I would just like to take this moment to deride Netflix for providing an endless source of old movies I always meant to watch but then completely forgot about and putting them right at my fingertips. Moving on...
As with practically the entire planet, I'm a big fan of Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli. Let's face it, he's probably the best maker and teller of fairy tales around today. So it should come as absolutely no surprise that Ponyo easily stands up with the rest of his amazing work, despite having almost none of the seriousness/drama of his more popular works. So why is it just as good? Because it's so damn CUTE, and sometimes it's good to have stories that are just plain happy.
Ponyo tells the story of a tiny fish with a humanish face and red hair escaping from her controlling formerly human father only to get caught in a glass bottle and washed up on shore. She is saved by a young boy named Sosuke, who breaks open the glass, cutting himself in the process. But Ponyo quickly licks the cut, and it heals. Sosuke decides to take Ponyo with him in a small bucket, and takes care of her as best he can. However, her father comes looking for her, and eventually sends his Muk-like wave creatures to take her from Sosuke and bring her back home. Both Sosuke and Ponyo are devastated, and Ponyo tells her father she loves Sosuke and wants to be human like him. So, she struggles real hard and starts turning into a human. But her father, with the help of some special magic elixirs, stops the process and makes her sleep. However, when she awakes she regrows her arms and legs and escapes, breaking into her father's very special elixir which releases the power of the sea, unleashing a tsunami made of giant water fish and flooding most of the town in her search to find Sosuke. Thankfully they are reunited soon enough, and are quite in love. However, Sosuke's mom left to check on the elderly women at the home she works at, and it's up to Ponyo and Sosuke to find her and make sure she's okay. Of course, it isn't simple, and it's soon revealed that there's much more at stake.
First things first, the animation is BEAUTIFUL as always, but I'm sure dealing with so many water effects was not easy and my hat is off to them for pulling off such amazing detail.
And I don't really know what else to say. The story and characters are unbearably cute, hell, even the theme song is adorable. Everything else is just style, which if you've seen Miyazaki before will be instantly familiar in its look, magical leanings, and high quality. The only thing I could fault it for is that it doesn't carry the emotional resonance of his other works and has a fairly simple plot without much conflict, but I think the film itself more just seems to resonate with its main protagonists who don't care that the moon is about to crash into the earth because love and fun is all that matters.
So in short, what Ponyo lacks in depth it makes up for in adorableness and amazing animation. It may not be perfect, but it'll certainly put a smile on your face.
Ponyo gets a 9/10.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
World's Greatest Dad
Thank god people give Robin Williams dramatic roles. You know the last at least somewhat respectable comedy he did (as a lead)? Or was at least memorable? Patch Adams in 1998. You know what dramas he's given us since then? One Hour Photo, Insomnia, The Final Cut, Man of the Year, and now World's Greatest Dad. Sure, several of those movies weren't necessarily great, but Williams did such an outstanding job in them that you have to wonder why he doesn't just stick to them from now on.
But has Williams finally found the right fit? Has he finally given an outstanding performance in a movie that was just as good? Honestly, I'm a little torn on this one, so we'll see if I've decided by the end of the review.
The movie follows Lance Clayton (Williams), father of a possible sociopath obsessed with porn named Andrew (Daryl Sabara from Spy Kids) who absolutely hates him. Lance writes novels, but has never been published. He teaches poetry at his son's high school, but the enrollment is so low it's close to being pulled. He's dating one of the other teachers named Claire (Alexie Gilmore), but they have to keep their relationship a secret being two teachers, and every time they're supposed to go out she always seems busy. On top of that, there's another teacher at the school named Mike (Henry Simmons) who seems to have all of the success and popularity that Lance dreams of, and even seems to be enamored of Claire. In short, life kind of sucks for him.
Then tragedy strikes when his son dies in a rather embarrassing way. To at least try and do the right thing, Lance makes it look like Andrew wrote a suicide note and then hung himself. Eventually Lance returns to work, but word of this rather eloquent suicide note has spread, and soon a copy is in the school newspaper. Suddenly the entire school is completely infatuated with their own idea or version of this kid who they never really knew, making Lance as popular as he always wanted to be.
From there things spiral as Lance feeds the flame, giving out little lies time and again to try and keep up this facade that his son was a good person, while also reaping the benefits for himself to get his writing out there. The entire movie is really one big satire on the nature of popularity, especially after death, while also struggling with the moral principles behind what happens when a big lie turns out to help a lot more than it hurts. The entire philosophy behind this film is absolutely brilliant, and is tackled in a very new and different way from any other film I've seen. So what's got me caught up?
The acting. Besides Robin Williams, and surprisingly Daryl Sabara, all of the performances felt very stilted and kind of out of place. Claire was almost cartoony in her ditziness as the wishy washy girlfriend, the rival teacher's performance started out great as the popular great guy but suddenly became overly forced when that changed, and Andrew's one and only friend was very quiet and delivered all of his lines in an almost wooden manner. The various students of the school also just felt like complete caricatures/stereotypes, and while the goth girl at least reveled in that the others just felt a little forced, and frankly poorly written.
On the other hand...I could be completely missing the point. It could be that the roles were meant to be that way as part of the message this film was delivering, which I wouldn't be surprised about. Nonetheless, there's a very fine line between satirizing a stupid character, and just having a stupid character.
That being said, honestly, to me it doesn't matter either way because the rest of the movie makes up for any acting discrepancies. Hell, just Robin Williams' performance makes up for it. The transformations Lance goes through are subtle to say the least, but Williams handles it deftly, letting the most minor changes in his facial expression do the acting for him. I honestly don't know how he did it so well, but there's a point where he finally decides that what's happening is not right, and you can tell from the slightest change in his smile right when it happens. There's no special dialogue, there's no music change, nothing to point out that the film just hit it's final act, except for him. It's a masterful performance that just points out how badly he needs a new agent who will steer him away from things like RV and License to Wed and get him the really solid dramatic roles.
But Williams is really just a great actor delivering a great performance in a great movie that dares to look at some very unconventional themes in a very unique way. It deals intelligently with both its humor and its drama, and the sometimes uncomfortable mix of the two. It brings to the table people who are neither good nor evil, but who constantly deal with both in themselves and others. In short, I made up my mind. It has its problems, but I think Williams finally did find a great movie.
World's Greatest Dad gets a 9/10.
But has Williams finally found the right fit? Has he finally given an outstanding performance in a movie that was just as good? Honestly, I'm a little torn on this one, so we'll see if I've decided by the end of the review.
The movie follows Lance Clayton (Williams), father of a possible sociopath obsessed with porn named Andrew (Daryl Sabara from Spy Kids) who absolutely hates him. Lance writes novels, but has never been published. He teaches poetry at his son's high school, but the enrollment is so low it's close to being pulled. He's dating one of the other teachers named Claire (Alexie Gilmore), but they have to keep their relationship a secret being two teachers, and every time they're supposed to go out she always seems busy. On top of that, there's another teacher at the school named Mike (Henry Simmons) who seems to have all of the success and popularity that Lance dreams of, and even seems to be enamored of Claire. In short, life kind of sucks for him.
Then tragedy strikes when his son dies in a rather embarrassing way. To at least try and do the right thing, Lance makes it look like Andrew wrote a suicide note and then hung himself. Eventually Lance returns to work, but word of this rather eloquent suicide note has spread, and soon a copy is in the school newspaper. Suddenly the entire school is completely infatuated with their own idea or version of this kid who they never really knew, making Lance as popular as he always wanted to be.
From there things spiral as Lance feeds the flame, giving out little lies time and again to try and keep up this facade that his son was a good person, while also reaping the benefits for himself to get his writing out there. The entire movie is really one big satire on the nature of popularity, especially after death, while also struggling with the moral principles behind what happens when a big lie turns out to help a lot more than it hurts. The entire philosophy behind this film is absolutely brilliant, and is tackled in a very new and different way from any other film I've seen. So what's got me caught up?
The acting. Besides Robin Williams, and surprisingly Daryl Sabara, all of the performances felt very stilted and kind of out of place. Claire was almost cartoony in her ditziness as the wishy washy girlfriend, the rival teacher's performance started out great as the popular great guy but suddenly became overly forced when that changed, and Andrew's one and only friend was very quiet and delivered all of his lines in an almost wooden manner. The various students of the school also just felt like complete caricatures/stereotypes, and while the goth girl at least reveled in that the others just felt a little forced, and frankly poorly written.
On the other hand...I could be completely missing the point. It could be that the roles were meant to be that way as part of the message this film was delivering, which I wouldn't be surprised about. Nonetheless, there's a very fine line between satirizing a stupid character, and just having a stupid character.
That being said, honestly, to me it doesn't matter either way because the rest of the movie makes up for any acting discrepancies. Hell, just Robin Williams' performance makes up for it. The transformations Lance goes through are subtle to say the least, but Williams handles it deftly, letting the most minor changes in his facial expression do the acting for him. I honestly don't know how he did it so well, but there's a point where he finally decides that what's happening is not right, and you can tell from the slightest change in his smile right when it happens. There's no special dialogue, there's no music change, nothing to point out that the film just hit it's final act, except for him. It's a masterful performance that just points out how badly he needs a new agent who will steer him away from things like RV and License to Wed and get him the really solid dramatic roles.
But Williams is really just a great actor delivering a great performance in a great movie that dares to look at some very unconventional themes in a very unique way. It deals intelligently with both its humor and its drama, and the sometimes uncomfortable mix of the two. It brings to the table people who are neither good nor evil, but who constantly deal with both in themselves and others. In short, I made up my mind. It has its problems, but I think Williams finally did find a great movie.
World's Greatest Dad gets a 9/10.
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
I was very sad when this movie finally came out after, all the buzz surrounding it and it being Heath Ledger's final movie, because it seemed to open with no fanfare and disappear just as quietly. But now it's on Netflix and I finally get the chance to see Terry Gilliam's latest work. And having seen it, I unfortunately understand why everyone kind of just quietly let it go.
As simply as I can manage it, the story is about a man named Dr. Parnassus who made a deal with the devil to gain eternal life thousands of years ago. Dr. Parnassus has the extraordinary ability to manipulate minds and let people see inside their imaginations. He forms a little circus act with a young man named Anton, the crass midget Percy, and his daughter Valentina in order to try to lure people into a mirror and give them a choice between either good or evil. If they choose evil, their soul goes to the devil. If good, their soul is freed. But there's something the good doctor is hiding. According to his deal with the devil, any child of his belongs to the devil when they turn 16. Coincidentally, it's only a week until Valentina's 16th birthday, and now Parnassus has to find a way to try to save her.
Enter a mysterious man (Heath Ledger) they find hanging under a bridge who survived by means of a pipe lodged in his throat. With no memory of who he is or why he was hung, the man stays with the company and tries to help them in their endeavor by luring in women with his attractiveness essentially. Meanwhile, as the day draws closer, the devil appears to Parnassus and makes a wager. Valentina will stay with whoever claims 5 souls first. And from then on...it's the madcap world known as Gilliamland. Not that the rest of it isn't Gilliam, it just gets real crazy from then on.
Of course, much was made about the fact that Ledger died halfway through the making of this movie, meaning other actors stepped in to take his place in certain parts, namely Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell. Surprisingly, they fit in quite well, as they only appear when Ledger's character enters the Imaginarium with other people, taking on the appearance of what people want him to look like. Basically, it's already so weird that the shifting faces make perfect sense, and the stand-ins do a great job of mimicking Ledger's actions and mannerisms.
As for the rest, I honestly don't really know what to say about it. If you've seen Gilliam's work before, you pretty much know exactly what you're getting into. A weird setting with a weird plot, some weird direction (Ledger constantly stroking Valentina's face looked very weird and very contrived) and a lot of very weird visuals. The actors are good enough (besides the often awkward Vern Troyer), but it doesn't really matter because they're not the focus, they're just delivering the vision put in front of them. And as with, unfortunately, most of Gilliam's work, that vision is so distorted and almost incomprehensible that it isn't so much entertaining or good as head-scratching.
Now, it certainly is interesting, and it's watchable enough, but in the end it just felt like this odd take on a battle between good and evil didn't have a point. It was just an interesting journey with a lot of fantastical images. I did come away with a somewhat positive feeling about it, but also wishing it had been something more...substantial.
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus gets a 5/10.
As simply as I can manage it, the story is about a man named Dr. Parnassus who made a deal with the devil to gain eternal life thousands of years ago. Dr. Parnassus has the extraordinary ability to manipulate minds and let people see inside their imaginations. He forms a little circus act with a young man named Anton, the crass midget Percy, and his daughter Valentina in order to try to lure people into a mirror and give them a choice between either good or evil. If they choose evil, their soul goes to the devil. If good, their soul is freed. But there's something the good doctor is hiding. According to his deal with the devil, any child of his belongs to the devil when they turn 16. Coincidentally, it's only a week until Valentina's 16th birthday, and now Parnassus has to find a way to try to save her.
Enter a mysterious man (Heath Ledger) they find hanging under a bridge who survived by means of a pipe lodged in his throat. With no memory of who he is or why he was hung, the man stays with the company and tries to help them in their endeavor by luring in women with his attractiveness essentially. Meanwhile, as the day draws closer, the devil appears to Parnassus and makes a wager. Valentina will stay with whoever claims 5 souls first. And from then on...it's the madcap world known as Gilliamland. Not that the rest of it isn't Gilliam, it just gets real crazy from then on.
Of course, much was made about the fact that Ledger died halfway through the making of this movie, meaning other actors stepped in to take his place in certain parts, namely Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell. Surprisingly, they fit in quite well, as they only appear when Ledger's character enters the Imaginarium with other people, taking on the appearance of what people want him to look like. Basically, it's already so weird that the shifting faces make perfect sense, and the stand-ins do a great job of mimicking Ledger's actions and mannerisms.
As for the rest, I honestly don't really know what to say about it. If you've seen Gilliam's work before, you pretty much know exactly what you're getting into. A weird setting with a weird plot, some weird direction (Ledger constantly stroking Valentina's face looked very weird and very contrived) and a lot of very weird visuals. The actors are good enough (besides the often awkward Vern Troyer), but it doesn't really matter because they're not the focus, they're just delivering the vision put in front of them. And as with, unfortunately, most of Gilliam's work, that vision is so distorted and almost incomprehensible that it isn't so much entertaining or good as head-scratching.
Now, it certainly is interesting, and it's watchable enough, but in the end it just felt like this odd take on a battle between good and evil didn't have a point. It was just an interesting journey with a lot of fantastical images. I did come away with a somewhat positive feeling about it, but also wishing it had been something more...substantial.
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus gets a 5/10.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Dead Space 2
Well, I literally just finished Dead Space 2, and my first impression is simply...holy shit.
We rejoin Isaac Clarke 3 years after the events of the original Dead Space. He has awoken in the psychiatric ward of a place known as The Sprawl, a gigantic city located on one of Saturn's moons, with no memory of how he got there or why he's in a straitjacket. However, we soon find out. After Isaac's encounter with the red Marker, his sanity has, shall we say, slipped a bit. It implanted something into his mind, and now he sees visions of his lost love Nicole (among other terrifying things). And then before you can finish saying "Hey, I think this guy is the guy from Dead Space Ignition," he's getting impaled by an Infector and turning into a necromorph before your eyes. You're then left to run IN A STRAITJACKET through halls with necros popping up all around you, forcing you to wonder what the hell is going on while also desperately trying to escape and cursing whenever you take a wrong turn. Once you finally escape your jacket and get your trusty kinesis, stasis, and plasma cutter (all in amazingly creative ways), the rest is a long trek through the Sprawl, unraveling the mystery of why you're there, why the necros have returned (Hint: there's another Marker), and what in the hell your visions are trying to tell you.
Honestly, to me the story was a little weak this time around. It was nice finally hearing Isaac talk, but he didn't seem to have interesting things to say, it just kind of made the dialogue easier. There's one rather predictable twist towards the beginning, one completely unforeseen twist in the middle that was surprisingly almost blink and you miss it, and an ending that is...odd, and doesn't make much sense especially in terms of the first game's ending and what Markers are supposed to be/do. The problem with playing a game from an insane protagonist's point of view (and for part of the game with an insane companion) while in this already somewhat confusing universe is that everything then becomes even more confusing. I'm sure that to the dedicated who can parse out all the various audio logs, text pieces, and messages from the Marker/Nicole (which were almost indecipherable to me due to the massive audio distortion they layer on top of it) there is a plot here that makes sense, but for everyone else it's a little hard to follow.
On the other hand, how much does the story matter in a survival horror game like this? Well...not that much. What really matters here are the scares, the monsters, and the action, and Dead Space 2 excels on all three fronts.
The scares. Everyone, including myself in a small way, was a little worried when they started showing off early videos of the game and we saw these wide open areas. After all, practically all of the original Dead Space took place in narrow corridors, constantly imbuing that sense that something dangerous is never very far away. Will the danger and scariness decrease in a more open space? HELL NO. Just because you can sometimes see them coming from farther away doesn't reduce the tension one bit. In fact, sometimes it can even lead to scarier situations because you know exactly what's headed for you and just how screwed you are. A great deal of this is also thanks to...
The monsters. Not only do all the originals make their return, but now you also get the disgusting and resilient Puker, the terrifying necro children called the Pack, the slow but deadly explosive necro babies called Crawlers, and the stealthy rhino-like Stalkers. Each requires different tactics to deal with, and adds their own little spice of terror. And Dead Space 2 has no qualms about throwing all different types at you, forcing you to really think on your feet and manage your weapons and health effectively. The only qualm I have is with one specific monster which returns from the first game. The regenerator. The one that can't die. In the first one you at least eventually get to kill it by burning it into ashes with a ship's engines, but it was still more annoying than anything. So along comes a more bug-like version here in the very final chapters, which chases you from when you first encounter it until essentially the end of the game. I understand you want the final section to be really intense, and feel the urge to push players forward in an anxious way towards the end, but an unkillable enemy who follows you into every room is not the way to do it. Instead of a desperate fight to the finish it became a marathon, where I was spamming stasis every moment I wasn't running. However, other than that one mistaken return, every other monster and encounter just plain works in both their difficulty and scariness.
The action. One thing the first Dead Space excelled at were its action-oriented set pieces. They carried all the explosions and tension of a Hollywood movie, while still remaining interesting and completely distinct from each other. Does 2 do better? Yes and no. With a greater variety of area types to explore in the Sprawl, there is also greater variety for these chunks of action, and Dead Space 2 makes some wonderful use of them. For example, the very first sequence running from necros while in a straitjacket, or an absolutely amazing sequence involving a tram and hanging upside down. So why do I also say "no"? Because there simply aren't enough of them. Every couple chapters in the first one saw either a big boss battle or a big action sequence. In this they just felt few and far between. Admittedly, the full levels felt much more replete than in the first, and each had their own special sequences, but the real big jaw-dropping events just seemed to be missing. Nonetheless, everything else did feel like it improved on the original.
Other mentionable pluses: the IMMENSELY improved zero-g sections, rechargeable stasis, the javelin gun (didn't try the other new ones), the very welcome improvement to punching and stomping, and the fun trip into a very familiar place.
It's hard comparing this sequel to its predecessor because it improves upon it in so many ways, but it also lags in others. On top of that, a great deal of the surprise of the setting, how different necros attack/react, and even of some of the "traps" (necro body on the ground, better bet it's still living) is gone because, well, we've seen it all before. Still, it's one hell of a game with plenty of tricks up its sleeve. And this is all not to mention the multiplayer (mostly since I haven't played it yet), or the inclusion of Dead Space Extraction (since I don't have the Move).
In short, if you enjoyed the first game, the sequel more than does it justice. If you're new to the universe, you've got one hell of a ride in store for yourself.
Dead Space 2 gets a 9.5/10.
We rejoin Isaac Clarke 3 years after the events of the original Dead Space. He has awoken in the psychiatric ward of a place known as The Sprawl, a gigantic city located on one of Saturn's moons, with no memory of how he got there or why he's in a straitjacket. However, we soon find out. After Isaac's encounter with the red Marker, his sanity has, shall we say, slipped a bit. It implanted something into his mind, and now he sees visions of his lost love Nicole (among other terrifying things). And then before you can finish saying "Hey, I think this guy is the guy from Dead Space Ignition," he's getting impaled by an Infector and turning into a necromorph before your eyes. You're then left to run IN A STRAITJACKET through halls with necros popping up all around you, forcing you to wonder what the hell is going on while also desperately trying to escape and cursing whenever you take a wrong turn. Once you finally escape your jacket and get your trusty kinesis, stasis, and plasma cutter (all in amazingly creative ways), the rest is a long trek through the Sprawl, unraveling the mystery of why you're there, why the necros have returned (Hint: there's another Marker), and what in the hell your visions are trying to tell you.
Honestly, to me the story was a little weak this time around. It was nice finally hearing Isaac talk, but he didn't seem to have interesting things to say, it just kind of made the dialogue easier. There's one rather predictable twist towards the beginning, one completely unforeseen twist in the middle that was surprisingly almost blink and you miss it, and an ending that is...odd, and doesn't make much sense especially in terms of the first game's ending and what Markers are supposed to be/do. The problem with playing a game from an insane protagonist's point of view (and for part of the game with an insane companion) while in this already somewhat confusing universe is that everything then becomes even more confusing. I'm sure that to the dedicated who can parse out all the various audio logs, text pieces, and messages from the Marker/Nicole (which were almost indecipherable to me due to the massive audio distortion they layer on top of it) there is a plot here that makes sense, but for everyone else it's a little hard to follow.
On the other hand, how much does the story matter in a survival horror game like this? Well...not that much. What really matters here are the scares, the monsters, and the action, and Dead Space 2 excels on all three fronts.
The scares. Everyone, including myself in a small way, was a little worried when they started showing off early videos of the game and we saw these wide open areas. After all, practically all of the original Dead Space took place in narrow corridors, constantly imbuing that sense that something dangerous is never very far away. Will the danger and scariness decrease in a more open space? HELL NO. Just because you can sometimes see them coming from farther away doesn't reduce the tension one bit. In fact, sometimes it can even lead to scarier situations because you know exactly what's headed for you and just how screwed you are. A great deal of this is also thanks to...
The monsters. Not only do all the originals make their return, but now you also get the disgusting and resilient Puker, the terrifying necro children called the Pack, the slow but deadly explosive necro babies called Crawlers, and the stealthy rhino-like Stalkers. Each requires different tactics to deal with, and adds their own little spice of terror. And Dead Space 2 has no qualms about throwing all different types at you, forcing you to really think on your feet and manage your weapons and health effectively. The only qualm I have is with one specific monster which returns from the first game. The regenerator. The one that can't die. In the first one you at least eventually get to kill it by burning it into ashes with a ship's engines, but it was still more annoying than anything. So along comes a more bug-like version here in the very final chapters, which chases you from when you first encounter it until essentially the end of the game. I understand you want the final section to be really intense, and feel the urge to push players forward in an anxious way towards the end, but an unkillable enemy who follows you into every room is not the way to do it. Instead of a desperate fight to the finish it became a marathon, where I was spamming stasis every moment I wasn't running. However, other than that one mistaken return, every other monster and encounter just plain works in both their difficulty and scariness.
The action. One thing the first Dead Space excelled at were its action-oriented set pieces. They carried all the explosions and tension of a Hollywood movie, while still remaining interesting and completely distinct from each other. Does 2 do better? Yes and no. With a greater variety of area types to explore in the Sprawl, there is also greater variety for these chunks of action, and Dead Space 2 makes some wonderful use of them. For example, the very first sequence running from necros while in a straitjacket, or an absolutely amazing sequence involving a tram and hanging upside down. So why do I also say "no"? Because there simply aren't enough of them. Every couple chapters in the first one saw either a big boss battle or a big action sequence. In this they just felt few and far between. Admittedly, the full levels felt much more replete than in the first, and each had their own special sequences, but the real big jaw-dropping events just seemed to be missing. Nonetheless, everything else did feel like it improved on the original.
Other mentionable pluses: the IMMENSELY improved zero-g sections, rechargeable stasis, the javelin gun (didn't try the other new ones), the very welcome improvement to punching and stomping, and the fun trip into a very familiar place.
It's hard comparing this sequel to its predecessor because it improves upon it in so many ways, but it also lags in others. On top of that, a great deal of the surprise of the setting, how different necros attack/react, and even of some of the "traps" (necro body on the ground, better bet it's still living) is gone because, well, we've seen it all before. Still, it's one hell of a game with plenty of tricks up its sleeve. And this is all not to mention the multiplayer (mostly since I haven't played it yet), or the inclusion of Dead Space Extraction (since I don't have the Move).
In short, if you enjoyed the first game, the sequel more than does it justice. If you're new to the universe, you've got one hell of a ride in store for yourself.
Dead Space 2 gets a 9.5/10.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Black Swan
Where to even begin...
It just seems to me that Darren Aronofsky lives in a very very bad place inside his mind. The man behind Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain, and The Wrestler is back with his first horror flick. Confused? Thought this was a trippy ballet movie? Well you're wrong. This is straight up suspenseful, psychotic horror.
Natalie Portman takes the lead as the ballerina Nina, who despite being amazingly technically proficient hasn't yet had the chance to shine. But now, the aging star of the stage Beth (Winona Ryder) is being forcefully retired and the role of the Swan Queen in Swan Lake is up for grabs. The director (Vincent Cassel) adds a little twist to the show, however, to make it interesting. The pure white swan and her evil twin the black swan will be played by the same ballerina. Nina, under the overly protective and caring eye of her mother, is perfect as the frigid white swan, but cannot loosen up to give the director the black swan he desires. Enter Mila Kunis as Lily, a younger dancer who embodies the black swan perfectly in her attitude and less technical style. Basically, the film mirrors the play, as you might expect. However, there's one thing which keeps you from knowing whether it is actually reflecting the play, or if it's merely pretending to: madness.
Nina goes through frequent psychotic breaks, hallucinating things that aren't there, and often entire events which she later discovers didn't happen. But possibly the most disturbing is that most of her visions involve such wonderful things as peeling her own skin off. Not to mention, the visions happen just often enough to keep you completely on edge along with Nina, never quite knowing what is real and what is insanity.
Most movies, or even just directors, have problems with starting at such a high level of suspense that there's simply nowhere to build. Black Swan does not have that problem. The high anxiety ratchets up real quick, and yet, it manages to remain completely suspenseful and horrifying until the last minute when you finally get your release.
A great deal of this comes from the very tight direction from Aronofsky, but a great deal of the due must also be paid to Portman, who brings us along with her on every single emotional up and down and all around. Kunis is also wonderful as Lily, easily treading the line between the seemingly clueless not-a-care-in-the-world ballerina and the seemingly dark and dangerous girl luring Nina into the depths. Barbara Hershey is almost the most terrifying of them all as Nina's mother, who will go to any lengths to make sure that her little daughter stays an innocent child for the rest of her life.
The only problem I had with this film was the ending, which I won't spoil, but it seemed such a lackluster way to end such a highly intense final half hour. It just seemed a bit obvious, but as I've looked back on it (and as will probably continue in future viewings) I've begun to appreciate it more.
One thing's for certain, Black Swan is one hell of a film. Its style and suspense keep you hooked from the very beginning, and likely won't let go even after the end.
Black Swan gets a 9.5/10
It just seems to me that Darren Aronofsky lives in a very very bad place inside his mind. The man behind Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain, and The Wrestler is back with his first horror flick. Confused? Thought this was a trippy ballet movie? Well you're wrong. This is straight up suspenseful, psychotic horror.
Natalie Portman takes the lead as the ballerina Nina, who despite being amazingly technically proficient hasn't yet had the chance to shine. But now, the aging star of the stage Beth (Winona Ryder) is being forcefully retired and the role of the Swan Queen in Swan Lake is up for grabs. The director (Vincent Cassel) adds a little twist to the show, however, to make it interesting. The pure white swan and her evil twin the black swan will be played by the same ballerina. Nina, under the overly protective and caring eye of her mother, is perfect as the frigid white swan, but cannot loosen up to give the director the black swan he desires. Enter Mila Kunis as Lily, a younger dancer who embodies the black swan perfectly in her attitude and less technical style. Basically, the film mirrors the play, as you might expect. However, there's one thing which keeps you from knowing whether it is actually reflecting the play, or if it's merely pretending to: madness.
Nina goes through frequent psychotic breaks, hallucinating things that aren't there, and often entire events which she later discovers didn't happen. But possibly the most disturbing is that most of her visions involve such wonderful things as peeling her own skin off. Not to mention, the visions happen just often enough to keep you completely on edge along with Nina, never quite knowing what is real and what is insanity.
Most movies, or even just directors, have problems with starting at such a high level of suspense that there's simply nowhere to build. Black Swan does not have that problem. The high anxiety ratchets up real quick, and yet, it manages to remain completely suspenseful and horrifying until the last minute when you finally get your release.
A great deal of this comes from the very tight direction from Aronofsky, but a great deal of the due must also be paid to Portman, who brings us along with her on every single emotional up and down and all around. Kunis is also wonderful as Lily, easily treading the line between the seemingly clueless not-a-care-in-the-world ballerina and the seemingly dark and dangerous girl luring Nina into the depths. Barbara Hershey is almost the most terrifying of them all as Nina's mother, who will go to any lengths to make sure that her little daughter stays an innocent child for the rest of her life.
The only problem I had with this film was the ending, which I won't spoil, but it seemed such a lackluster way to end such a highly intense final half hour. It just seemed a bit obvious, but as I've looked back on it (and as will probably continue in future viewings) I've begun to appreciate it more.
One thing's for certain, Black Swan is one hell of a film. Its style and suspense keep you hooked from the very beginning, and likely won't let go even after the end.
Black Swan gets a 9.5/10
Exit Through the Gift Shop
I never really understood the street art movement, nor why it had suddenly exploded in popularity when this man named Banksy suddenly started making news for his works. So I never got around to watching his film, which I thought was detailing the street art movement, despite the good reviews because I frankly wasn't that interested. However, I finally sat down to watch it, and was very pleasantly surprised by what I saw.
While Banksy directed and produced the film, most of the footage and story comes from Thierry Guetta, a most likely insane man who practically films every thing he can every moment he can. The adventure begins when Thierry discovers his cousin in France is actually the street artist Invader, who pastes blocks in the forms of different kinds of space invaders up all over the city. Thierry decides the opportunity is too good to be missed and follows Invader, filming him as he posts his art and even helping out a little. Soon enough he's being introduced to others in the field, including Shepard Fairey in L.A., who he decides to follow instead of returning to France. On the pretense of making a documentary on street art, Shepard allows Thierry to follow him around and learn the tricks of the trade. Eventually word reaches Thierry of the famous and highly anonymous Banksy. Asking everyone he could, everyone he had met, he tries to get a hold of Banksy, but to no avail. Eventually, however, Banksy calls Shepard up in need of an extra man, and Shepard gives him Thierry.
From then on, I dare not spoil what happens lest I ruin the wonderful surprises this movie holds for you. This movie is, and yet is not, a documentary about street art. Instead, it's more about the making of a documentary about street art, and the highly interesting story of Thierry and his influence on both the art and artists around him.
I couldn't help but think throughout that this movie was one big setup. That it was all a lie, a moral hidden in a fake documentary. And yet, to me it doesn't really matter if it's true or not because the story it tells is so wonderfully philosophical that the questions it raises go far beyond the need to know if it's real or not. This movie is funny, deep, a little crazy, and all sorts of fun, and it makes a subject that I really cared nothing about into one I am anxious to see the progress of.
Applause must be given to whoever sorted through the thousands upon thousands of hours of footage Thierry recorded to find the jewels they show here. I'm sure it was no meager feat, and the final product ended up looking wonderful and very well crafted. But the story they culled from it is even more impressive.
This movie surprised me in a great many ways with its humor, its style, and especially its willingness to look at the world of art in a completely new way, even to the point of questioning whether its very subject matter was art. Frankly, I was blown away, and recommend this film highly to anyone.
Exit Through the Gift Shop gets a 10/10.
While Banksy directed and produced the film, most of the footage and story comes from Thierry Guetta, a most likely insane man who practically films every thing he can every moment he can. The adventure begins when Thierry discovers his cousin in France is actually the street artist Invader, who pastes blocks in the forms of different kinds of space invaders up all over the city. Thierry decides the opportunity is too good to be missed and follows Invader, filming him as he posts his art and even helping out a little. Soon enough he's being introduced to others in the field, including Shepard Fairey in L.A., who he decides to follow instead of returning to France. On the pretense of making a documentary on street art, Shepard allows Thierry to follow him around and learn the tricks of the trade. Eventually word reaches Thierry of the famous and highly anonymous Banksy. Asking everyone he could, everyone he had met, he tries to get a hold of Banksy, but to no avail. Eventually, however, Banksy calls Shepard up in need of an extra man, and Shepard gives him Thierry.
From then on, I dare not spoil what happens lest I ruin the wonderful surprises this movie holds for you. This movie is, and yet is not, a documentary about street art. Instead, it's more about the making of a documentary about street art, and the highly interesting story of Thierry and his influence on both the art and artists around him.
I couldn't help but think throughout that this movie was one big setup. That it was all a lie, a moral hidden in a fake documentary. And yet, to me it doesn't really matter if it's true or not because the story it tells is so wonderfully philosophical that the questions it raises go far beyond the need to know if it's real or not. This movie is funny, deep, a little crazy, and all sorts of fun, and it makes a subject that I really cared nothing about into one I am anxious to see the progress of.
Applause must be given to whoever sorted through the thousands upon thousands of hours of footage Thierry recorded to find the jewels they show here. I'm sure it was no meager feat, and the final product ended up looking wonderful and very well crafted. But the story they culled from it is even more impressive.
This movie surprised me in a great many ways with its humor, its style, and especially its willingness to look at the world of art in a completely new way, even to the point of questioning whether its very subject matter was art. Frankly, I was blown away, and recommend this film highly to anyone.
Exit Through the Gift Shop gets a 10/10.
An Education
I was intrigued by this title back in 2009, especially after it garnered such high praise and received three Oscar nominations including best picture. Well I finally got around to watching it and have to say that I was...underwhelmed.
The film takes place in early 1960s London, where 16 year old Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is being kept firmly to the tracks towards Oxford by her very forceful father (Alfred Molina) and sympathetic but stern teachers. Yet while she studies hard and has a very nice disposition, it also becomes apparent quite quickly that this is not the life she wants to lead.
In steps David (Peter Sarsgaard), a 30-something year old who innocently drives up to her in the rain, offering to protect her cello in the car while she walks alongside. Soon enough she's charmed off her feet and climbs in herself, thus beginning a long saga of a rather creepy romance. He wines her, dines her, takes her out to parties with another 30-something couple, and even whisks her off to Paris and buys her everything she wants. But of course, David is not without his dark side, namely in his business dealings, but despite it all Jenny still loves him and gives up everything to be his.
Before I start deriding I do have to say that Mulligan and Sarsgaard are really wonderful in their respective roles. Mulligan carries a fierceness to her that shirks the role of the stereotypical young lady in love and gives a great deal of maturity and depth to a character that frankly probably shouldn't have it. Sarsgaard, for some reason, always creeps me out. Whether it's because he just normally goes after these kind of roles where he's not what he seems, or just because of the way he looks and talks, I don't know. But that creepiness works perfectly as this older man who very obviously has secrets and whom this young girl should very obviously not be with.
But that is also part of this movie's downfall. An Education makes itself out to be like a comedy/romance/coming of age story. Unfortunately, the story this movie actually tells is far from the genres is tries to fit into. Every scene that in a normal romance would be just fine carried this creepy quality to it that I just couldn't put aside, nor should the movie have tried to either. Perhaps it was just trying to emulate or explain how things were back in the day, but especially with what is revealed about David it's as if the movie is trying to fool us, just as Jenny and her family are fooled, into thinking that we're watching Pride and Prejudice.
Oh god, and her family. Poor Alfred Molina starts as the stereotypically brutish, stern 50s-era father who cares absolutely nothing for women's opinions, and then turns into a blubbering bashful idiot every time David is around. The pure lack of any concern over Jenny dating or marrying this much older man, and of her dropping out of school to do so, shows a remarkable lack of character continuity on the writer's part, especially when at the end he finally softens up to Jenny. The poor mother comes off even worse, being the absolutely stereotypical 50s repressed housewife who never talks and cleans until midnight but feels bad about it. They seemed almost cartoonish sometimes in how they were written.
So then I looked up the source of the story. It's from an autobiographical essay by a British journalist. And then it hit me. Of course they seem weirdly inconsistent and stereotypical. They're based on what a 16 year old girl thought of them at the time. Though I am surprised that now that she's older she didn't look back and think they must not have really been like that.
Maybe I'm getting it all wrong, and David really was just an amazingly smooth talker who could get what he wanted out of anyone, but in this movie it all just feels too unreal and inconsistent.
And then there's the ending. Shame on the screenwriter for that ending. SHAME. Those last five minutes honestly ruined the movie. I suppose it was meant to be a nice little tie-off where we see that life does go on and things end on at least a little bit of a happy note. But boy did it just go wrong. We go from this very dramatic scene where everything has fallen apart, to this weird, wholly unsatisfying little snippet where everything is okay now and she got into Oxford after all and she met other boys. The end. It takes whatever this movie was working toward and just throws it down an unfinished drain. It really feels like the screenwriter just ran out of time and decided to tack this thing on the end.
In short, An Education stands to its name, as it's a film to learn from. It takes all the things going for it, great costumes, a great setting, great actors, etc. and then shoves this screenplay onto them (which was nominated for an Oscar unbelievably) which takes the entirely wrong approach to its subject. It's almost maddening because one little thing could have fixed a lot of the problems I had: make it from Jenny's point of view. Then all the character discrepancies, all the complete ignorance, all the oddities of this movie would've made sense because we're only getting one character's view of the situation.
Yet despite my railing against it, I did actually enjoy the movie for the most part. Despite my frustrations, it was still, on the whole, a good film. It's just the odd choices made in the screenplay that mar it from actually being worthy of the Oscar nods it received (besides Mulligan's, she deserved that one).
An Education gets a 6.5/10.
The film takes place in early 1960s London, where 16 year old Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is being kept firmly to the tracks towards Oxford by her very forceful father (Alfred Molina) and sympathetic but stern teachers. Yet while she studies hard and has a very nice disposition, it also becomes apparent quite quickly that this is not the life she wants to lead.
In steps David (Peter Sarsgaard), a 30-something year old who innocently drives up to her in the rain, offering to protect her cello in the car while she walks alongside. Soon enough she's charmed off her feet and climbs in herself, thus beginning a long saga of a rather creepy romance. He wines her, dines her, takes her out to parties with another 30-something couple, and even whisks her off to Paris and buys her everything she wants. But of course, David is not without his dark side, namely in his business dealings, but despite it all Jenny still loves him and gives up everything to be his.
Before I start deriding I do have to say that Mulligan and Sarsgaard are really wonderful in their respective roles. Mulligan carries a fierceness to her that shirks the role of the stereotypical young lady in love and gives a great deal of maturity and depth to a character that frankly probably shouldn't have it. Sarsgaard, for some reason, always creeps me out. Whether it's because he just normally goes after these kind of roles where he's not what he seems, or just because of the way he looks and talks, I don't know. But that creepiness works perfectly as this older man who very obviously has secrets and whom this young girl should very obviously not be with.
But that is also part of this movie's downfall. An Education makes itself out to be like a comedy/romance/coming of age story. Unfortunately, the story this movie actually tells is far from the genres is tries to fit into. Every scene that in a normal romance would be just fine carried this creepy quality to it that I just couldn't put aside, nor should the movie have tried to either. Perhaps it was just trying to emulate or explain how things were back in the day, but especially with what is revealed about David it's as if the movie is trying to fool us, just as Jenny and her family are fooled, into thinking that we're watching Pride and Prejudice.
Oh god, and her family. Poor Alfred Molina starts as the stereotypically brutish, stern 50s-era father who cares absolutely nothing for women's opinions, and then turns into a blubbering bashful idiot every time David is around. The pure lack of any concern over Jenny dating or marrying this much older man, and of her dropping out of school to do so, shows a remarkable lack of character continuity on the writer's part, especially when at the end he finally softens up to Jenny. The poor mother comes off even worse, being the absolutely stereotypical 50s repressed housewife who never talks and cleans until midnight but feels bad about it. They seemed almost cartoonish sometimes in how they were written.
So then I looked up the source of the story. It's from an autobiographical essay by a British journalist. And then it hit me. Of course they seem weirdly inconsistent and stereotypical. They're based on what a 16 year old girl thought of them at the time. Though I am surprised that now that she's older she didn't look back and think they must not have really been like that.
Maybe I'm getting it all wrong, and David really was just an amazingly smooth talker who could get what he wanted out of anyone, but in this movie it all just feels too unreal and inconsistent.
And then there's the ending. Shame on the screenwriter for that ending. SHAME. Those last five minutes honestly ruined the movie. I suppose it was meant to be a nice little tie-off where we see that life does go on and things end on at least a little bit of a happy note. But boy did it just go wrong. We go from this very dramatic scene where everything has fallen apart, to this weird, wholly unsatisfying little snippet where everything is okay now and she got into Oxford after all and she met other boys. The end. It takes whatever this movie was working toward and just throws it down an unfinished drain. It really feels like the screenwriter just ran out of time and decided to tack this thing on the end.
In short, An Education stands to its name, as it's a film to learn from. It takes all the things going for it, great costumes, a great setting, great actors, etc. and then shoves this screenplay onto them (which was nominated for an Oscar unbelievably) which takes the entirely wrong approach to its subject. It's almost maddening because one little thing could have fixed a lot of the problems I had: make it from Jenny's point of view. Then all the character discrepancies, all the complete ignorance, all the oddities of this movie would've made sense because we're only getting one character's view of the situation.
Yet despite my railing against it, I did actually enjoy the movie for the most part. Despite my frustrations, it was still, on the whole, a good film. It's just the odd choices made in the screenplay that mar it from actually being worthy of the Oscar nods it received (besides Mulligan's, she deserved that one).
An Education gets a 6.5/10.
The Tourist
Alright, time for yet another long string of movies I've watched but neglected to review. The marathon begins with...The Tourist.
Upon seeing the first trailer for this film I practically immediately dismissed it as just another Hollywood action flick where you put two hot people together and hope there's money to be made. However, then I saw that Johnny Depp was nominated at the Golden Globes for it and thought, what the hell, they must have seen something good right?
Well, let's just say I'm never trusting the Golden Globes again.
Admittedly, yes, Depp is good. He's his normal wonderful acting self. Jolie is also perfectly fine as the mysterious ingenue as she really doesn't have to do anything but stand around looking sultry, which she does just by existing. And despite a vapid storyline and poor dialogue, she and Depp still manage to stir up some chemistry. Unfortunately, that's about where the good parts end. Oh, and Venice is beautiful, and beautifully shot.
The rest is your stereotypical humdrum action flick with some funny moments, some romantic moments, and a lot of guns. There's technically a twist at the end, though you'll guess it very easily.
In short (since I've still got several movies to go and The Tourist doesn't really deserve more than passing mention), while it certainly isn't a good movie, it certainly isn't bad either. It just runs par for the course.
The Tourist gets a 5/10.
Upon seeing the first trailer for this film I practically immediately dismissed it as just another Hollywood action flick where you put two hot people together and hope there's money to be made. However, then I saw that Johnny Depp was nominated at the Golden Globes for it and thought, what the hell, they must have seen something good right?
Well, let's just say I'm never trusting the Golden Globes again.
Admittedly, yes, Depp is good. He's his normal wonderful acting self. Jolie is also perfectly fine as the mysterious ingenue as she really doesn't have to do anything but stand around looking sultry, which she does just by existing. And despite a vapid storyline and poor dialogue, she and Depp still manage to stir up some chemistry. Unfortunately, that's about where the good parts end. Oh, and Venice is beautiful, and beautifully shot.
The rest is your stereotypical humdrum action flick with some funny moments, some romantic moments, and a lot of guns. There's technically a twist at the end, though you'll guess it very easily.
In short (since I've still got several movies to go and The Tourist doesn't really deserve more than passing mention), while it certainly isn't a good movie, it certainly isn't bad either. It just runs par for the course.
The Tourist gets a 5/10.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The Social Network
My catching up on all the movies garnering Oscar buzz this year began with one of the forerunners, The Social Network. And let me say, the praise is well deserved.
The movie is set during the hearing for the lawsuits against Mark Zuckerberg from, on one side, his former friend Eduardo Saverin, and on the other, the highly athletic Winklevoss twins and their business partner who gave Zuckerberg the idea that lead to facebook in the hopes he'd help them set it up. Instead he took it and ran with it. Yet, despite technically taking place during the hearing, most of the movie focuses on the past and each person's recollections.
There are two things, I think, which set this movie apart from the herd. First, they are able to merge what's happening now and the memories of the past in such an amazingly fluid way that the story never falters in its pace or ceases to surprise. The second is that despite a story that in other hands would probably come across boring (after all a great deal of it is litigation and typing on computers), the tension and interest in where the story is going to go next never stops. Really it all comes down to the rather surprisingly fast pace and tone of the movie, for which credit must be given to the director David Fincher.
But of course a director can only do so much without a good cast, but they certainly don't fail him here. Jessee Eisenberg's constant awkward and sarcastic nature as Zuckerberg is always interesting to watch, and the tension he carries as a character is really reflective of the tension that keeps this movie constantly interesting. Andrew Garfield is wonderful as the betrayed best friend trying to navigate his way through the constantly shifting waters around Zuckerberg. And as much as I love Justin Timberlake on SNL and have the utmost faith in his acting abilities, even I was surprised by his brilliant turn as the shifty devil Sean Parker who founded Napster and leads Zuckerberg morally astray (though also into billions and billions of dollars).
This movie is at turns a tight suspenseful drama, comedy, romance, and satire, and it succeeds at each. I could probably keep singing its praises all over the place (including the rather different but wholly welcome musical score), but I have to wrap it up. So, in the end The Social Network is a masterful piece of acting, directing, screenwriting, and just about everything else. It grabs you from the very first confusion swirled scene until the last click of the mouse at the end and never lets go.
The Social Network gets a 10/10.
The movie is set during the hearing for the lawsuits against Mark Zuckerberg from, on one side, his former friend Eduardo Saverin, and on the other, the highly athletic Winklevoss twins and their business partner who gave Zuckerberg the idea that lead to facebook in the hopes he'd help them set it up. Instead he took it and ran with it. Yet, despite technically taking place during the hearing, most of the movie focuses on the past and each person's recollections.
There are two things, I think, which set this movie apart from the herd. First, they are able to merge what's happening now and the memories of the past in such an amazingly fluid way that the story never falters in its pace or ceases to surprise. The second is that despite a story that in other hands would probably come across boring (after all a great deal of it is litigation and typing on computers), the tension and interest in where the story is going to go next never stops. Really it all comes down to the rather surprisingly fast pace and tone of the movie, for which credit must be given to the director David Fincher.
But of course a director can only do so much without a good cast, but they certainly don't fail him here. Jessee Eisenberg's constant awkward and sarcastic nature as Zuckerberg is always interesting to watch, and the tension he carries as a character is really reflective of the tension that keeps this movie constantly interesting. Andrew Garfield is wonderful as the betrayed best friend trying to navigate his way through the constantly shifting waters around Zuckerberg. And as much as I love Justin Timberlake on SNL and have the utmost faith in his acting abilities, even I was surprised by his brilliant turn as the shifty devil Sean Parker who founded Napster and leads Zuckerberg morally astray (though also into billions and billions of dollars).
This movie is at turns a tight suspenseful drama, comedy, romance, and satire, and it succeeds at each. I could probably keep singing its praises all over the place (including the rather different but wholly welcome musical score), but I have to wrap it up. So, in the end The Social Network is a masterful piece of acting, directing, screenwriting, and just about everything else. It grabs you from the very first confusion swirled scene until the last click of the mouse at the end and never lets go.
The Social Network gets a 10/10.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
The Mist
GAH I FORGOT ANOTHER ONE.
Okay, The Mist. Based off a Stephen King book The Mist is actually quite surprising in that the supernatural oddities are there pretty much from the get-go and are completely visible. This turns it from the normal kind of supernatural thriller King is used to producing into a movie with an almost survival horror bent to it. Does that make it better?
The Mist takes place in a small town where before you can say "uh oh" a mass of mist is rolling down the mountainside from the general direction of an army base, trapping a father, son, and his neighbor along with several others inside a grocery store. They then proceed to discover just what kind of threat they're dealing with, both on the outside, and eventually inside as well from a woman preaching about the end of days.
The cast are really all surprisingly good, especially Marcia Gay Harden as the religious zealot. While there are some stars here (including the man now immortalized as Starkiller in The Force Unleashed video games), you really get the sense that this is an ensemble cast in an ensemble setting and they all make each other look good as any ensemble should.
The creatures themselves are really cool looking, though they also ratchet up the suspense as it seems like each new encounter brings with it a new and terrifying creature. Each person's foray into the mist keeps you on the edge of your toes, just like everyone in that store.
Yet with all that being said, the story itself seemed a little unremarkable to me. The whole thing, while effective, still felt like it was lacking a little originality. It felt like any other suspenseful monster movie. People stick together to survive, bad things happen, and there is an inevitable trip into danger to try and get supplies that goes predictably wrong. There's a kind of "twist" that is a big no brainer (SPOILER It's all a military experiment that went wrong, DUH. END SPOILER) .
However, this movie deserves to be watched just for the ending. It doesn't really matter if you watch the rest of the film. You can get by on knowing that monsters attack, a lot of people die, and there's pretty much no hope of living for anyone. The ending, though...the ending needs to be seen. It is one of the most original and completely horrifying endings to a movie I think I've ever seen. It strikes deep, and it strikes hard. It takes a surprisingly bold move that I believe most movies would shy away from, and that's all I'm going to say about it except WATCH IT.
The Mist as a whole may not have much originality going for it, but the tight acting and highly unconventional ending make it a very worthwhile view.
The Mist gets an 8/10 (the ending bumped it by a point).
Okay, The Mist. Based off a Stephen King book The Mist is actually quite surprising in that the supernatural oddities are there pretty much from the get-go and are completely visible. This turns it from the normal kind of supernatural thriller King is used to producing into a movie with an almost survival horror bent to it. Does that make it better?
The Mist takes place in a small town where before you can say "uh oh" a mass of mist is rolling down the mountainside from the general direction of an army base, trapping a father, son, and his neighbor along with several others inside a grocery store. They then proceed to discover just what kind of threat they're dealing with, both on the outside, and eventually inside as well from a woman preaching about the end of days.
The cast are really all surprisingly good, especially Marcia Gay Harden as the religious zealot. While there are some stars here (including the man now immortalized as Starkiller in The Force Unleashed video games), you really get the sense that this is an ensemble cast in an ensemble setting and they all make each other look good as any ensemble should.
The creatures themselves are really cool looking, though they also ratchet up the suspense as it seems like each new encounter brings with it a new and terrifying creature. Each person's foray into the mist keeps you on the edge of your toes, just like everyone in that store.
Yet with all that being said, the story itself seemed a little unremarkable to me. The whole thing, while effective, still felt like it was lacking a little originality. It felt like any other suspenseful monster movie. People stick together to survive, bad things happen, and there is an inevitable trip into danger to try and get supplies that goes predictably wrong. There's a kind of "twist" that is a big no brainer (SPOILER It's all a military experiment that went wrong, DUH. END SPOILER) .
However, this movie deserves to be watched just for the ending. It doesn't really matter if you watch the rest of the film. You can get by on knowing that monsters attack, a lot of people die, and there's pretty much no hope of living for anyone. The ending, though...the ending needs to be seen. It is one of the most original and completely horrifying endings to a movie I think I've ever seen. It strikes deep, and it strikes hard. It takes a surprisingly bold move that I believe most movies would shy away from, and that's all I'm going to say about it except WATCH IT.
The Mist as a whole may not have much originality going for it, but the tight acting and highly unconventional ending make it a very worthwhile view.
The Mist gets an 8/10 (the ending bumped it by a point).
Paranormal Activity 2
So my bad, I actually watched this movie several weeks ago and then completely forgot to write anything down about it. Which unfortunately means I'll be going off of what I remember from when I viewed it, which while I think I can still provide a good analysis, it may not be as good as when it was fresh in my head. Nonetheless...
We quickly learn that this sequel is actually a prequel, following the story of the sister of the main girl from the first one, her husband, her daughter, her little baby, and their dog. The beginning actually starts off rather confusingly as we get from a very quick transition with almost no explanation that we've suddenly jumped forward a couple weeks that their house was broken into, thus necessitating a security system that watches over the house. From that point on most of the scary footage comes from those cameras, with snippets of handheld in-between.
As in the first one, weird things start happening on a low level. The pool cleaner mysteriously ends up out of the pool each morning, seemingly on its own. There are thumps in the night. And then as time goes on and the family starts getting more and more freaked out, scarier and scarier crap keeps happening. Oddly enough though, I thought it started out much more strongly than the first, which was almost to its detriment as from that point on they had to try and get scarier than that. And while at some points they certainly managed it, it was odd to start the foray into madness with such a big event.
Underneath all the hubbub, however, are some rather interesting revelations about why the things that happened in the first movie happened and why this demon is terrorizing them all. I won't spoil anything here, because I think this was worth viewing, but the ending in particular I thought was a really great ending. It's unexpected, different, and yet totally makes sense within the context of the story they've presented. In the first one there was the infamous change from the kinda boring but very interesting original ending to the Spielberg scary as hell but really cliche ending (a change they're sticking with in this one), neither of which really felt right. The second, however, hits it right on the head.
In terms of the rest of the production, the actors are once again average though certainly good at acting scared, the choppiness we get in the timeline from one handicam shot to the next is a little jarring and makes it hard to keep up with what's going on, and the scares themselves while bigger are not necessarily better. That isn't to say it wasn't scary, it just wasn't as effective as the first one since for this one you basically know you're going to hear footsteps in the night and watch people get dragged. And yet, I liked it better than the first, particularly because it made up for those faults by having an actually interesting story, and an ending that just plain worked.
Basically, this sequel/prequel retained many of the problems of the first, yet also improved upon it. From where this one ended I doubt there will be a third, but who knows, maybe they'll finally strike the right balance between small, unpredictable scares that build tension and big scares that can only have a big impact for a short period of time. The first favored the small at the expense of the large except for the end, while the second favored the big at the expense of those small moments that really hammer in the suspense. I suppose it's a balance that all good horror must find, and the second did better at it than the first, but still had its share of problems. In the end...
Paranormal Activity 2 gets a 7.5/10
We quickly learn that this sequel is actually a prequel, following the story of the sister of the main girl from the first one, her husband, her daughter, her little baby, and their dog. The beginning actually starts off rather confusingly as we get from a very quick transition with almost no explanation that we've suddenly jumped forward a couple weeks that their house was broken into, thus necessitating a security system that watches over the house. From that point on most of the scary footage comes from those cameras, with snippets of handheld in-between.
As in the first one, weird things start happening on a low level. The pool cleaner mysteriously ends up out of the pool each morning, seemingly on its own. There are thumps in the night. And then as time goes on and the family starts getting more and more freaked out, scarier and scarier crap keeps happening. Oddly enough though, I thought it started out much more strongly than the first, which was almost to its detriment as from that point on they had to try and get scarier than that. And while at some points they certainly managed it, it was odd to start the foray into madness with such a big event.
Underneath all the hubbub, however, are some rather interesting revelations about why the things that happened in the first movie happened and why this demon is terrorizing them all. I won't spoil anything here, because I think this was worth viewing, but the ending in particular I thought was a really great ending. It's unexpected, different, and yet totally makes sense within the context of the story they've presented. In the first one there was the infamous change from the kinda boring but very interesting original ending to the Spielberg scary as hell but really cliche ending (a change they're sticking with in this one), neither of which really felt right. The second, however, hits it right on the head.
In terms of the rest of the production, the actors are once again average though certainly good at acting scared, the choppiness we get in the timeline from one handicam shot to the next is a little jarring and makes it hard to keep up with what's going on, and the scares themselves while bigger are not necessarily better. That isn't to say it wasn't scary, it just wasn't as effective as the first one since for this one you basically know you're going to hear footsteps in the night and watch people get dragged. And yet, I liked it better than the first, particularly because it made up for those faults by having an actually interesting story, and an ending that just plain worked.
Basically, this sequel/prequel retained many of the problems of the first, yet also improved upon it. From where this one ended I doubt there will be a third, but who knows, maybe they'll finally strike the right balance between small, unpredictable scares that build tension and big scares that can only have a big impact for a short period of time. The first favored the small at the expense of the large except for the end, while the second favored the big at the expense of those small moments that really hammer in the suspense. I suppose it's a balance that all good horror must find, and the second did better at it than the first, but still had its share of problems. In the end...
Paranormal Activity 2 gets a 7.5/10
Every Little Step
Despite an inherent love for musicals, I haven't really been around them. I've seen a couple performed, and watched a couple movie adaptations, but I've never been in one or exposed to more than the most popular ones like Phantom and Les Mis. So having received the recommendation from my more musically inclined girlfriend I turned on Every Little Step, a documentary about the casting of the revival of A Chorus Line, which is a musical that I had never heard of nor heard songs from. Thankfully, however, I am an actor, and this is an actor's movie.
A Chorus Line is the rather brilliant brainchild of Michael Bennett, who sat down with several fellow Broadway actors for 12 hours, talking about what it was like to be in showbusiness. He then took those stories and turned it into a musical about a bunch of actors auditioning for a Broadway show. So Every Little Step then chronicles the stories of some of the 3,000 people who showed up to audition for the revival, making it a documentary about a bunch of actors auditioning for a show about a bunch of actors auditioning for a show. Very meta.
Frankly it's a fascinating process, and the movie captures it very well. You see these rooms filled with dancers who all get turned away, then another roomful where you can see who is on their game and who just doesn't have it. Even towards the very end to watch these people who have put their livelihoods on the line for this job go so far, only to fall after 8 MONTHS of waiting. It's intense.
The only problem I have is that I wanted more. It felt like it all went by so quickly, and some final people ended up in that cast that were barely even mentioned. At the final callback there were still about 10 people we knew nothing about. I understand it would take a long time to do each and every person's story, and some of them might not have an interesting story to tell, but I would've gladly stuck around for another 30 minutes of material (it runs 1.5 hours). I know this is one of those situations where you just have to make some sacrifices so that the movie can still tell a story and end in a reasonable amount of time, but damn it, it was so interesting I couldn't help but feel the lack of depth.
For any actors or those who are involved in theater, this is a brilliant movie to see as you feel like you can really understand what these people are going through which makes the emotional impact strike all the harder. For everyone else, it's a rarely seen and very interesting look into just what it takes to make it to Broadway. In any case, it's a worthwhile view.
Every Little Step gets a 9/10.
A Chorus Line is the rather brilliant brainchild of Michael Bennett, who sat down with several fellow Broadway actors for 12 hours, talking about what it was like to be in showbusiness. He then took those stories and turned it into a musical about a bunch of actors auditioning for a Broadway show. So Every Little Step then chronicles the stories of some of the 3,000 people who showed up to audition for the revival, making it a documentary about a bunch of actors auditioning for a show about a bunch of actors auditioning for a show. Very meta.
Frankly it's a fascinating process, and the movie captures it very well. You see these rooms filled with dancers who all get turned away, then another roomful where you can see who is on their game and who just doesn't have it. Even towards the very end to watch these people who have put their livelihoods on the line for this job go so far, only to fall after 8 MONTHS of waiting. It's intense.
The only problem I have is that I wanted more. It felt like it all went by so quickly, and some final people ended up in that cast that were barely even mentioned. At the final callback there were still about 10 people we knew nothing about. I understand it would take a long time to do each and every person's story, and some of them might not have an interesting story to tell, but I would've gladly stuck around for another 30 minutes of material (it runs 1.5 hours). I know this is one of those situations where you just have to make some sacrifices so that the movie can still tell a story and end in a reasonable amount of time, but damn it, it was so interesting I couldn't help but feel the lack of depth.
For any actors or those who are involved in theater, this is a brilliant movie to see as you feel like you can really understand what these people are going through which makes the emotional impact strike all the harder. For everyone else, it's a rarely seen and very interesting look into just what it takes to make it to Broadway. In any case, it's a worthwhile view.
Every Little Step gets a 9/10.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
The Road
This movie has me torn. On one hand I found the setting of an America devastated by some kind of massive destructive event, leaving the last remnants of humanity to wander a dead world absolutely fascinating. The struggle to survive turning most into cannibals, with only a few keeping the fire of their humanity alive. On the other hand, I feel like the story never made a point, besides saying things are bleak. We follow around this father and son as they go south towards the ocean, bad things happen along the way, and they both grapple with what it means to be the good guys in a bad world. Every single shot looks stark and gray, practically every location is burned or broken down, and by the end you're just left sitting there thinking "Well that was depressing."
Basically it makes me want to go and read the book, because I can tell there's something beneath this drudge of grayness that is actually an interesting story. Unfortunately, instead of exploring the depths of morality and metaphor littered throughout, the movie just takes us along on this very slow paced journey where they're either running/hiding from cannibals, walking/scavenging/sleeping, or showing how the father is pretty much a failure. He preaches about carrying the fire, being the good guy, yet when the opportunity presents itself he always looks out only for himself while his son tries desperately to make him change his mind. And that's the movie. Running, resting, scavenging, and morality. There's certainly a message to be found in it, a deeper resonance the movie was trying to achieve, but unfortunately it just came off dull. And then there's the ending...
SPOILER ALERT...I really couldn't understand the point of the ending. We've just spent almost 2 hours with this father and son, with the father trying the entire time to teach what he can. His dying request is that the son be cautious, and voila the first person he comes across, who instills no confidence whatsoever, he almost immediately trusts. Not only that, but he admits to there being others with him. And then, he admits that they've been following him the entire time. But...then it turns out to be okay. It's actually a family. It's the good guys they were searching for. Possibly. It just seemed like a very odd ending, to immediately forget his father's wishes but don't worry it's okay they're actually nice. I guess the fire lives on? END SPOILERS
To me it just felt like despite the good acting and interesting direction, what fell flat was simply the screenplay itself. It turned what could've been a fascinating philosophical study amid the backdrop of this strange alternate reality into an odd, slightly muddled post-apocalyptic journey movie where the journey didn't really have a solid beginning or end. With any luck I'll get to reading the book, and will hopefully have a much better impression.
The Road gets a 5/10.
Basically it makes me want to go and read the book, because I can tell there's something beneath this drudge of grayness that is actually an interesting story. Unfortunately, instead of exploring the depths of morality and metaphor littered throughout, the movie just takes us along on this very slow paced journey where they're either running/hiding from cannibals, walking/scavenging/sleeping, or showing how the father is pretty much a failure. He preaches about carrying the fire, being the good guy, yet when the opportunity presents itself he always looks out only for himself while his son tries desperately to make him change his mind. And that's the movie. Running, resting, scavenging, and morality. There's certainly a message to be found in it, a deeper resonance the movie was trying to achieve, but unfortunately it just came off dull. And then there's the ending...
SPOILER ALERT...I really couldn't understand the point of the ending. We've just spent almost 2 hours with this father and son, with the father trying the entire time to teach what he can. His dying request is that the son be cautious, and voila the first person he comes across, who instills no confidence whatsoever, he almost immediately trusts. Not only that, but he admits to there being others with him. And then, he admits that they've been following him the entire time. But...then it turns out to be okay. It's actually a family. It's the good guys they were searching for. Possibly. It just seemed like a very odd ending, to immediately forget his father's wishes but don't worry it's okay they're actually nice. I guess the fire lives on? END SPOILERS
To me it just felt like despite the good acting and interesting direction, what fell flat was simply the screenplay itself. It turned what could've been a fascinating philosophical study amid the backdrop of this strange alternate reality into an odd, slightly muddled post-apocalyptic journey movie where the journey didn't really have a solid beginning or end. With any luck I'll get to reading the book, and will hopefully have a much better impression.
The Road gets a 5/10.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Killer Klowns from Outer Space
The title really says it all. Do I even need to provide a review? Much like movies such as "Piranha" or "Anaconda" you pretty much know exactly what you're signing up for when you press play. However, there's something special about Killer Klowns that I think at least deserves some words written about it.
The concept of Killer Klowns is rather simple. Aliens who just happen to look like clowns, use cotton candy and popcorn as weapons, and whose spaceship is coincidentally shaped like a circus tent, land for an unknown reason in this small town and proceed to capture or kill every single person there in clown-like fashion. There's your stereotypical hero, maiden, powerful ally (cop), supposed comic relief (ice cream brothers), and stick-in-the-mud who doesn't believe a damn thing until he's dead (other cop), all with acting skills developed at whatever place casting directors went to for every actor from every bad horror movie made in the 80s (the mall?). So after stumbling on the big secret that this circus tent, which mysteriously appeared in the woods right where a meteor they watched fall should've crashed down, is actually a spaceship filled with deadly klowns, our heroes spend the movie running from death and trying to warn everyone before they all get turned into cotton candy cocoons.
If you really need it...SPOILER ALERT...everyone but the kinda hero, maiden in distress, powerfully ally and supposed comic relief end up dead. Somehow during the entire movie, the cop is the only one who figured out how to kill the klowns (shoot their noses off), and is able to kill the big boss klown, subsequently blowing up their ship and killing any other possible survivors from the town. Miraculously, he survives the explosion by locking himself in the klown car, and the comic relief escapes the previous explosion they were in AND the destruction of the ship by hiding in their ice cream truck's freezer. The cavalry, in the form of police from a neighboring town, show up just in time to see the ship explode. And just as the movie ends, with our heroes asking if it's finally all over, they get pied in the face, setting up a sequel if they ever chose to do one. END SPOILERS
It's ridiculous. It's all pure and utter failure in pretty much every sense. The acting, direction, script, sets, just about damn near everything is just plain BAD. The only redeeming thing is that the klowns were at some points pretty darn scary looking. So why even give this film a mention?
Because it was funny. It was damn funny. It was all just so ridiculous that I couldn't help but enjoy it. If it hadn't been filmed in the same period as, and thus been one of, all of those terrible 80s horror films I would've said it was a wonderful spoof. You just have to think that they knew they were making a terrible terrible film and so they had fun with it. But almost better is to think that they were taking themselves absolutely seriously, just because it makes their predicament all the funnier.
Killer Klowns is by no means a good movie, and I'm sure many would not have as fun a time with it as I had. Still, if you've got several people over and have fun supplying additional commentary while a movie is going then this is a great way to waste an hour and 20 minutes.
Killer Klowns from Outer Space gets a 4/10.
The concept of Killer Klowns is rather simple. Aliens who just happen to look like clowns, use cotton candy and popcorn as weapons, and whose spaceship is coincidentally shaped like a circus tent, land for an unknown reason in this small town and proceed to capture or kill every single person there in clown-like fashion. There's your stereotypical hero, maiden, powerful ally (cop), supposed comic relief (ice cream brothers), and stick-in-the-mud who doesn't believe a damn thing until he's dead (other cop), all with acting skills developed at whatever place casting directors went to for every actor from every bad horror movie made in the 80s (the mall?). So after stumbling on the big secret that this circus tent, which mysteriously appeared in the woods right where a meteor they watched fall should've crashed down, is actually a spaceship filled with deadly klowns, our heroes spend the movie running from death and trying to warn everyone before they all get turned into cotton candy cocoons.
If you really need it...SPOILER ALERT...everyone but the kinda hero, maiden in distress, powerfully ally and supposed comic relief end up dead. Somehow during the entire movie, the cop is the only one who figured out how to kill the klowns (shoot their noses off), and is able to kill the big boss klown, subsequently blowing up their ship and killing any other possible survivors from the town. Miraculously, he survives the explosion by locking himself in the klown car, and the comic relief escapes the previous explosion they were in AND the destruction of the ship by hiding in their ice cream truck's freezer. The cavalry, in the form of police from a neighboring town, show up just in time to see the ship explode. And just as the movie ends, with our heroes asking if it's finally all over, they get pied in the face, setting up a sequel if they ever chose to do one. END SPOILERS
It's ridiculous. It's all pure and utter failure in pretty much every sense. The acting, direction, script, sets, just about damn near everything is just plain BAD. The only redeeming thing is that the klowns were at some points pretty darn scary looking. So why even give this film a mention?
Because it was funny. It was damn funny. It was all just so ridiculous that I couldn't help but enjoy it. If it hadn't been filmed in the same period as, and thus been one of, all of those terrible 80s horror films I would've said it was a wonderful spoof. You just have to think that they knew they were making a terrible terrible film and so they had fun with it. But almost better is to think that they were taking themselves absolutely seriously, just because it makes their predicament all the funnier.
Killer Klowns is by no means a good movie, and I'm sure many would not have as fun a time with it as I had. Still, if you've got several people over and have fun supplying additional commentary while a movie is going then this is a great way to waste an hour and 20 minutes.
Killer Klowns from Outer Space gets a 4/10.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World
In case you couldn't tell from reading the rest of this blog I'm a big video game nerd. And while I didn't really grow up with the arcade era that Scott Pilgrim hearkens back to, it doesn't mean I can't completely and utterly fall in love with this movie.
Scott Pilgrim is a 23 year old bass player in a band called the Sex Bob-Ombs, who have never known the taste of success despite a lot of heart. He starts out dating a high-schooler named Knives Chau, despite the constant flack he gets from his friends. However, one day he has a dream about a mysterious woman on roller skates, then sees her in real life at a party, learns her name is Ramona Flowers, and immediately falls for her despite her complete lack of interest in him. Yet despite that she still starts to hang out with Scott and the romance begins to bloom. But before you know it, the shit hits the fan as juggling both Knives and Ramona, Scott learns that in order to keep dating Ramona he has to battle and defeat her 7 evil exes, most of whom are conveniently in town for the battle of the bands.
What follows is brightly colored, flashy, absolutely over-the-top and more than fun. Often Scott unwittingly ends up in these battles to the death while trying to manage the ups and downs of dating Ramona or breaking up with Knives or just trying to live his day to day life. I don't even really know how to explain it, but this movie manages to strike the perfect balance between romantic comedy, action movie, and homage to the arcade. The first evil ex shatters into a thousand coins when Scott defeats him, which Scott then picks up and realizes he can use for bus money. The whole tone of the movie has this kind of hyper-surreal feel to it, and somehow it all just works really well.
Michael Cera is his usual nerdy nice self, which is fine since it just works so perfectly for the character. Really every actor and actress really hits their mark, but the stars of this show are the evil exes. Besides the twins who we literally hear nothing from, they are all hilarious. From the very first fireball throwing, demon hipster chick summoning ex all the way down to the always wonderful Jason Schwartzman as the leader of the exes, every single one stole their scenes. It was just so obvious that they themselves were having a great time that it was impossible not to enjoy it right along with them.
The only problem I have with Scott Pilgrim is that it's so flashy, fun and fast paced that it kind of forgets to have substance under it. I went through the entire movie loving every eccentric bite sized scene, but left it feeling a little hungry for more, especially after the kind of cliche ending. **SPOILER ALERT** Of course I understand why Scott ends up with Ramona. After all it's like Knives says, he's spent all this time fighting for her he should go get her. Yet, I also felt like they really pinpointed in the final battle how Scott and Knives were right for each other and Ramona was maybe not the right choice for him. Personally I just think it would've been a much more compelling ending to let Ramona go. **END SPOILER**
Scott Pilgrim is basically the epitome of style over substance, and yet the style that's there is so unique, interesting and FUN that I can't really fault it that. One thing's for sure; I'll definitely be going back and watching this one again and again.
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World gets a 9/10.
Scott Pilgrim is a 23 year old bass player in a band called the Sex Bob-Ombs, who have never known the taste of success despite a lot of heart. He starts out dating a high-schooler named Knives Chau, despite the constant flack he gets from his friends. However, one day he has a dream about a mysterious woman on roller skates, then sees her in real life at a party, learns her name is Ramona Flowers, and immediately falls for her despite her complete lack of interest in him. Yet despite that she still starts to hang out with Scott and the romance begins to bloom. But before you know it, the shit hits the fan as juggling both Knives and Ramona, Scott learns that in order to keep dating Ramona he has to battle and defeat her 7 evil exes, most of whom are conveniently in town for the battle of the bands.
What follows is brightly colored, flashy, absolutely over-the-top and more than fun. Often Scott unwittingly ends up in these battles to the death while trying to manage the ups and downs of dating Ramona or breaking up with Knives or just trying to live his day to day life. I don't even really know how to explain it, but this movie manages to strike the perfect balance between romantic comedy, action movie, and homage to the arcade. The first evil ex shatters into a thousand coins when Scott defeats him, which Scott then picks up and realizes he can use for bus money. The whole tone of the movie has this kind of hyper-surreal feel to it, and somehow it all just works really well.
Michael Cera is his usual nerdy nice self, which is fine since it just works so perfectly for the character. Really every actor and actress really hits their mark, but the stars of this show are the evil exes. Besides the twins who we literally hear nothing from, they are all hilarious. From the very first fireball throwing, demon hipster chick summoning ex all the way down to the always wonderful Jason Schwartzman as the leader of the exes, every single one stole their scenes. It was just so obvious that they themselves were having a great time that it was impossible not to enjoy it right along with them.
The only problem I have with Scott Pilgrim is that it's so flashy, fun and fast paced that it kind of forgets to have substance under it. I went through the entire movie loving every eccentric bite sized scene, but left it feeling a little hungry for more, especially after the kind of cliche ending. **SPOILER ALERT** Of course I understand why Scott ends up with Ramona. After all it's like Knives says, he's spent all this time fighting for her he should go get her. Yet, I also felt like they really pinpointed in the final battle how Scott and Knives were right for each other and Ramona was maybe not the right choice for him. Personally I just think it would've been a much more compelling ending to let Ramona go. **END SPOILER**
Scott Pilgrim is basically the epitome of style over substance, and yet the style that's there is so unique, interesting and FUN that I can't really fault it that. One thing's for sure; I'll definitely be going back and watching this one again and again.
Scott Pilgrim vs. The World gets a 9/10.
The Human Centipede
Watching this travesty of a film I couldn't help but be reminded of the first time I watched Hostel, years after its release. When it first came out, everyone was thoroughly disgusted and grossed out by the completely over-the-top gore, violence, and nudity, marking it as probably the best example at that time of the "torture porn" genre. I vowed never to see it since there really was no need. Then, one day, in a moment of weakness I figured what the hell and I watched it. Honestly, I didn't find it to be so bad. Maybe I'm just jaded or immune to graphic violence in movies these days but the rather obviously fake torture in Hostel didn't effect me. And while the plot of the movie was reeeally stupid, I still couldn't help hating myself for actually enjoying the kind of Grindhouse sentimentality this movie held.
So sure enough, years later another movie comes out trying to top all others as the most disgusting movie ever released. However, unlike Hostel, the Human Centipede falls flat in just about every way, including the gross out factor. Once you've heard what the Human Centipede is actually about, you've pretty much already gotten through the worst of it. In some ways, hearing about and imagining it is actually far worse than what they actually show. Though there are still certainly some very cringe worthy moments.
So yes, it was disgusting. But frankly, it's no worse than Saw or Hostel or any other entry in the torture porn genre. It certainly has a different concept to it which makes it more revolting, but I was actually shocked when I realized that the bandages covering the really disgusting parts of the centipede weren't going away. I really expected them to go that far from what I had heard, but thankfully it spared us the really gruesome bits.
As to the rest of the movie beyond its shock value, there's really nothing there. Dieter Laser is genuinely terrifying as the doctor, and the asian man at the front has his moments (though most are surprisingly humorous). But the two "actresses" really do seem like they were just hired out of a porno, along with the cops. The story itself is expectedly very poorly written, with very bad dialogue, many many so bad it's funny moments, and enough head-desk moments to give you a concussion without a desk.
In short, there is nothing redeeming about this movie besides Dieter Laser, and that's only because he has one of the most terrifying faces I've ever seen on a person. If your own sensibilities didn't tell you already to stay far far away from this movie, and you're even a little curious about seeing it, just walk away. This movie is all about the shock value, and if you already know what it's about, then the shock is gone.
The Human Centipede gets a 1/10.
So sure enough, years later another movie comes out trying to top all others as the most disgusting movie ever released. However, unlike Hostel, the Human Centipede falls flat in just about every way, including the gross out factor. Once you've heard what the Human Centipede is actually about, you've pretty much already gotten through the worst of it. In some ways, hearing about and imagining it is actually far worse than what they actually show. Though there are still certainly some very cringe worthy moments.
So yes, it was disgusting. But frankly, it's no worse than Saw or Hostel or any other entry in the torture porn genre. It certainly has a different concept to it which makes it more revolting, but I was actually shocked when I realized that the bandages covering the really disgusting parts of the centipede weren't going away. I really expected them to go that far from what I had heard, but thankfully it spared us the really gruesome bits.
As to the rest of the movie beyond its shock value, there's really nothing there. Dieter Laser is genuinely terrifying as the doctor, and the asian man at the front has his moments (though most are surprisingly humorous). But the two "actresses" really do seem like they were just hired out of a porno, along with the cops. The story itself is expectedly very poorly written, with very bad dialogue, many many so bad it's funny moments, and enough head-desk moments to give you a concussion without a desk.
In short, there is nothing redeeming about this movie besides Dieter Laser, and that's only because he has one of the most terrifying faces I've ever seen on a person. If your own sensibilities didn't tell you already to stay far far away from this movie, and you're even a little curious about seeing it, just walk away. This movie is all about the shock value, and if you already know what it's about, then the shock is gone.
The Human Centipede gets a 1/10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
