts can only go so far. With a little more depth, I think this would’ve been a far superior blockbuster.
Dorian Blues
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
This coming-of-age film feels very after-schoolish but it gets the point across about the hardship of coming out of the closet. Michael McMillian, who I first took notice opposite Amanda Bynes in “What I Like About You,” does a great job as a conflicted gay guy who is very angry with his father (Steve Fletcher) for preferring his brother, Lea Coco, over him when it comes to pretty much everything. The topics of sibling rivalry and the subordinate mother (Mo Quigley) were also tackled quite nicely. I enjoyed the fact that each character is flawed but very likeable in their own way (except probably the strict father). Each scene was done in a fun, light, quirky way so the lessons were not heavy-handed. Another thing that I found enchanting about the movie is that it stays away from sex scenes because most gay movies have to have at least one sex scene for the sake of it. I don’t like that trend because it takes up running time and not all gay guys are obsessed with sex. Some of them are more like McMillian’s character: a bit uptight, judgmental, sensitive, but very fun and open once a person gets to know him. The bit about the “it’s not pink, it’s fuschia” line is very memorable because it can mean two things: how people see you and how you see yourself. Those scenes were handled very nicely and I applaud the filmmakers for it.
Bolt
Bolt (2008)
★★★★ / ★★★★
I’m surprised how fun this movie was considering it’s not made by Pixar. From beginning to end, it was able to provide its audiences unabashed cuteness, genuine laughter, and heart. All of the components of the film seemed to fit together like an intricate but highly rewarding puzzle. The voices of Bolt (John Travolta) and Penny (Miley Cyrus) are recognizable but never distracting; the soundtrack in each momentous scene manages to touch the right emotions; the jokes are wide-ranging (considering it comments on the inner-workings of Hollywood) but never out-of-place; and the story offers something for kids, adults, and everything inbetween. Not to mention the supporting characters, Mittens (Susie Essman) and Rhino (Mark Walton), are as interesting as the main characters. What made this film that much more enjoyable and interesting for me was its references to spy films and television shows, movies like “The Truman Show,” “Superman,” and “Finding Nemo,” and its focused theme of losing one’s innocence via going on an adventure (the symbolism regarding Bolt’s black thunder on his white fur is both simple and thoughtful). The lessons about friendship and the balance between self-reliance and evaluating the right time to ask for help were never hammered into the viewers’ heads. This is the first feature film that I saw in 3-D and I was nothing short of amazed. Even though it may not be necessary, it definitely enhances one’s viewing experience. I highly recommend “Bolt” and even go as far to say that it should be nominated for an Oscar. Even though it’s not as exemplary as “WALL-E,” it’s just as fun to watch because it’s creative, highly energetic, and it makes one feel good even after the credits finish rolling.
9 Dead Gay Guys, Night Watch, L.A. Confidential
9 Dead Gay Guys
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
This was interesting because it’s somewhat set in a gangster underworld… but pretty much everyone is a homosexual. In its own twisted way, it worked and I laughed a couple of times. Thankfully, the two leads–Glen Mulhern and Brendan Mackey–are charismatic because some of the material were really random and dragged on a bit. What made me not like this is movie as much is the fact that 95% of all homosexuals portrayed in the film were stereotypes–feminine behavior, wearing bright colors all the time, constantly high-pitched voices… I couldn’t relate to it as much as I should have. After watching the (adorable) non-stereotypical homosexuals in “Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist,” watching such characters here was a step backwards. You never really know what you’re going to get in each scene. The topics range from “dick cheese” (honestly, that was disgusting), the idea of two red bulls which applied to penis lengths, male hustling, to a murderous dwarf. Another factor I liked is that towards the end, it tied up some loose ends, not plot-wise, but character-wise. It was sensitive but not to the point where it was out of character. With a little more focus when it comes to the bigger picture and tweaks in the script, this would’ve been really good. I’ll give this one a slight recommendation with a warning that it’s not for everyone, especially those who are not open to the LGBT community.
Night Watch
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I can’t believe this film broke all kinds of box-office records in Russia. It’s not a bad film, per se, it’s just full of mediocrity. Interestingly enough, I saw “Day Watch,” its sequel (which I thought was horrible), first and ended up liking “Night Watch” more even though the special effects are less great and the story is less in scope. What I like most about this film is the relationship between Konstantin Khabensky (the protagonist) and Dmitry Martynov (the potential bringer of the apocalypse). Even though they’re not related by blood, I saw them as father and son because the scenes that they were in together had a certain sparkle and heart. It was also nice to see Aleksei Chadov as a badass young vampire being introduced here and had a bigger role in the sequel. One can tell that the filmmakers made this film to be a trilogy because there are a lot of loose ends and characters that the audience didn’t get to fully know. Not to mention that the finale is a bit anti-climactic because it’s more about forgiveness instead of a great battle between the Light and the Dark ones. I’ve browsed through forums on IMDB and some people claim that if “Night Watch” was made or released in the United States, it would be considered… trash (as a euphemism). Personally, I don’t think it’s fair to compare foreign films to pictures made in America because most foreign films have considerably less budget and the way they choose to tackle a subject is much different than in America. This film has creativity when it comes to offering its audiences unique images and artistic subtitles. I say give it a chance but have an open mind if it turns out to be something that you didn’t expect.
L.A. Confidential
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
This is a rich film that thrives on mood, character development, and storytelling. I feel like everyone is in this picture: Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, Guy Pearce, James Cromwell, Kim Basinger, David Strathairn, Danny DeVito, Ron Rifkin, Simon Baker… and the list goes on. There’s definitely a hint of noir from the 1940′s and 1950′s that made me enjoy it that much more because I am fan of those kinds of films. Unlike most movies that use that time period, this one is so natural, that sometimes I forget that it is a period piece. Instead, I focused more on the story rather than the time period because I was curious about the real identity of the person who the cops are after. Just when you think you know who the target is, you are given a piece of information that will support that he or she is not the killer. Either that or the person you suspect is murdered in some way. So, the audiences are left to keep guessing until the last few scenes of the film. I also liked that each of the main character has some sort of a motivation that made him want to be a cop. It explains why he is the way he is and we feel like we know them a bit better. Finally, I admired how the filmmakers presented the elusive nature of the word “justice.” That word is thrown around in the film from time to time and it’s funny because even though the protagonists are good guys (are they?), they are arguably amoral in some way. We are not completely attached to them because they, too, are possible suspects. The situations that the characters are put in feel realistic and the actors are nothing short of electric. The killing spree in the end alone makes this movie worth watching.
9 Songs, Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist, Lakeview Terrace
9 Songs
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I was surprised that this erotic drama was directed by Michael Winterbottom, who also directed the haunting science fiction film called “Code 46.” But it’s a shame that this turned out to be a pretty mediocre picture because Kieran O’Brien and Margo Stilley had good chemistry together. Yes, a lot of skin and sex scenes were shown. They were necessary to the story and I know that people who are not open to sex and nudity will automatically dismiss this picture and label it as pornographic. I guess the dynamics between the two main characters can be seen in two ways: two people who genuinely care about one another or two people who cling to one another because they feel alone no matter where they are or who they’re around with. I chose to see it as the latter. The film didn’t even bother to introduce the characters in a meaningful way so there’s automatic disconnect there. The movie also features the vast field of ice of Antarctica where it’s cold, lonely, and isolated–just like the characters. As for the random concerts, I thought they were sort of unnecessary but it was still a pleasure to see Franz Ferdinand perform on stage. I was also convinced that I should hear more about Michael Nyman’s music. Instead of the choppy concert scenes, I thought “9 Songs” could have featured more dialogue between the characters so that the audience will understand their motivations a bit better. It’s funny because I was more involved with the picture when the two leads were talking, teasing, and fighting with each other instead of when they were making love. It’s a daring picture and I commmend the actors for choosing to participate in this project. It could’ve been something really great and romantic with a few more alterations in the script.
Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
Even though Michael Cera plays the same type of character (“Superbad,” “Juno”) in pretty much every movie, I love him for it because he’s the master of awkward teen comedy. He has great comedic timing and he always gets his audience to care for his character in under twenty minutes. This film is about the adventures of Cera and Kat Dennings in one night–from finding the drunken Ari Graynor, dealing with the ex-girlfriend Alexis Dziena, having good fun with the gays (Aaron Yoo, Rafi Gavron, Jonathan B. Wright), to attending a “Where’s Fluffy” concert. If one looks at the overall picture, it may not amount to much because it’s directed more toward high school and college students, but it’s undeniably cute and has its genuinely funny moments (that Ellen Degeneres bit was hilarious!). We also get cameos from John Cho, Eddie Kaye Thomas, and Kevin Corrigan. There’s also a plethora of music references that range from The Cure to Shout Out Louds. Overall, the picture is very hip and energetic but could have used a bit more meaning. Honestly, I was also glad to see Asians in this film because I think we are underrepresented. Also, the idea of Cera having band members (and best friends!) who are gay but not flaming was a fantastic idea. I enjoyed Yoo and Gavron because I saw a bit of myself in them. (I would’ve liked to see at least one kiss between Gavron and Wright because they look so cute together!) This picture gave me a feeling of “American Graffiti,” (a weaker) “Before Sunrise,” and “Before Sunset.” Other than the movie not adding up to much, I have no problem with it at all. Not all movies have to be meaningful to be beautiful and appreciated.
Lakeview Terrace
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I expected to be greatly entertained coming into this film because I’ve been a fan of Neil LaBute since I watched the masterfully manipulative “The Shape of Things” (I thought it was a bit better than “In the Company of Men” but both are just as mean). I was surprised that this movie didn’t have LaBute’s signature direction and style of storytelling. In fact, I thought it was another typical quasi-thriller from a first time director with a very blatant symbolism that hammers the audiences again and again. Samuel L. Jackson, Patrick Wilson, and Kerry Washingtom did a good job playing their respective roles and I don’t blame them for the weak script and mediocre direction. For a movie that runs for about two hours long, the thrills are barely there. Knowing LaBute’s repertoire, he offers a number of powerful moral conundrums that last in the audiences’ minds after the credits start rolling. Here, the experience was lackadaisical at best and I forgot about the film right when I got in the car. With a better material, LaBute can definitely make a more poweful picture about race, abuse of power, and family dynamics. “Lakeview Terrace” is mostly a miss but saved by above average acting; the potential is there but the plot distractions derailed this picture.
Chapter 27, Taxi to the Dark Side, Bigger Stronger Faster
Chapter 27
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
This is an interesting movie because I didn’t like it but I’m somewhat recommending it. There’s a big sense of realism in this picture that made it that much more haunting. Jared Leto as Mark David Chapman, infamously known as John Lennon’s assassin, gives a borderline great performance not only because he gained about sixty pounds for the role; Leto really embodied Chapman’s twisted and fractured mind. The film gave possible reasons why Chapman did what he did, from J.D. Salinger’s “The Catcher in the Rye,” lack of genuine human connection, to alienation, but does not cross that line where the audiences are asked to feel for Chapman. Lindsay Lohan is pretty good here as Jude, who realizes that Chapman is more of stalker than a fanatic. Whenever she and Leto interact, the picture feels more alive. Thankfully, it’s a short film because I was beginning to feel uncomfortable watching Leto; usually he plays a pretty boy who’s damaged in some way but not as shocking as he is in this film. This movie is definitely not for everyone because it feels more like a broadway play than anything (one of the main reasons why I didn’t like it). I’m recommending “Chapter 27″ for the sheer power of Leto’s acting and a nice reminder that Lohan still has star power because she can genuinely act.
Taxi to the Dark Side
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I consider this the twin of the very informative “Ghosts of Abu Ghraib” because it essentially tackles the same issues. However, it does not mean that “Taxi to the Dark Side” doesn’t have anything worthwhile to offer. Although it obviously leans toward the left side of the political spectrum, it is able to set up its thesis and arguments in a focused manner. I was also surprised by how affecting this documentary becomes when the narrator (director Alex Gibney) and the people being interviewed stop talking and let the images speak for themselves. I have my own opinion of the Bush administration and I’m not going to discuss them here. However, I thought it was smart move when the film points out the flaws of President Bush and his regime–to highlight the source of why military personnel are capturing and torturing people despite their lack of evidence to support that those people are terrorists. Not only that, the film also points to the media (such as television shows like “24″) and its audiences. The media anesthetizes us when it comes to violence. And without our thirst for revenge after the 9/11 attacks, we wouldn’t have supported Bush’s notion to basically rewrite the constitution by passing “laws” that “can be interpreted differently” in order to justify torture that crosses the line of cruelty by a mile. The film is also smart enough to consider alternative (more effective and truthful) ways of acquiring information from people that were taken in custody. I really liked this film even though the subject is familiar because it is able to open our eyes about our government and allow us to question our own morality. This issue of torture is still relevant today and will remain so until the supposed “War on Terror” is “won.”
Bigger, Stronger, Faster
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]
“But in America, it seems like cheaters always prosper.” I know this is a very personal documentary by Chris Bell but he helmed this film in such a way that it gets better the deeper the audiences get into it. It starts off as a critique on American society where most people are willing to do anything to be the best. And then suddenly, it becomes about family values, body images of both youth and adults, childhood dreams, politics, what we’re willing (or not willing) to give up in our lives just so our loved ones can sleep a little better at night. I found this movie to be really scary but also very realistic. Just when I was convinced that, generally, steroids are okay (I am aware of its benefits in the medical field such as stereoids being a solution for muscular dystrophy), my perception is altered because it provides cases which argue that steroids are not okay (risk of suicide, adverse effects in our bodies, addiction). This picture contains a lot of footages that features George W. Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone… which sets up issues that concern us because of what is presented in the media: hard body/masculinity is good; soft body/femininity is bad. It was also interesting when the action figures from the ’60s, ’70s, ’80s were brought up and how their looks have changed. This film covered so much ground to the point where I thought it was so rich with information, I could discuss them all day. Some people may argue that it’s a sign of a lack of focus. I disagree because all of those seemingly disparate things connect to the overall picture: the role of perfomance-enhancing drugs in the United States. I consider this a very important film and it’s one of the best documentaries I’ve seen in 2008.
Quantum of Solace
Quantum of Solace (2008)
★★★ / ★★★★
If a person was to read only the first sentence of this review, I would say watch “Casino Royale” right before jumping into “Quantum of Solace” because it is a direct continuation (reminiscent of “Halloween II”–about one hour gap) and there’s plethora of references (such as familiar faces and familiar scenes) to its predecessor. That said, I think this is a good installment in the James Bond franchise but not a great one. Critics complain about how this is not the same Bond they’ve come to know in the past. That argument/complaint has expired since the success of the exemplary “Casino Royale” and I’m not going to get into it. I’ve come to fully accept and love the new Bond (Daniel Craig) even though he reminds me a bit of Jason Bourne (Matt Damon).
One of the reasons why I did not like this film as much as I should have was its running time: it’s only about an hour and forty minutes. I felt like the director, Marc Forster, felt pressured to deliver one action scene after another so he somewhat neglected the story. (Most readers should know that the main components I look for in any film genre is a story and an interesting character study.) Although I find the action scenes nothing short of astonishing and jaw-dropping (not to mention flinch-inducing), during its more silent moments, I wanted to know more about Quantum. It is only briefly mentioned in the end and, as much as I hate to admit, I felt a bit cheated.
Judi Dench is back as M and I found her to be more attainable this time around. Instead of just being Craig’s boss, I thought she was like a mother figure to him. As usual, Bond and M’s conversations are astute and electric. Mathieu Amalric as the villainous Dominic Greene, unfortunately, did not work for me. He’s too much of a coward to be horrifying, a total opposite of Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) of “Casino Royale.” Even though both of the villains mentioned previously are merely pawns of the Quantum organization, a villain is supposed to be interesting in the least, the main character’s foil to be sufficient. As for the new Bond girl Camille, played by Olga Kurylenko, I found her to be irritating. The film tries a little too hard to make her a character that deserves the audiences’ sympathy. She’s got nothing on Vesper (Eva Green), if you ask me. As for Craig, I just love watching him because he oozes charisma in every frame (and I have a thing for secret agents). I’m mesmerized by his icy blue eyes (that rope scene when Craig shoots the guy while being suspended in the air made my heart skip a beat). My stand-out scenes include: the rooftop chase, the Quantum agents’ aggregation (that gave me the chills because it implies that terrorists can meet anywhere in public!), the plane attack, and the last scene in the apartment. Those scenes are so exciting, I tried not to blink.
Overall, this is not the best Bond film but it is definitely worth seeing because it serves as a transition to the next installment. In the untitled “Bond 24″ film, I really want to know more about the Quantum organization. They remind me of the SD-6 organization on “Alias” because they have insidious ways of infiltrating the good guys’ agency. In essence, this film is about trust between each crucial character. And I trust the sequel’s promise to be both adrenaline-fueled and, best of all, revelatory.
Casino Royale
Casino Royale (2006)
★★★★ / ★★★★
I outright disagree that Sean Connery is, and always will be, the best James Bond. We have a new 21st century James Bond now–Daniel Craig–and I happen to believe he is the best James Bond… at least, so far. What I love about this film is that it resets the franchise story-wise but manages to keep all the components from the past Bond films that made it into a phenomenon. Craig’s icy-cold blue gaze mixed with genuine humanity and heart creates a character who is both lethal but someone that the audiences can root for. This is highlighted during the scenes where there’s no dialogue; we are left to stare into Craig’s eyes and observe his body language to provide us what his character is thinking and feeling. There are other outstanding performances. Judi Dench as M is complete magic. There’s something about her demeanor that I find very cold so I know right away that she possesses a lot of power. To be honest, she scares me more than Bond. Eva Green as Vesper Lynd came a long way since I saw her in Bernardo Bertolucci’s “The Dreamers” (one of those films back in high school that made me fall in love with the cinema). In here, Green is sophisticated, eloquent, and beyond ravishing. Green and Craig have chemistry together. When Bond and Lynd interact, especially in the amusing and engaging train scene, one can understand why they fell in love. Mads Mikkelsen as Le Chiffre gave me the creeps because one of his eyes emits tears of blood. If that doesn’t spell menace, I don’t know what does. Lastly, I really loved Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter even though he didn’t have much screen time. After watching him in “Angels in America,” I’ve come to the conclusion that he’s one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood. He brings subtlety and strength into his characters and thus elevating the scenes he’s in to another level. Martin Campbell’s (“GoldenEye”) direction is effective because he successfully shows his audiences how Bond grows as an agent via his experiences in the field and as a damaged human being. This isn’t your campy, cheesy, early James Bond films. This is a pure adrenaline action-thriller with astute dialogues that deserves comparison to future Bond pictures. To match this installment’s greatness is definitely going to be a challenging task considering they pretty much got everything right on this one. If you were to bet on which installment is one of the best 007 films, put your money on “Casino Royale.”
Run Fat Boy Run, The Omen, The Foot Fist Way
Run, Fat Boy, Run
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I expected this movie to be charming and silly, but I didn’t expect it to be so light. I thought the best part of the movie was the irony in the conversations and situations; the worst part, though, was the forceful slapstick that either hits or misses. Still, I did like the energy that the film had. Simon Pegg was funny as usual, especially the scene where he tries to run in short shorts for barely twenty feet. He has great comedic timing and he reminded me of why I loved “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz.” I also really liked Thandie Newton as Pegg’s ex-fiancée but I think the filmmakers could have delved into her character a little more. She was a bit one-dimensional because she was always in scenes where she’s portrayed as still hung up about being left at the altar. At least with Pegg’s character, we saw some sort of change by the end of the picture. This was directed by David Schwimmer from “Friends” and though he did direct before (such as a few episodes of “Friends”), I should have expected a lot less. As a director, I feel like he should’ve told the story in a more focused manner, less slapstick, a little more character development, and made the final scenes more memorable. “Run, Fat Boy, Run” is far from being a bad film. It’s like a bird with damaged wings that keeps trying to fly but doesn’t quite get off the ground.
Omen, The (1976)
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I know I’m in the minority here but I actually prefer the 2006 version with Julia Stiles and Liev Schreiber over this one. There were barely any genuine scares and I found it appalling that some people compare this to the masterful “The Exorcist” and “Rosemary’s Baby.” Sure, they have the anti-Christ issue as a commonality but quality-wise, this film is far from those classics. I did like the performances here, however, especially Gregory Peck and Lee Remick. I believed Peck to be the protective husband who did not want his wife to find out that their biological son had died so he adopted a baby behind his wife’s back. Remick was both funny and convincing during the parts where she was being attacked. As for Harvey Stephens, who played Damien, he’s creepy as hell and I thought he really was an anti-Christ personified. The little things he does like giving someone a certain look, grimacing when something bad happens to someone, pretending to be innocent when he’s in trouble… I wanted his character to die so badly. I’m not going to complain how predictable it was because I saw the 2006 version first and both movies are almost exactly the same. If I had seen this version first, I would’ve said that the 2006 version was the predictable one. Overall, I liked the dated visual effects (I like campiness in certain films), the story, and the awkward camera angles, especially during the kills. But I just can’t forgive the very slow scenes when Peck is discovering that the child he raised all those years really is the anti-Christ. It should have been heart-pounding and horrifying instead of tedious. After all, it’s supposed to be a horror film.
Foot Fist Way, The
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
I’m so close to giving this movie a one star out of four. The only reason why I didn’t is that it managed to make me laugh out loud with its crude humor… when it doesn’t cross the line. And that’s my main problem with this picture: it crosses the line… multiple times without having some sort of heart that justifies why we should care for the characters. I know that this is supposed to be a dark comedy so being crude and mean comes with the territory (like in “Bad Santa” and “Fargo”). A main character that doesn’t have a filter can be loveable but if that character does not have a single redeeming quality, it just doesn’t work. I was insulted that this picture even dared the audience to sympathize with Danny McBride’s character. Not only is he a jerk (he physically takes out his anger out on his students), I believe he deserves to be cheated on by his wife (Mary Jane Bostic). It’s disappointing because the funny material is there but it just needed to know the exact moments regarding when to cross the line so the audience don’t feel bad about watching the film. Also, the filmmakers did not have to result to humor regarding bodily functions. This definitely reminded me of “The Office,” which is one of the main aspects I liked about it, because McBride reminded me of Steve Carell’s character (but without heart)–he thinks he’s the best and that people love him… when, in reality, they really, really cannot stand him. This is a big disappointment and I’d rather not watch it again any time soon.
Black Snake Moan, The Dead Zone, The Matador
Black Snake Moan
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
As strange as this film is, it’s ultimately a story about redemption. There’s something beautiful about the uneveness of this movie: the first twenty minutes are focused, the middle doesn’t know where to go, and the last twenty minutes regained its focus and offered something a little extra–something touching and real. I think this is one of my favorite roles of Christina Ricci: she’s a sex addict at first glance but we see her evolve until the last frame. Samuel L. Jackson is complex, to say the least, and every time he refers to the Bible, I think of his speech on “Pulp Fiction.” Just when you think he’s going to take his character one way, he takes it in the opposite direction and it feels refreshing. Justin Timberlake surprised me again like he did in “Alpha Dog.” Just when I thought he’d be the weakest link in the film, he more than held his own again A-list actors like Ricci and Jackson. There were a few highlights in the picture: Ricci’s “agony” on the grass when Timberlake left to serve in the war, when Ricci realizes that Jackson has tied a chain around her, when Jackson sings the blues while Ricci seductively dances in a pub, and when Jackson and Ricci made music together. Those scenes are so memorable, it makes up for most of the film’s shortcomings. Still, this is a very different movie so I can’t recommend this to just about anyone. It requires close viewing because some of the changes that the characters go through are shown in a subtle (and sometimes frustrating) manner.
Dead Zone, The
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
Most people put this under the horror genre but this is a supernatural thriller more than anything. This film, directed by David Cronenberg, is smart because instead of avoiding the question of how will people react if they know about the main character’s ability to tell the future, it tackles the subject head-on and drives the story forward. I completely bought that Christopher Walken has the power of premonition because of his soft-spoken nature but knowledgeable (yet shifty) eyes. I also bought the romance between Walken and Brooke Adams because they had chemistry. My main problem with the film is that it feels like it’s divided into episodes: how the ability came about was part one, the murderer of the town was part two, the boy that was being tutored was part three, and the political figure played by Martin Sheen was part four. The only organic parts of the story that seemed to flow was Walken’s interactions with Adams and Herbert Lom, the doctor that took care of Walken while he was in a coma for five years. My other minor problem is that path that Walken’s character had taken in the end was very different from the character we got to know throughout the picture. Still, there’s a lot to recommend here such as solid acting from all the actors and a smart concept by Stephen King. This is a pretty solid “what if” movie that poses a lot of philosophical questions worth thinking about.
Matador, The (2005)
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]
“I’m as serious an erection problem.” I loved this film the first time I saw it because this is a classic ordinary guy meets a not-so-ordinary guy… with a little something extra. The timing and pace of this picture is impeccable: the first forty-five minutes focus on how Greg Kinnear, a businessman, and Pierce Brosnan, an assassin, meet and the last forty-five minutes focus on how their lives have changed after their meeting. By the end of the movie, I realized that from the first scene to the last, it kept getting better and better–I wanted to for it to be longer because I was really interested in getting to know the characters a little more. Once you think a character is one way, that assumption is blurred by another scene so you have to make room for reevaluation. Greg Kinnear is perfect as a regular Joe who doesn’t see how good he has it despite being often down on his luck. One can tell from his eyes that he craves something exciting, something new. Hope Davis is really funny, as usual, as a once tormented high school kid who can’t quite let go of what happened to her son. Her sensitive moments were heartbreaking and her character was established with a relatively short period of screen time. Last but not least, Pierce Brosnan is very believable as an assassin who eventually loses his touch while at the same time realizing that he doesn’t have any friends because of occupation. I think his age does give him edge without sacrificing his signature charisma. I also love the fact that his sexuality is always vague so his character is that much more interesting. There are a lot of inside jokes (accidental or otherwise) that made me laugh and one of them was the job in The Philippines. Those scenes were so funny to me because none of the supposed Filipinos on screen even looked remotely Filipino. I really couldn’t stop laughing and I thought it was great. Written and directed by Richard Shepard, this is one of my favorite dark comedies because it reminded me a lot of another favorite film of mine called “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.”
Hancock, Hellboy II: The Golden Army, P2
Hancock
[ 1 star out of 4 ]
This movie is pretty terrible and the trailers reflected that. This picture not only suffers from a lack of focus but also a lack of aim and resolution. I feel like the filmmakers were coming up with ideas right on the spot as it went along. With a confusing backstory, it was hard for me to care for the characters. I know that the filmmakers are trying to make a funny superhero movie that doesn’t take itself too seriously. I believe they could have made that kind of film with a better script, visual effects, and with just the right balance of tone and pace. Not even the star power of Will Smith, Charlize Theron, and Jason Bateman could save this wreck. Smith’s character was annoying and I felt like I didn’t know anything about him; Theron’s character was moody the whole time; the only character I could stand was Jason Bateman because he has that natural charm. Another problem I had was the lack of a villain. I know that not all superhero films have to have a villain but this one desperately needed it because there’s absolutely nothing that drives the story forward. I felt like we were stuck in one place the whole time and it was sickening. I have nothing more to say other than I expected nothing and was still disappointed. Give this one a pass if you’re highly doubtful of seeing it in the first place.
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I liked this installment as equally as its predecessor. The script has a nice balance of action and humor, the characters are interesting, and the visual effects are nothing short of magnificent. Guillermo del Toro has once again outdone himself when it comes to giving his audience creatures that are beyond out of this world. Some of the images reminded me of “Pan’s Labyrinth” only without the dark fairytale that drives the story. I’ve also seen del Toro’s “The Orphanage” and I’m often at awe when it comes to his talent. Ron Perlman, Selma Blair, and Doug Jones reprise their roles as Hellboy, Liz Sherman and Abe Sapien, respectively. I felt like four years didn’t go by after the first film because they feel so at home with their characters. Therefore, the pace wasn’t slow because the audiences don’t have to watch the actors become comfortable with their characters. As for the story regarding the Golden Army, Prince Nauda (Luke Goss) and Princess Nauda (Anna Walton), I must admit that I didn’t care much about it as long as the film delivered adrenaline-fueled action scenes. Although the pace may be a little too fast and therefore not answer certain questions, it’s more than forgiven because the fantasy world that they live in is so vast to the point where it’s impossible to find out everything about them in the first place. What this film lacked that the first one thrived in, though, was the backstory regarding Hellboy’s childhood. I thought that the first “Hellboy” had more heart but less action scenes while “Hellboy II: The Golden Army” is the complete opposite. Still, if there is going to be a third picture, I’d like to find more about Hellboy’s origins and the unanswered questions that this installment brought up.
P2
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I was pretty surprised that I enjoyed this movie quite a bit because a lot of critics didn’t like it. While I don’t disagree that this is no different than most cat-mouse thrillers out there, I thought it was solid when it came to delivering the thrills. If one expects nothing but to be entertained when it comes to the characters making stupid decisions, the killer popping out of nowhere, and missing opportunities of escape, one will bound to like this picture. Wes Bentley (“American Beauty”) is pretty effective as the parking attendant who terrorizes Rachel Nichols (“Alias”). I wasn’t that surprised to see Bentley as an effective stalker because I noticed a little bit of craziness in his eyes on “American Beauty.” His charisma works worked with him in the beginning and I wish they could’ve established that a little more before diving for the kill. But I was surprised to see Nichols as an effective potential scream queen, which reminded me of a somewhat weak version of Jamie Lee Curtis on “Halloween.” I also really liked the this film was set during Christmas. I will never perceive “Santa Baby” the same way without thinking of someone being held against their own will in a parking structure during Christmas dinners. Despite the film’s inadequacies regarding its background story, the pace of the film is brisk and the tone is cold (yet strangely involving). I recommend this film during sleepovers on a rainy night. (Did I mention that this movie contains one of the most gruesome deaths involving a car in recent memory? I covered my eyes!)
Snow Angels, Brand Upon the Brain!, The Italian Job
Snow Angels
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
This film is deftly crafted into three parts: the way the characters are prior to a life-changing event, the life-changing event, and the way the characters are after the life-changing event. As unoriginal as that sounds, writer-director David Gordon Green is able to do something different–may it comes to different camera angles, unexpected twists in events and character development, or fusing genres together in some scenes. This film definitely reminded me of “The Ice Storm” because of its setting, “Gone Baby Gone” during its most emotional moments, and “No Country for Old Men” during the heart-pounding scenes. Green was able to take all of these things, make it his own, and tell a poignant story about relationships, flaws, and the virtue of forgiveness. I’ve never seen Kate Beckinsale so natural and powerful as she is in this film. Out of all the characters, I thought she excelled most when it comes to being vulnerable yet scathing at the same time. Sam Rockwell’s transition from being a wounded bird to an unstable venomous python is a revelation. But it’s also shocking mixed with a little bit sadness. Michael Angarano and Olivia Thirlby are great character foils for Beckinsale and Rockwell. It made me wonder whether the two teenagers will end up as miserable like the two adults or whether they’ll take the opposite road and be happy, healthy people. Thirlby surprised me in this picture because she knew how to be subtle at the right moments so she dominated each scene she’s in. As for Connor Paolo, I’ve mostly seen him in as a clean-cut good younger brother in “Gossip Girl” and a psychologically damaged criminal/victim in two episodes of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” so I was kind of disappointed that his character here wasn’t as developed as I liked for him to be. I waited for his character to add to the drama but it never happened so it made me question his role in the overall scope of things. Undeveloped characters like Paolo definitely made this picture less powerful but it’s still touching and devastating in its own right. Green has a certain talent that I look for in a director; this film made me want to check out his filmography and watch his other films.
Brand Upon the Brain!
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
The only movie I’ve seen from Guy Maddin so far was “The Saddest Music in the World” back in 2003 and I thought that was really weird. “Brain Upon the Brain!” is on an entirely different level. Even though this film may seem to be about everything–from homosexuality/bisexuality, child abuse, incest, voodoo, quest for identity, to the dangers (and madness) of science–when one takes the time to step back and tries to figure out the commonality among such disparate subjects, one will conclude that it’s basically about childhood memories. But what Maddin does different is straying as far away from Hollywood and totally embracing surrealism mixed with the strangest images of the imagination. Even though I didn’t understand everything in the story, I was with it pretty much the whole time because I’ve never seen anything like it. Despite its strange way of telling the story, I could tell that this project is very personal and I wanted to know which parts of it actually happened to Guy Maddin (since the main character is named after him played by Sullivan Brown as the younger version and Erik Steffen Maahs as the older version). I liked that the story was told in a silent movie technique because it makes the film look and feel more mysterious. The love triangle between Brown, Maya Lawson, and Katherine E. Scharhon reminded me of the noir films back in the 50′s because each of the character involved is keeping a secret from one another which culminate at the end of the picture. As for the soundtrack, it’s pretty much used throughout the movie and it’s nothing short of mesmerizing. “Brand Upon the Brain!” inspires me to look up Guy Maddin’s other pictures because (from what I’ve seen so far) they are able to offer unique experience that Hollywood cannot provide.
Italian Job, The (2003)
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I saw this movie back in 2003 but I find it amazing that I don’t remember anything about it except that one tunnel scene near the end. So, I decided to watch it the second time and was reminded of how much I liked it the first time. I like that this isn’t the kind of caper film that takes itself too seriously. The tone of the picture is very light–it has that laid back, vacation feel that makes me want to go outside and frolic with nature. The characters of Mark Wahlberg, Charlize Theron, Jason Statham, Seth Green, and Mos Def are very funny in their own ways (I loved the Napster jokes!) but also very smart which makes them that much more interesting. I don’t know if I completely bought Edward Norton as the villain but I felt that he had fun with his character so I played along with it. And I must say that I’ve never seen MINI Coopers look so cool prior to this film. There were two highlights: the heist in Italy and the battle between the Wahlberg’s group and Norton on the streets (and underneath!) Los Angeles. Those scenes were so exciting, I tried not to blink. There were definitely scenes that made me think, “Wow! That’s so smart!” so not only was I interacting with it, I was also having a good time. I’ve always been a sucker for caper movies that involves gathering a group of people with disparate abilities with one goal at hand so it wasn’t at all hard for me to embrace this film. Luckily, this one is entertaining and fast-paced.
