Friday, December 16, 2011
FLYPAPER (2010) (a review)
A heist movie and a detective movie and a romance all in one. Stars Ashley Judd and Patrick Dempsey.
The story: Tripp (Dempsey) flirts with a cute teller, Kaitlin, who is about to be married (Judd) when two groups enter the bank to rob simultaneously. But then things start to go wrong and now Tripp, who is eccentric and obsessive tries to figure out who really set up the heist and what plan they have for all of them.
Was it good?
In parts. As a heist movie it isn't that interesting or exciting. As a romance, it isn't that convincing. And as a comedy it wasn't very funny. However, there is something charming about it. Between Tripp and Kaitlin's flirting, everything going wrong and Tripp's attempts to figure out what is happening it is constantly entertaining. Unfortunately, a lot of the explainations don't really hold and the movie at times veers off into the silly/unbelievable catagory. In a lot of ways it reminded me of a silly (and not as good) version of the episode "Bad Breaks" on BURN NOTICE. In that episode Michael is trapped inside a bank during a robbery and he has to try to stop the robbers by sabatoging them while pretending to help them. This movie isn't as clever or as funny and some of the twists are obvious and even the ones that aren't just never really surprise you.
Still, for all the ways in which is doesn't succeed, it is consistantly entertaining and almost always charming. I wouldn't recommend it at theater prices, but for a light/fun movie with a little robbery throw in, it's definitely worth a rental.
*** RENTAL ***
NEVERLAND (syfy channel movie)(2011) (a review) *** RENTAL ***
The latest in the Syfy channels series of reinventing classic fairy tales (following TIN MAN, their take on Wizard of Oz and ALICE, a sci-fi retelling of Alice in Wonderland). All of the movies have been written and directed by Nick Willing. This movie is a prequel to the classic story, telling how Peter and Captain Hook can to be in Neverland. This movie stars: Anna Friel, Rhys Ifans and more.
The story: 1906 London. Peter is a thief and part of a gang run by James Hook. During a heist, they find a magic orb that transports them (and several other boys) to Neverland. Peter is found by the indians, incluidng Tiger Lily. Hook and the other boys are found by pirates, including the beautiful lead pirate Elizabeth Bonnie. Now the pirates, led by Bonnie and Hook, will try to find the magic orb and the secret of the indians while Peter tries to decide who he should be loyal to.
Was it good?
In parts. It was interesting enough that if you are a fan of Peter Pan then it will make for an interesting watch. The beginning in London isn't interesting and goes on for WAY too long. However once they get transported to Leverland things get interesting. What makes this section work is the way peopel seperate into two sides. Peter and Hook used to be allies, but now Hook with with the pirates and Peter is with the indians, and no one really is a villain yet. They both have goals that make sense (finding the others, getting home), but because of how each side operates they are set against each other. The best part of this is the relationship between Bonnie and Hook, the two pirate captains (Anna Friel and Charlie Rowe), which at times is manipulation and at times genuine attraction. Unfortuantely, as the show goes on the dynamics become less interesting. It becomes about chasing people and burning things. And the goals that people have keep changing. At one point they want to go home, then Hook wants the fairy magic (that allows Peter to fly), and then they want to go home but come back...I don't know. For the 2nd quarter had a wonderful feel to it, a sense of fun you'd expect from a Peter Pan story, but as it went on it seemed to lose that becoming darker and less engaging. (The beginnign is pretty dark too, but I was okay with it starting like that.) Eventually all the things come to pass -- Peter gets to fly, Hook loses his hand, but by then it just didn't feel like a prequel...I just didn't believe that these characters would turn into the Peter Pan and Captain Hook we know. Which wouldn't be bad if this was meant to be a different interpretation, but when it is set-up as a prequel it makes for a disappointing last hour.
Still, if you skim the first half hour, the second hour especially has a lot of great things in it and the relationship between Bonnie and Hook is worth watching too. Of course, it's the Syfy channel, so it's done on the cheap and there are definitely scenes that get hurt by that. It's not a story I would watch again or give as a gift, but it was good to watch and I'd recommend it for free or a cheap rental.
*** RENTAL ***
Monday, December 12, 2011
REAL STEEL (2011) (a review) ** RECOMMEND ***
Yes, I am recommending this movie and yes I am as surprised as anyone. However, if you can get past the silly concept and put your cynicism on hold, the first 3/4 of this movie are as good of a feel good film as anything I've seen in a while. It's a blatant Rocky with robots, and for the most part it works. There are just a couple moments in the final 1/4 that don't ring true that stall this from being just a great, great film. Considering how dumb I thought the trailer was, I can't believe how much I liked it. I liked it a lot.
The story: in the future, boxing match will be held with robots instead of people. Charlie (Hugh Jackman) was a boxer and now prowls the underground boxing circuit with his robot trying to make money and win. Except he keeps losing and ends up owing people a lot of money. Then he gets word an ex-girlfriend has died and Charlie now has custody of his son, whom he has never seen. However, the woman's sister wants custody of the boy instead so Charlie works out a deal with her husband -- $100,000 and he'll give up custody of the boy after looking after him for the summer. After his next robot gets killed in a match, Charlie goes looking in a junkyard and the boy finds an old model sparring robot. charlie helps fix it up and together them go on the underground robot fight circuit, with the boy believing in this old robot and Charlie desperate for money to keep his creditors away, until they work their way up and get a shot at a real title.
Was it good?
Yeah. The concept is silly and if you are cynical parts of this will be ridiculously stupid, but if you can put it aside it is just a fun, fun film with a great underdog story. From Charlie losing his robots and deep in dept to the boy who has become a pawn and who just wants something to believe in. The fight scenes were a little disappointing and the last one didn't work for me at all (is rope-a-dope really a good strategy for robots?), but overall it was just a good feel-good movie with a lot of heart and enough humor to make it a solid film.
*** RECOMMEND ***
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Martha Marcy May Marlene (2011) (a review) ** RECOMMEND ***
The directorial debut by Sean Durkin that stars Elizabeth Olsen (younger sister of the Oslen twins).
The story: a girl (Olsen) goes to live with her sister after escaping from an abusive cult. However, just because she is out of the cult doesn't mean she can put it behind her and as she struggles to return to "normal" life she becomes increasingly paranoid that the cult is coming back for her.
Was it good?
Yes. Very good. Almost excellent, but a few things hurt the final film and prevented it
from being an alsolutely A+++ film. First the good. The story is interesting from the start as it begins with the girl having escaped and calling her sister, who hasn't heard from her in two years. Things are immediately tense and awkward and we can see the girl having trouble in this new setting (her sister's boyfriend's home). As she struggles to adjust we begin to flashback to her experiences in the cult, from her first entering to the escalating abuse and violent behavoir.
Where the movie falters is both the beginning and the ending. We never see Martha's life before that made her join the cult and while much of it is implied by her time at her sister's house. While this is okay for most of the film, prevents the main character from having a strong arc and stops the second half of the film, as she struggles with her nightmares, to have quite the impact it should have. And the ending...well, it just didn't work for me. The problem is you spend all this time watching to see if she is going to escape from the psychological damage of the cult and it just doesn't give you that final answer. Now this isn't bad if you are doing a "Lady and the Tiger" story where there is a deeper question, but because there really isn't anything else here so the ending for me felt more like a cop out.
Still, overall a great film. If you are looking for a creepy psychological thriller that is more about character than cheap scares, this is a good one to check out.
*** RECOMMEND ***
THE THING (2011) (a review) *** RENTAL ***
A prequel to the classic John Carpenter film of the same name. That movie starred Kurt Russell. I have no idea who the director or actors were in this one. (I mean, I do because I checked Wiki, but I'd never heard of them before and don't really care about them now.)
The story: People find an alien frozen in the ice in the arctic. Turns out it is still alive and it begins grabbing people and turning into them. They have to figure out who is human and who is alien as they try to survive.
Was it good?
Depends. The story is basically a mediocre telling of the exact same story from the original. If you've seen the o- there's no reason to watch this. It's the same movie, just with a few bigger scenes and a bunch of sillier stuff. If you haven't seen the Carpenter film, then it might be worth watching.
Still, by staying close to the original they are staying close to a formula that works and there are a few scenes with some genuine tension. It was worth a cheap rental, and a genuine if you didn't see the original.
*** AVOID ***
30 MINUTES OR LESS (a quick review)
An action-comedy by the director of ZOMBIELAND starring Jessie Eisenberg (also from Zombieland as well as Social Network). Zombieland was a big, surprise hit. This movie...not so much.
The story: a pizza delivery guy is ambushed and gets a bomb strapped to him and is told to get $100 grand in nine hours or they will blow him up. You see, the guys that bomb-strapped him want to hire a man to kill their dad so they can inherit money to open a tanning salon/prostitution ring. The boys pull off the heist, but then everything starts to go wrong.
Was it good?
It was okay. The beginning I guess is supposed to be clever and funny, but it didn't work for me at all. None of the banter or relationships landed for me. Once things get in motion it picks up a bit and there were a few laughs, but it was just too little, too late and the ending didn't add anything. Comedy is subjective. For me this was miss.
Still, I can see where some people would like it. If Jessie Eissenberg in a bumbling criminal movie sounds funny you might like it. If the idea doesn't do anything for you immediately...I'd avoid it.
*** AVOID ***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)