Hurt me plenty

The Hurt Locker starts out as a balls out war movie following an unconventional bomb specialist but transforms into a liberal mess of crooked plot lines and confusion as to where it's going to end up. Though the acting and action is top notch, the story itself sets out to accomplish more than it can within the time allotted. Even with enough time, the lack of a central plot makes for a movie that seems could have been split into three, or maybe even a mini series.

Kathyn Bigelow (K-19: The Widowmaker) directs a film that runs amok with scenes that seem to have nothing to do with each other or the rest of the story. It seems the only purpose of them all is a higher purpose. The anti-war undertones in The Hurt Locker are painfully unbearable. Whether it's destroying a family back home, killing the chance of having one or even just putting forth the notion that death is in fact bad, The Hurt Locker is a left winger's dream.

This isn't a bad thing, but it isn't a good thing either. Just like that, it makes for a pretty mediocre movie. Check it out, but please don't get caught up in the hype.

5.5/10

In space no one can hear you cry

Moon, currently an 8 theatre release written and directed by Duncan Jones, is less a sci-fi thriller and more a somber tagedy of one man's emotional turmoil brought on by desperate lonliness.

Sam Rockwell plays a lone crew member of a mining platform on the moon. At the start of the film, he has two weeks left in his contract before he is free to see his family back on earth. As events unfold, we see his nearly every reason for living is a lie.

Save for his robotical companion voiced by Kevin Spacey, Rockwell is the only true actor on screen for about 98% of Moon. This is not a slipshod move. Moon is an emotional rollercoaster and Rockwell will hold the viewer's hand to times of laughter and tears, just as Jones intended. He proves time and again that he can act better than most. It won't likely happen with Moon, but mark this reviewer's text, Sam Rockwell will win an Oscar before his career in acting is done.

What's interesting is this movie really could have taken place anywhere. Being that a one-man moon base with a view of Earth is probably the lonliest place a person could go, it gives the ideal setting. That said, the graphics of Moon aren't phenomenal; the moon-base Sarang looks very futuristic and iPod'ish, but it's nothing that hasn't been done before (think 2001: A Space Odyssey). The lunar surface is pretty cool, but not believeable. Again, it's Rockwell's performance that will convey the sad and lonely theme Moon aimed for. This is aided, however, by the music. Clint Mansell created some of the most morose tunes for this movie that have ever been put on a reel. This isn't surprising, he did The Wrestler, The Fountain and Requiem for a Dream. Perhaps Jones will use him in the future just as Aronovsky repeatedley has.

This is NOT a feel good movie. It is however a very good movie that will have you counting your blessings when the credits begin to roll, unless of course you begin to question if those blessings are truly what they seem to be.

9/10

The Hangover

Just go see it, it's good, well, hilarious. Way better than Starsky and Hutch, slightly better than Road Trip not near as good as Old School. Todd Philips really brings people the type of comedy that hasn't reared it's bastard head in a quite a while. So again, go see it.

8.375/10

Drag me to Raimi

The man who brought the world the cult classic Evil Dead more than 25 years ago now brings us easily the best horror film of the past 5 years, Drag Me to Hell. This movie has all the elements that made Evil Dead great; loads of gore, a ridiculous though semi good plot, and of course that awkward line between horror and comedy.

I won't say much about the plot other than it's a horror movie; a horror movie with demons, ghosts and posessions - much like Evil Dead. Truly the only difference between DMtH and Evil Dead is 28 years of technological and industry advances. Whether that tickles your fancy is up to you.

The dialogue and acting in DMtH is fair at best, but really, would you expect anything more from a horror movie? The special effects and sound especially are near Oscar quality. The graphic nastiness that DMtH brings to the table is truly disgusting. The amount of projectile vomit, blood, snot and other various body fluids and chunks is sweet, but when they're done with such finesse and care (like they are), snot becomes sexy.

See this movie with a bunch of friends and do NOT take it seriously. For what it is, it's a masterpiece. Spider Man was great, but Drag Me to Hell proves Sam Raimi's true calling is horror.

7.2/10

Summer Begins.

I know absolutely nothing about Star Trek. I have never seen an episode at any point during the different series of the show. All I knew were names of characters and that they were in this ship called the Enterprise.

To anybody out there who wants to make a great movie, this is how you do it. To put it as simply as I can, what makes this movie great is the story. The story is simple, how it plays out is not. As I mentioned before, I am not a Star Trek person, however, I am a LOST person. That being said, J.J. Abrams' influence from LOST was very apparent in Star Trek, and it only helped to keep my interest.

Many Sci-Fi films struggle with the necessity of explaining gadgetry and technology that only exists in the universe of the film. Star Trek brilliantly cuts out all the unnecessary technical jargon and is very straight forward. The acting is excellent. Hats off to Mr. Quinto as Spock, he was perfectly cast and plays the role extremely well. Every single character had an arc no matter how great or how small.

This is by far the best film of the year, so far. The graphics and cinematography were unbelievable. This movie pays great homage to the incredible epic that is Star Wars, but does so with grace and brings it's own ingredients to the formula.

I will note that Star Trek's tagline 'The Future Begins' was straight up jacked from Terminator Salvation. The first poster for TS had that as it's tagline which has now since been updated to 'The End Begins.' Anyway Star Trek = Amazing. See it. No matter who you are, this one's for you.

Best Sci Fi movie of all time?

No. George Lucas will always carry that trophy in his back pocket. But is Star Trek the greatest Sci Fi picture in the past 25 years? Arguably, yes. Abrams has created a middle ground where trekkies, Star Wars fans, and even new-to-sci-fi movie fans can come together and experience all the same emotions while watching this film. Star Trek has and will do what Casino Royale did for the Bond franchise, but it did it much, much better. Further it's much more likely that it's sequel will be much, much better than Quantum of Solace.

We're seeing a trend here. Remakes of good movies/stories and making them great. Two cases in point: Casino Royale and Batman Begins, but to a much more relevant and successful standpoint, The Dark Knight. Film makers are seeing these not to be taken seriously movies, watching crazy Koreans stealing diamonds to keep the sun shining all the time or hearing "Ice to see you!" and saying,"I could do better than that." And they do. They start from scratch, scrap all the bad, bring in more of the good, making fans of the series and new viewers alike very, very satisfied. Abrams hopped onto this wagon and truly breathed life into a dying genre.

Star Trek has everything; eye reddening action sequences, ear wax melting sound, ab hurting comedy and even an inter-species dorm room hook up sesh with a green chick. Additionally, all the actors do a fantastic job, most of them in roles that don't fit their MO. I won't go into detail here, but each actor plays their role so well that traces of characters they've played in the past are completely unapparent. The graphics and special effects in Star Trek are the best to ever grace the silver screen. The sleek futuristic beauty of the Enterprise and the dark terror of the Romulan's ship combined with the eery stillness of space bring to mind a similar achievement Kubrick made with 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Boldy go see this movie, and see it on IMAX. You'll be happy you did. Star Trek is by far the most entertaining and awe inspiring film of 2009 and has set the bar for all later films. The tag line get's it right: The Future Begins.


9.8/10

Jimmy Logan

X-Men Origins: Wolverine explains quite a bit: the origin of Wolverine, how Three Mile Island really blew up, and that prequels/sequels don't require skilled writing.

The cinematography and action in XMO:W are incredible, far more eye-catching and enthralling than any other this year so far. It's clear that director Gavin Hood planned each claw swipe, back flip, sword swipe, and teleport in a way that makes each sequence look raw, rough, and even sexy at times. Here's the problem: rough and sexy is all it is. XMO:W is plagued with scenes that have absolutely zero purpose other than generating an audience reaction of "Hmm, that was cool." Further, characters were introduced with large potential for development only to be roped after a few scenes. Beyond this, the dialogue was eye-rolling worthy, a giant cheese fest of velveeta covered filth. Almost as if the screenwriter (who wrote Rendition!?) gave a nod to Storm's line in X:Men "Do you know what happens to a toad when it get's struck by lightning? Same thing that happens to everything else." Ugghhhhh.

On the plus side, we get to see (a completely useless) appearance by Gambit, an (almost useless) introduction of Cyclops, a bald (strange cameo of) Ryan Reynolds, Liev Shreiber gettin' some on an M-60 Full Metal Jacket style, and of course, the origin of Wolverine, even if it's quick enough to be fit into a You Tube video.

XMO:W is like Superman ice cream. It looks cool, but once you realize it's really just vanilla it's a let down. XMO:Wolverine is very entertaining, but it leaves too many loose ends that could only be tied up in a sequel... to a prequel. A second 'origin' doesn't really make much sense, but it looks like it'll happen. Who knows, maybe this'll be another trilogy. Check it out, perhaps you'll agree.

6.5/10

In a jiffy and a little t.o.'d

Despite a screenplay that could have been written by a 15 year old rich kid, LA thug wannabe living in Hoboken, NJ, Fast & Furious is a cold-sweat-causing, red-eye provoking, kick-you-in-the-nuts-and-make-you-want-more testosterone fest of 'holy sh*t!'ness.

Fast & Furious takes place five years after the events of The Fast & the Furious and resurrects the main characters along with it. The events that bring them all back together (along with the entire plot of the movie) will have viewers thinking, "Wait, but... what?...Why would they... Oh! Look! Cars and breasts!"In other words, Fast & Furious is like that hot girl you know named Victoria (yup, her) that you love to go out with, but would douse yourself in 97 octane gasoline and ask her to light a match after talking to her for any more than three minutes. And she'd do it 'cause she's freakin' special! Like our beloved Victoria, where F&F lacks intelligence, it more than makes up with it's sexy, salacious, sweet and saucy form.

This 'form' is made up of imports, muscle cars, guns, scantily clad Asian chicks, and of course, Jordana Brewster, who is sadly only on screen for about 7 minutes. Michelle Rodriguez get's even less screen time, it evens out though with her flash-back time. Paul Walker is less 'Whoa! Paul Walker was freakin' sick in Running Scared!' and more, 'Oh, Joy Ride, that's Paul Walker right? Can I have two for Training Day instead?' Vin Diesel plays the perfect role as always.

Fast & Furious is not a first date movie, though it is definitely a 32nd date movie. Make sure you drive the lamest car possible to see it; obeying posted traffic laws, abiding crossing guards and driving on the right side on the way back will be a true test of citizenry.

Overall: 6.7/10

Who Watches the Watchmen.

I don't know about you, but I have always been a fan of the Film Noir. A lone detective tries to solve a crime with no leads. He eventually finds some clue or someone who knows more. He tries to tell those around him, but most are skeptical at best. Like all film noirs go, there is always more than seems to be present.

Having not read the graphic novel Watchmen, my opinion of the movie may be biased, but guess what I'm the one who's writing. Not you. So what I say goes. Watchmen is a great film. It is truly a unique look at "superheroes" if they could actually exist in an alternate version of the world. None of the characters have superpowers, save for one and like almost all superheroes, his powers only belong to him due to an accident.

The characters of Watchmen really make this film what it is. Each character sees the world from one perspective. Pure black and white, a place where superheroes can't make a difference anymore, or a world on the brink of total annihilation. It is only after their beliefs are shaken to their very core do the Watchmen begin to make the hard choices.

Watchmen is a visually stunning film. It has graphic violence and nudity galore (male and female). It's an important insight into the superhero genre that will be appreciated by fans of that lore. All others will just have to sit back and take Watchmen for what it is, a modern, carefully woven, excellent, film noir.

You like me, you really like me!

8 Oscars for one film? Shazam! Danny Boyle in particular deserves this, especially for his diverse track record. Trainspotting, Sunshine, 28 days later. It's quite respectable. Enough about him, let's talk about the others.

Every award given out was the right one for the right person except one. Kate Winslet was long overdue and Heath Ledger was by far the most deserving for undoubtedly the best performance of the year, if not ever for a psychopath. The one award I didn't agree with, with my counterpart so accurately called, was Sean Penn for best actor. I'm sure many agree with me. Yes, he's a great actor, but in the competition of who can play the best historical figure, Frank Langella's Nixon was far better. Milk was one of the more liberal movie to be released this past year and acting aside, I believe the (incredibly liberal) Academy would be more likely to vote for a man playing a gay freedom fighter than for a man playing a corrupt selfish ex-president.

And though there was no chance of him winning, I am very happy that Robert Downey Jr. was nominated. It's not often that a comedy get's a nod from the Academy and it's encouraging for future films of the genre.

All in all it was a good night, already films like Watchmen will be potential winners for next year.

Waiting is the hardest part

Sigh. If and when I make a movie I will make sure it is released in the first two months of the year so it'll look like gold compared to everything that's out. It's not to say these movies are bad by any means, just that none are truly original.

Put on your walking shoes and take a journey with me as we take a gander at the chart toppers for this past weekend. And...here...we...GO!

Friday the 13th comes in at #1. I can respect that. After Jason went to Space and took on Mr. Kruger, it was about time for him to come back to what his mama taught him and slash up some horny teens. Good form, Mr. Voorhees, originality is the key to success.

He's just not into you. Though I'm not really into date movies aka movies for angry/upset-recently dumped-girlfriends-that-will-watch-this-movie-after-going-to-ben-&-jerry's-for-a-pint-o'- chunky-monkey-while-wearing-sweatpants-and-a-box-of-'hankies', it has a great cast and is a carbon copy of the best seller that came out about 4 years ago.

Taken is nothing more than a less awesome, moreover, less AMERICAN Commando.

Coraline. Everyone should see this movie. Think Spirited Away but not Japanese, not whiney, and on the cusp of creepy graphics. Check it.

Annnddd Confessions of a Shopaholic. Girls that have a mean age of about 3.68 years less than those that will see He's just not that into you will see this. They of course also may be the same girls. The difference between these two movies is a girl actually has a shot at bringing her boyfriend to see the former. No man alive would willingly see this movie without some serious incentive, ie if Sacha Baron Cohen weren't in the picture and some lucky guy were able to take Isla Fisher to the premiere.

Like my counterpart, I am eagerly anticipating the premiere of Watchmen. Until then we're graced by Madea goes to Jail, Under the Sea 3D (which actually looks pretty amazing), Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li, and another 3D adventure, Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience. Lucky for us NY/LA residents, Gomorrah is out as well. Expect a full review on it shortly.

Come on. Push Me.

I'm back. As I'm sure you all know, this blog has come to a screeching halt as of late. And what is to blame you ask, the shitty movies that come out in January and the lovey-dovey February ones still to come. Right now the only movie I'm interested in seeing isn't out until March, and that film is titled Watchmen, but I digress.

Now, to pass the time I went to see Push. I must say that being Chris Evans looks like fun. He gets to beat the shit out of people and sleep with the hottest girls.

Back to Push. For those of you who don't know, it's about people with special abilities aka super powers. There are a few powers that make little or no sense and a few that would just suck to have. I mean I wouldn't tell anybody that when I scream loud, glass breaks. I think that would normally be a given.

Push, however, is not all that bad. It's action is entertaining and the exposition never really slows down the pace of the film. Granted the "why" of the main objective is never really explained and as always in a film like this, a couple of holes in the plot are very apparent.

For the general movie-going population, they will find this film to be dumb and most likely a wast of their time. With any film involving superpowers, magic, or vampires if you can't suspend your beliefs for 2 hours, why are going to see the film in the first place?

For lovers of the Superhero genre (such as myself and my counterpart on this site) we will enjoy the film for what it is, but all of us will leave the theatre with the same thought, "I could have made a movie like that so much better;" and therein, as the Bard would tell us, lies the rub.

And the Award Goes To...

Every year, after the so called best movies are all released (all in the same week no less) announcements come out about the nominated films for the Academy Awards. Now here's what I don't understand, why doesn't the best film or best person ACTUALLY win the award? So I am submitting to you now my thoughts on who WILL win and who DESERVES to win.

BEST PICTURE

Who Will Win: MILK - Now I haven't actually seen this film so I may be biased, but I don't think it deserves the win.
Who Should Win: SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE - This movie deserves the win due to the fact that it is BY FAR the best movie that has come out all year.

BEST ACTOR

Who Will Win: SEAN PENN - I'm gonna lay something out there, I HATE Sean Penn. I think he is a HUGE over actor and definitely did not deserve the Oscar for Mystic River, especially over Daniel Day-Lewis in Gangs of New York. I did hear his performance in this film is incredible, but that still doesn't sway me.
Who Should Win: FRANK LANGELLA - He was absolutely perfect as former President Richard Nixon. His performance could not have been better in any way. This is the guy who should take it home.
Honorable Mention: MICKEY ROURKE - I would say that he deserves the win for the Wrestler, but to be perfectly honest, he was just being himself and not playing a character.

BEST ACTRESS

Who Will Win: MERYL STREEP - I did not see Doubt, but I'm sure miss Streep was great in it as usual. And knowing how the Academy feels about her, she'll probably take it home.
Who Should Win: KATE WINSLET - I didn't see Revolutionary Road either, but every single movie that Mrs. Mendes (Yes she's married to Sam Mendes) is in, she gives an Oscar worthy performance, I mean she has been nominated 5 times and never won.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Who Will Win: HEATH LEDGER - By far the greatest performance of the year.
Who Should Win: HEATH LEDGER - see above
Honorable Mention: ROBERT DOWNEY Jr. - His performance in Tropic Thunder was one of the funniest things I have ever seen. Now Comedy roles rarely, if ever win Academy Awards and if Heath Ledger wasn't in contention, the Award definitely should have gone to Downey Jr. "I don't read the script, the script reads me" Classic.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Who Will Win: KATE WINSLET - Considering she will be nominated for Best Actress and Supporting, she has a better shot in the Supporting area for The Reader.
Who Should Win: VIOLA DAVIS - Now yes, she does have an edge in playing her role in Doubt on the stage, but her transition to film was seamless. She should take it home.


That's how I feel about the year in film. You don't like it, I don't care. I'm right. You're wrong. Learn to like it.