OK, so we've found a rom-com that doesn't quite as much of an enthusiastic thumbs-up. But I did enjoy it.
Isla Fisher has come a long was since Summer Bay, and is certainly a very likeable presence on-screen (even in the detestable Wedding Crashers). Her slapstick comedy is not exactly on the realistic side of things though, and there's only so many deliberates (as opposed to accidents) that one can swallow over two hours.
Every single rom-com cliché is present and correct, right down the public humiliation scene. But this is no Devil Wears Prada, and I suspect even Meryl Streep couldn't rise this material above the mundane.
That said, I had fun.
6/10
Thursday 10 September 2009
He's Just Not That Into You - review
Another day, another romantic movie, and another positive review. Am I getting mushy or something?
Well let's clear that up.. no I'm not. But I did really enjoy this film. Nothing really original or Earth-shattering, but there were some nice characters, decent performances and surprisingly complex situations. All characters have their up sides and down sides (though Drew Barrymore's character didn't do enough to register with me).
To be honest, it felt more like a TV show- like an episode of Brothers & Sisters or something. And I mean that in a good way. If this was a pilot, I'd watch the show.
8/10
Wednesday 9 September 2009
The Time Traveler's Wife - review
Oh how it pains me to leave out that "L".
I can be a sucker for a good love story. I can even be a sucker for a bad one. Good or bad, this one suckered me. I was curious to see how this intriguing idea was going to play out, and was very happy with the way it did. I haven't read the novel so have no idea what changes have been made, but I certainly didn't feel like I was missing anything (except, perhaps, for more of Ron Livingstone, whose "best friend" role isn't given enough screen time to develop).
I have been a big fan of Bana since "Troy" (without him, there's no reason to see it) and even liked his polarising "Hulk". Rachel McAdams should be a much bigger star than she is by now. Fantastic in "Mean Girls", "The Notebook" and the so-so "Red Eye", somehow she still isn't a household name. Hopefully the success of this film will change that.
Much has been made of the pairing of this two, but I had no problem with their chemistry (or lack thereof). They are an unlikely match age-wise, but the nature of the story makes it irrelevant.
It may not be a film I'll dash to see again soon, but am sure one day in the future will see it on a Blu-Ray shelf, think "awww" and come home with it....
9/10
I can be a sucker for a good love story. I can even be a sucker for a bad one. Good or bad, this one suckered me. I was curious to see how this intriguing idea was going to play out, and was very happy with the way it did. I haven't read the novel so have no idea what changes have been made, but I certainly didn't feel like I was missing anything (except, perhaps, for more of Ron Livingstone, whose "best friend" role isn't given enough screen time to develop).
I have been a big fan of Bana since "Troy" (without him, there's no reason to see it) and even liked his polarising "Hulk". Rachel McAdams should be a much bigger star than she is by now. Fantastic in "Mean Girls", "The Notebook" and the so-so "Red Eye", somehow she still isn't a household name. Hopefully the success of this film will change that.
Much has been made of the pairing of this two, but I had no problem with their chemistry (or lack thereof). They are an unlikely match age-wise, but the nature of the story makes it irrelevant.
It may not be a film I'll dash to see again soon, but am sure one day in the future will see it on a Blu-Ray shelf, think "awww" and come home with it....
9/10
Rent - review
As something of a Rent virgin, this was all new to me- the story, characters, songs. The closest I've ever come to familiarity with this was "Lease: The Musical" in Team America: World Police.
After a strong opening with the excellent "Seasons of Love", things rapidly went downhill with cheesy forgettable song after cheesy forgettable song- the kind that aren't actual songs, but dialogue set (vaguely) to music. However, we then have a few interesting set-pieces, including "Tango:Maureen" and "Out Tonight", and the plot is underway. Things take another dip an hour in, when we're finally introduced to the much-mentioned Maureen. I'm assuming she is supposed to be a breath of fresh air, but is, in fact, irritating beyond comprehension. Fortunately, she isn't given much to do and is very quickly sidelined for the mawkish second half.
Shame that Taye Diggs is relegated to little more than a cameo, and it is pretty clear that Chris Columbus couldn't direct traffic. The lack of imagination in bringing the stage to life is suffocating rather than breathtaking.
I'd be lying if I said this film had no effect on me, and will certainly be tracking down some of the soundtrack. First impressions- good, not great, but could be a grower.
7/10
After a strong opening with the excellent "Seasons of Love", things rapidly went downhill with cheesy forgettable song after cheesy forgettable song- the kind that aren't actual songs, but dialogue set (vaguely) to music. However, we then have a few interesting set-pieces, including "Tango:Maureen" and "Out Tonight", and the plot is underway. Things take another dip an hour in, when we're finally introduced to the much-mentioned Maureen. I'm assuming she is supposed to be a breath of fresh air, but is, in fact, irritating beyond comprehension. Fortunately, she isn't given much to do and is very quickly sidelined for the mawkish second half.
Shame that Taye Diggs is relegated to little more than a cameo, and it is pretty clear that Chris Columbus couldn't direct traffic. The lack of imagination in bringing the stage to life is suffocating rather than breathtaking.
I'd be lying if I said this film had no effect on me, and will certainly be tracking down some of the soundtrack. First impressions- good, not great, but could be a grower.
7/10
Tuesday 8 September 2009
JCVD - review
A curious one, this. About 30 minutes in, wasn't sure I was going to make it through. It begins very strangely, seemingly lacking in narrative, and comes across a bit rambling and experimental. Then the film enters a second chapter- at first, adding to the confusion. Then it becomes clear we are seeing the same events, but from a different perspective. Now I was interested. All I knew about this film was the notorious to-camera "this is my life" monologue, and yet it didn't seem quite so out of place when it happened. This is clearly a vanity project, despite the lengths to which Jean-Claude Van Damme goes to show he's not a real-life action hero. An interesting idea, mostly successful, and has certainly raised Van Damme in my estimation. He certainly gives an emotional performance- but I still can't work out what the hell I just watched. Bonkers.
7/10
7/10
District 9 - review
This is my favourite film of the year so far. Given this, and that I saw it very recently, I thought I'd have a go at a proper review that's worthy of the film. I'll keep it as spoiler-free as I can for those who haven't seen it.
This one really came out of nowhere. I hadn't even heard of it until I saw the trailer before GI Joe about a month ago. I couldn't work out exactly what the plot was- it looked bombastic and confusing, like Alien Nation meets Transformers, but shot documentary-style.
How wrong I was.
The film simply presents you with facts, documentary-style, about incidents that occurred recently in an area known as District 9. To quote Jim Dale, the facts were these...
Approximately 20 years ago, an alien spaceship appeared over Johannesburg... and that was it. After several months, nothing else had happened. The military eventually managed to get on board and evacuate the contained aliens, keeping them in an area called District 9. The aliens showed no hostility, no friendliness... in fact, no purpose whatsoever. Despite this, 20 years later, local residents are complaining of the NIMBY factor and the aliens (or "prawns" as the less-sympathetic amongst the humans amusingly refer to them) are forced to move on to a smaller, more concentrated area, referred to as District 10. It is the day before this transition that these events take place- partly in documentary-style, but we as viewers also get to see a glimpse of the true story behind the news reports.
The man in charge of the eviction is pen-pushing nepotist Wikus Van De Merwe, played to perfection by newcomer Sharlto Copley. He is a bumbling, amiable man, yet is cheerfully unaware of how casually inhumane he is. This is someone that's going to have to earn your sympathy, but yet seems too harmless to actively dislike- at least until he's given a position of power.
The other character of note is an alien, curiously named Christopher Johnson. Clearly a very different being to most of his fellows, he stands up to his species' mistreatments. Through him, we learn that not all of the aliens are necessarily the unorganised cat food-addicted rabble they appear to be. Friends or foes? The answer should be obvious, but who's going to humour them long enough to find out? There is clearly a very well-considered back story for the aliens here- but, much like the oft-compared Cloverfield, even at the end of the film we are yet to find out what it is. And even in a sequel, it's not certain we need this information. That's not to say we don't want it...
District 9 expertly magpies from existing sci fi lore - a bit of Robocop here, a bit of Aliens there, just a dash of Independence Day... but it's all only on a very superficial level. District 9 has its own story to tell, and its own points to make. For example, much is made of the human-alien transformation, but it's merely a MacGuffin; a plot device. It is only important because of where it takes our lead character. If you think the film is ripping off The Fly, then either you're not paying attention, or you are missing the point completely. Of both movies. It's like saying Orwell's Animal Farm rips off Disney's Bambi for having talking animals.
The film has a lot to say, and says it. It also has a lot to do, and just gets on with doing it. If you get the subtext, great. If you don't, it doesn't matter because the film has moved on and you won't feel like you're missing anything, anyway.
The pacing is very deliberate. Starting off as a documentary, events are leisurely explained and shown to us, with little commentary or judgement. Even when we are taken out of the documentary context, characters do not suddenly start behaving differently. It's a very deft way of setting an ominous tone. We're waiting for the sting in the tail, even if there may not be one.
For a film with such a tiny budget, not to mention a debut director in Neill Blomkamp, the special effects are flawless. The aliens are clearly CGI creations, but move, communicate and emote better than some of the humans. They are purely there to tell the story, and are far more convincing than a man in suit would be. If you've come purely for an Independence Day-style dogfights or action set-pieces, then you're in for disappointment. That said, there are some amazing shoot-outs and when Blomkamp decides to flex his action muscles, he does indeed have an impressive set of guns. (Sorry.)
Crucially, this is violence with consequence. When Wikus is forced to fire a gun, he is doing so very much against his will- even on a "prawn". We learn that the aliens' technology is incredibly powerful and see its devastating potential- yet always in the hands of humans (the irony of that statement shouldn't be lost on those who've seen the film). The aliens are deliberately insect-like, rather than cute and cuddly- giving us that extra distance to strip them of humanity, should we choose to do so. Ultimately, we judge them more on the way they are treated than the way they behave. And yet it is never over-laboured, it's just there for you to acknowledge or not.
If the film has a flaw, it's the mixture of narrative styles- we jump from documentary to movie narrative without warning- at times you don't even notice, but when you do it can pull you out of the film. However, I was so engrossed by this point I just shrugged it off. Also, there were a lot of one-dimensional characters, particularly the Nigerian gangsters, the members of MNU (the organisation for whom Wikus works), and the largely faceless hordes of aliens. However, this can simply be explained away by the leads' interactions with these characters. There's not really much time for fleshing these characters out, and they're not likely to show their vulnerable sides on the job. You could level this at the actors, an obvious drawback of a star-free vehicle, but surprisingly isn't as much of an issue as you may fear. Plus there's always a guilty pleasure in seeing a cartoon villain finally get their comeuppance.
So there you go. For me, this was a visceral, emotional and thoroughly entertaining experience; something completely unexpected. After less than a month on release, the film currently sits at #44 on the imdb all-time chart. I pity Mr. Blomkamp... how on Earth will he follow that? I, for one, can't wait to find out.
10/10
This one really came out of nowhere. I hadn't even heard of it until I saw the trailer before GI Joe about a month ago. I couldn't work out exactly what the plot was- it looked bombastic and confusing, like Alien Nation meets Transformers, but shot documentary-style.
How wrong I was.
The film simply presents you with facts, documentary-style, about incidents that occurred recently in an area known as District 9. To quote Jim Dale, the facts were these...
Approximately 20 years ago, an alien spaceship appeared over Johannesburg... and that was it. After several months, nothing else had happened. The military eventually managed to get on board and evacuate the contained aliens, keeping them in an area called District 9. The aliens showed no hostility, no friendliness... in fact, no purpose whatsoever. Despite this, 20 years later, local residents are complaining of the NIMBY factor and the aliens (or "prawns" as the less-sympathetic amongst the humans amusingly refer to them) are forced to move on to a smaller, more concentrated area, referred to as District 10. It is the day before this transition that these events take place- partly in documentary-style, but we as viewers also get to see a glimpse of the true story behind the news reports.
The man in charge of the eviction is pen-pushing nepotist Wikus Van De Merwe, played to perfection by newcomer Sharlto Copley. He is a bumbling, amiable man, yet is cheerfully unaware of how casually inhumane he is. This is someone that's going to have to earn your sympathy, but yet seems too harmless to actively dislike- at least until he's given a position of power.
The other character of note is an alien, curiously named Christopher Johnson. Clearly a very different being to most of his fellows, he stands up to his species' mistreatments. Through him, we learn that not all of the aliens are necessarily the unorganised cat food-addicted rabble they appear to be. Friends or foes? The answer should be obvious, but who's going to humour them long enough to find out? There is clearly a very well-considered back story for the aliens here- but, much like the oft-compared Cloverfield, even at the end of the film we are yet to find out what it is. And even in a sequel, it's not certain we need this information. That's not to say we don't want it...
District 9 expertly magpies from existing sci fi lore - a bit of Robocop here, a bit of Aliens there, just a dash of Independence Day... but it's all only on a very superficial level. District 9 has its own story to tell, and its own points to make. For example, much is made of the human-alien transformation, but it's merely a MacGuffin; a plot device. It is only important because of where it takes our lead character. If you think the film is ripping off The Fly, then either you're not paying attention, or you are missing the point completely. Of both movies. It's like saying Orwell's Animal Farm rips off Disney's Bambi for having talking animals.
The film has a lot to say, and says it. It also has a lot to do, and just gets on with doing it. If you get the subtext, great. If you don't, it doesn't matter because the film has moved on and you won't feel like you're missing anything, anyway.
The pacing is very deliberate. Starting off as a documentary, events are leisurely explained and shown to us, with little commentary or judgement. Even when we are taken out of the documentary context, characters do not suddenly start behaving differently. It's a very deft way of setting an ominous tone. We're waiting for the sting in the tail, even if there may not be one.
For a film with such a tiny budget, not to mention a debut director in Neill Blomkamp, the special effects are flawless. The aliens are clearly CGI creations, but move, communicate and emote better than some of the humans. They are purely there to tell the story, and are far more convincing than a man in suit would be. If you've come purely for an Independence Day-style dogfights or action set-pieces, then you're in for disappointment. That said, there are some amazing shoot-outs and when Blomkamp decides to flex his action muscles, he does indeed have an impressive set of guns. (Sorry.)
Crucially, this is violence with consequence. When Wikus is forced to fire a gun, he is doing so very much against his will- even on a "prawn". We learn that the aliens' technology is incredibly powerful and see its devastating potential- yet always in the hands of humans (the irony of that statement shouldn't be lost on those who've seen the film). The aliens are deliberately insect-like, rather than cute and cuddly- giving us that extra distance to strip them of humanity, should we choose to do so. Ultimately, we judge them more on the way they are treated than the way they behave. And yet it is never over-laboured, it's just there for you to acknowledge or not.
If the film has a flaw, it's the mixture of narrative styles- we jump from documentary to movie narrative without warning- at times you don't even notice, but when you do it can pull you out of the film. However, I was so engrossed by this point I just shrugged it off. Also, there were a lot of one-dimensional characters, particularly the Nigerian gangsters, the members of MNU (the organisation for whom Wikus works), and the largely faceless hordes of aliens. However, this can simply be explained away by the leads' interactions with these characters. There's not really much time for fleshing these characters out, and they're not likely to show their vulnerable sides on the job. You could level this at the actors, an obvious drawback of a star-free vehicle, but surprisingly isn't as much of an issue as you may fear. Plus there's always a guilty pleasure in seeing a cartoon villain finally get their comeuppance.
So there you go. For me, this was a visceral, emotional and thoroughly entertaining experience; something completely unexpected. After less than a month on release, the film currently sits at #44 on the imdb all-time chart. I pity Mr. Blomkamp... how on Earth will he follow that? I, for one, can't wait to find out.
10/10
Monday 7 September 2009
The Last House on the Left (2009 remake) - review
As far as slasher/horror/thriller movies go, the original Last House on the Left is a pretty nasty one- not so much for what you see, but for the uncomfortable story presented to you. To this remake's credit, it keeps pretty faithful to that side of things, and as a result, this is an equally uncomfortable watch. Unfortunately the film lets itself down in the Dad (Tony Goldwyn) vs bad guy finale, while the mother (Monica Potter) pretty much just watches hubby getting smashed through paper furniture. A shame, since the couple have easily given the most sympathetic performances up to that point- nice, without overplaying it. That said, I still feel a little tense even now that it's over, and the film must get some credit for that, at least.
7/10
7/10
Hush - review
Like a low-budget, British version of Breakdown, this film certainly works on a suspense level. However, the suspension of disbelief required is more than most would be willing to give. Too many coincidences, conveniently-timed moments and downright nonsensical incidents erase at the film's credibility. The potential is there and it raises some interesting issues- then ignores them, going for the contrived plot where the protagonist just happens to make all the right assumptions.
7/10
7/10
Sunday 6 September 2009
Top Movies of 2009 (so far) - IMHO
1. District 9
2. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
3. Inglourious Basterds
4. Drag Me to Hell
5. The Time Traveler's Wife*
6. Let the Right One In
7. The Wrestler
8. Bolt
9. Frost/Nixon
10. Frozen River
*added September 9th
Potential candidates still to come... Up!, Avatar, Surrogates, Fantastic Mr Fox
Welcome!
This blog will hopefully soon contain various information about movies that I would find interesting.
This may include reviews (my own/others), news, UK/US box office info, release dates, Top 10s etc.
Watch this space!
This may include reviews (my own/others), news, UK/US box office info, release dates, Top 10s etc.
Watch this space!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
