Monday 29 February 2016
Straight Outta Compton Movie Review
Straight Outta Compton (2015)
Written by: Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff (screenplay), S. Leigh Savidge & Alan Wenkus and Andrea Berloff (story)Directed by: F. Gary Gray
Starring: O'Shea Jackson Jr., Corey Hawkins, Jason Mitchell, Paul Giamatti
Rated: R
From Compton, Califorinia, NWA revolutionizes the hip hop and music world with brash lyrics that depict the harsh realities of their lives. The band disbands just as quickly as it rose to super stardom.
Sin City Movie Review
Sin City (2005)
Written by: Frank Miller (graphic novels)
Directed by: Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez, Quentin Tarantino (special guest director)
Starring: Mickey Rourke, Jessica Alba, Benicio Del Toro, Clive Owen, Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Powers Boothe, Rutger Hauer
Rated: R
Intertwining stories of corruption in the fictional Basin City, a hoodlum seeking revenge for a dead prostitute, a truce hanging in the balance between cops and the girls of Old Town, and a cop having to protect a girl once again from the same assailant.
We dive into Sylvester Stallone's '80s filmography towards the end. You don't want to miss it.
One Day Movie Review
One Day (2011)
Written by: David Nicholls (screenplay), David Nicholls (book)
Directed by: Lone Scherfig
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Jim Sturgess, Patricia Clarkson
Rated: PG-13
A series of snapshots on the same day each year chronicling the friendship of Dexter (Jim Sturgess) and Emma (Anne Hathaway).
Also Watched - 11.22.63, Love, Vinyl
Also watched this week 11.22.63, Love, Vinyl.
11.22.63 (2016)
Written by: Bridget Carpenter (developed for television by)
Starring: James Franco, Sarah Gadon, George MacKay
A high school teacher (James Franco) travels back in time to stop the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Love Season 1 (2016)
Created by: Judd Apatow, Lesley Arfin, Paul Rust
Starring: Gillian Jacobs, Paul Rust, Claudia O'Doherty
This Netflix original series is a Judd Apatow comedy about relationships. The show follows Mickey and Gus who just came out of separate relationship and now navigate the world of dating in Los Angeles.
Vinyl Season 1 (2016)
Created by: Mick Jagger, Terence Winter, Rich Cohen, Martin Scorsese
Starring: Bobby Cannavale, Olivia Wilde, Ray Romano, Juno Temple, James Jagger
Richie Finestra (Bobby Cannavale) is a New York record executive in 1973, endeavoring to sign the biggest and best talent.
Amy Movie Review
Amy (2015)
Directed by: Asif Kapadia
Starring: Amy Winehouse, Mitch Winehouse, Mark Ronson
Rated: R
The life of Amy Winehouse depicted through archival footage, music, and interviews.
Selma Movie Review
Selma (2014)
Written by: Paul WebbDirected by: Ava DuVernay
Starring: David Oyelowo , Carmen Ejogo , Tim Roth, Tom Wilkinson, Oprah Winfrey
Rated: PG-13
Plot:
Martin Luther King Jr. led the struggle to secure equal voting rights with a march in Selma, Alabama. Faced with resistance and violence his perseverance ultimately proved successful.
2016 Academy Award Winners
"I'm here at the Academy Awards - otherwise known as the White People's Choice Awards.". Chris Rock was on fire tonight, and used his Oscar opening monologue as a vehicle to address the #OscarsSoWhite controversy. That's exactly what one would have expected and I absolutely loved it.
Jokes aside, Chris's message was clear, black actors must get the same opportunities as white actors, not just once. And this also applies to other minorities as well.
Back to the ceremony, Lady Gaga brought to the stage the abuse survivors, but The Weeknd was the best musical act and had the best original song in my opinion.
"Mad Max: Fury Road" got a love of love, and "The Revenant" almost left high and dry. But without further ado, let's see this years winners and losers.
Best Picture
The Big Short
Bridge of Spies
Brooklyn
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Room
Spotlight
I wanted "The Revenant" or "Mad Max: Fury Road" to win, but it was quite obvious "Spotlight" was going to win because it is the most important film of this year. I'm just glad "The Big Short" didn't win.
Bryan Cranston - Trumbo
Matt Damon - The MartianLeonardo DiCaprio - The Revenant
Leo finally won the damn award, and used his speech to discuss climate change. But first of all he thanked Tom Hardy, how sweet is that? And his moment with Kate? Aww!
Spotlight
I wanted "The Revenant" or "Mad Max: Fury Road" to win, but it was quite obvious "Spotlight" was going to win because it is the most important film of this year. I'm just glad "The Big Short" didn't win.
Best Actor
Bryan Cranston - TrumboMatt Damon - The Martian
Michael Fassbender - Steve Jobs
Eddie Redmayne - The Danish Girl
Eddie Redmayne - The Danish Girl
Leo finally won the damn award, and used his speech to discuss climate change. But first of all he thanked Tom Hardy, how sweet is that? And his moment with Kate? Aww!
Best Actress
Cate Blanchett - Carol
Brie Larson - Room
Jennifer Lawrence - Joy
Charlotte Rampling - 45 Years
Saoirse Ronan - Brooklyn
Brie won as expected and she gave a beautiful speech thanking film festivals for showing the film, and moviegoers for going to see the movie.
What a huge and beautiful surprise! Mark Rylance won over Stallone. I still can't believe it.
Damn! Wouldn't it be just perfect if both Leo and Kate won? Anyway, Alicia deserved it, even though she was not a supporting role. Smart move though, she would have never won over Brie.
Brie won as expected and she gave a beautiful speech thanking film festivals for showing the film, and moviegoers for going to see the movie.
Best Supporting Actor
Christian Bale - The Big Short
Tom Hardy - The Revenant
Mark Ruffalo - Spotlight
Mark Rylance - Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone - Creed
Sylvester Stallone - Creed
What a huge and beautiful surprise! Mark Rylance won over Stallone. I still can't believe it.
Best Supporting Actress
Jennifer Jason Leigh - The Hateful EightRooney Mara - Carol
Rachel McAdams - Spotlight
Alicia Vikander - The Danish Girl
Kate Winslet - Steve Jobs
Damn! Wouldn't it be just perfect if both Leo and Kate won? Anyway, Alicia deserved it, even though she was not a supporting role. Smart move though, she would have never won over Brie.
Best Director
Adam McKay - The Big Short
George Miller - Mad Max: Fury Road
Alejandro G. Iñárritu - The Revenant
Lenny Abrahamson - Room
Tom McCarthy - Spotlight
Two consecutive year, quite impressive.
Best Original Screenplay
Bridge of Spies
Ex Machina
Inside Out
Spotlight
Straight Outta Compton
Wow, this probably was the worst screenplay in the category.
Wow, this probably was the worst screenplay in the category.
Best Adapted Screenplay
The Big Short
Brooklyn
Carol
The Martian
Room
And this was arguably the worst screenplay.
And this was arguably the worst screenplay.
Best Animated Feature
Anomalisa
Boy & the World
Inside Out
Shaun the Sheep Movie
When Marnie Was There
Best Animated Short
Beat Story
Prologue
Sanjay's Super Team
We Can't Live without Cosmos
World of Tomorrow
Best Foreign Language Picture
Embrace of the Serpent (Colombia)
Mustang (France)
Son of Saul (Hungary)
Theeb (Jordan)
A War (Denmark)
Best Documentary Feature
Amy
Cartel Land
The Look of Silence
What Happened, Miss Simone?
Winter on Fire: Ukraine's Fight for Freedom
Best Documentary Short Subject
Body Team 1
Chau, beyond the Lines
Claude Lanzmann: Spectres of the Shoah
A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness
Last Day of Freedom
Best Live-Action Short
Ave Maria
Day One
Everything Will Be Okay (Alles Wird Gut)
Shok
Stutterer
Stutterer
Best Film Editing
The Big Short
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Spotlight
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Best Visual Effects
Ex Machina
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Best Production Design
Bridge of Spies
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
I'm so happy Ennio Morricone won. Time to show some national pride.
Best Makeup & Hairstyling
Mad Max: Fury Road
The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared
The Revenant
Best Costume Design
Carol
Cinderella
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Best Original Score
Bridge of Spies
Carol
The Hateful Eight
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
I'm so happy Ennio Morricone won. Time to show some national pride.
Best Sound Mixing
Bridge of Spies
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Best Sound Editing
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Star Wars: The Force Awakens
Best Cinematography
Carol
The Hateful Eight
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Sicario
Special Mention: Charlize Theron
Best Original Song
Earned It (The Weeknd) - Fifty Shades of Grey
Manta Ray (J. Ralph & Antony) - Racing Extinction
Simple Song #3 (Sumi Jo) - Youth
Til It Happens to You (Lady Gaga) - The Hunting Ground
Writing's on the Wall (Sam Smith) - Spectre
Writing's on the Wall (Sam Smith) - Spectre
Special Mention: Charlize Theron
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
Genre
Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi
Director
William Shatner
Country
USA
Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan, George Takei, Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Laurence Luckinbill, David Warner, George Murdock, Todd Bryant, Spice Williams-Crosby, Charles Cooper Cynthia Gouw
Storyline
Captain Kirk (Williams Shatner) and his crew has to deal with Spock's long-lost half-brother Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill) who hijacks the Enterprise for an obsessive search for God at the center of the galaxy.
Opinion
Spock is too busy trying to understand humans and humour to do all the job so he left the reins of direction to Kirk, who better stick to his job of captain of the Enterprise because he is not a good director.
"Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" unfortunately is another weak odd numbered film.In the first part that sees Kirk, Spock and McCoy camping there is humour, and the influence of the fourth chapter is palpable. This is arguably the best part of the film and the most enjoyable. Then the crew of the Enterprise stumbles across a bad idea, poorly executed that turns into a bad film as one would expect.
While I liked the idea of Spock having a brother brother which is totally different from the other Vulcans - Sybok uses sensibility and passion instead of sense and logic -, I don't get his obssession with finding God. He probably represents the Christian missionary, but I don't see the point in a Star Trek film. And the film doesn't even explain who the fake God was in the end of the film. And the end is just terrible. A cocktail party with the Klingons? Seriously? How about no?
Most of the time the comedy seems forced instead of being natural, especially when Sulu and Chekov were lost and Chekov blows into the communicator to simulate a blizzard; that just wasn't funny.
The badly executed, fake-looking special effect doesn't help either, but that didn't bother me so much. Some of the acting was weak and over the top though, and that did quite bother me.
Sunday 28 February 2016
Vinyl Season 1 Episode 3 Recap
Vinyl (2016-)
Created by: Mick Jagger, Terence Winter, Rich Cohen, Martin Scorsese
Starring: Bobby Cannavale, Olivia Wilde, Ray Romano, Juno Temple, James Jagger
Vinyl is getting better, but it's still cashing in on promises it hasn't fulfilled. It's using tripe to amplify the drama and it's completely unnecessary. This episode felt the leanest, but there's still some fat to trim away. It still hasn't moved into must watch television, but if it keeps improving it might get there. Check out my Vinyl season 1 recaps.
Plot:
Richie Finestra (Bobby Cannavale) is a New York record executive in 1973, endeavoring to sign the biggest and best talent.
Review: Episode 3 Whispered Secrets
I like the theme song other than it's two or three times longer than it should be. It's not dissimilar from the show.
The show is really playing up Richie's drama with his wife. It's not a mistake, but the show is just going a bit too far into her resulting issues. Richie still hasn't told her he isn't selling the company. He tries to avoid her, but that can't last forever. I get the show wants to show us how Richie's action affect others, but it feel forced. She tries to raise money for a fundraiser when Richie won't cut a check. She goes to her friend Andy Warhol to get him to sign a painting. He sees through her charade but signs anyway.
The other annoying plot point that I assume will play a larger and larger role is the murder from the first episode. This show is not a cop drama or cat and mouse game. The murder was unnecessary in the first episode and now it serves as drama. It was done to create drama later and now they are capitalizing. Richie is having flashbacks about it, of course. Corso is pushing for Richie to review his girlfriend's demo tape. Corso mentions the murder as blackmail. Did someone think the script was weak and need an adrenaline shot? Is this going to be a plot point that snakes around the entire season? The show should focus on music.
Richie went to Lester Grimes and wants to release his old records. Lester tells him to walk.This is what I want to see, Richie chasing talent. As much as we've seen Lester, I'm guessing his story is just getting started. He lost out and could have been big in the music industry, but Lester might just discover a new genre of music.
One of Richie's scouts is pushing Vince, the front man of Alice Cooper to go solo. This later did happen, as Vince went solo and adapted the band's name for his solo career. Will the show explore this? It seems odd to include this if they aren't going to. Then again this is what I expected, cameos of artists from that era. Alice Cooper was leading the scout on. Richie spurned them a few years ago.
If ACR is a partnership why does Richie all all the shots? Richie is pushing his ideas on his partners and they just take it. Is it easier to moan and complain than fight? Are they just making the best of a bad situation?
Jamie is still working with one of the developers to transform The Nasty Bits. When Richie walks out on the band, Jamie takes the blame for softening them when it was the developer that did it, and gets them to play something original. Richie likes the original sound.
Corso calls Richie to tell him the body has been found. It's such needless drama. This episode did a good job of getting into what the show should do, but it also had a few unnecessary plot points. It's not lean enough and the murder plot point is just annoying.
Created by: Mick Jagger, Terence Winter, Rich Cohen, Martin Scorsese
Starring: Bobby Cannavale, Olivia Wilde, Ray Romano, Juno Temple, James Jagger
Plot:
Richie Finestra (Bobby Cannavale) is a New York record executive in 1973, endeavoring to sign the biggest and best talent.
Review: Episode 3 Whispered Secrets
I like the theme song other than it's two or three times longer than it should be. It's not dissimilar from the show.
The show is really playing up Richie's drama with his wife. It's not a mistake, but the show is just going a bit too far into her resulting issues. Richie still hasn't told her he isn't selling the company. He tries to avoid her, but that can't last forever. I get the show wants to show us how Richie's action affect others, but it feel forced. She tries to raise money for a fundraiser when Richie won't cut a check. She goes to her friend Andy Warhol to get him to sign a painting. He sees through her charade but signs anyway.
Richie went to Lester Grimes and wants to release his old records. Lester tells him to walk.This is what I want to see, Richie chasing talent. As much as we've seen Lester, I'm guessing his story is just getting started. He lost out and could have been big in the music industry, but Lester might just discover a new genre of music.
One of Richie's scouts is pushing Vince, the front man of Alice Cooper to go solo. This later did happen, as Vince went solo and adapted the band's name for his solo career. Will the show explore this? It seems odd to include this if they aren't going to. Then again this is what I expected, cameos of artists from that era. Alice Cooper was leading the scout on. Richie spurned them a few years ago.
If ACR is a partnership why does Richie all all the shots? Richie is pushing his ideas on his partners and they just take it. Is it easier to moan and complain than fight? Are they just making the best of a bad situation?
And the Oscar Goes to... Winners of the Costume Awards
Tonight's Awards honors the costumes and their designers for all of the films released before the Academy Award for Best Costume was instituted. There were many great and beautiful costumes in the films released between 1930 and 1947 and we are here tonight to recognize the tireless work and effort that went into them and that decades later still bring us delight when we see them on the big (tv) screen whether it's the first time or the 20th time.
Now I know some of you have been waiting for this moment for quite some time so I won't waste any time in announcing the winners.
Drumroll please...
For the year 1930... and the winner is...
Adrian with 71% of the votes for his beautiful gowns for Miss Shearer in The Divorcee
For the year 1931... and the winner is...
Adrian, for the second year in a row for his gowns in Possessed with 57% of the votes
For the year 1932... and the winner is...
Adrian - Grand Hotel - 55%
For the year 1933... and the winner is...
Adrian - Dinner at Eight - 62%
For the year 1934... and the winner is...
Dolly Tree - The Thin Man - 44% (barely won over Cleopatra)
For the year 1935... and the winner is...
Milo Anderson - Captain Blood - 54%
Adrian - Camille - 50%
For the year 1937... and the winner is...
Adrian - Maytime - 44%
For the year 1938... and the winner is...
Milo Anderson - The Adventures of Robin Hood - 44%
For the year 1939... and the winner is...
Walter Plunkett - Gone With the Wind - 87% (the other 12% went to The Wizard of Oz)
For the year 1940... and the winner is...
Adrian & Gile Steele (mens) - Pride and Prejudice - 50%
For the year 1941... and the winner is...
Adian - Ziegfeld Girl barely won over Edith Head's The Lady Eve with 57% (Head - 42%)
For the year 1942... and the winner is...
Orry-Kelly - Now, Voyager - 50%
For the year 1943... and the winner is...
Gile Steele (Supervised by Irene) - Du Barry was a Lady - 55%
For the year 1944... and the winner is...
Irene Sharaff - Meet Me in St. Louis - 62%
For the year 1945... and the winner is...
Leah Rhodes - Saratoga Trunk - 42%
For the year 1946... and the winner is...
A tie between Irene's The Postman Always Rings Twice & Jean Lewis' Gilda, both with 30%
For the year 1947... and the winner is...
Milo Anderson (Marjorie Best) - Life With Father - 62%
Sidney Poitier & Denzel Washington: Oscar Legends
I was watching some old Oscar videos on YouTube and I wanted to share these three with you. The first is Sidney Poitier's win at the 1964 Oscars for his role in Lilies of the Field. I love presenter Anne Bancroft's reaction.
The second is Denzel Washington presenting Sidney Poitier with an Honorary Oscar at the 2002 Awards.
The third is Denzel Washington's second Oscar win, also at the 2002 Awards and his first Oscar in the Best Actor Category for Training Day. Why I'm sharing it? It has Sidney Poitier in it and Julia Robert's reaction is pretty much the same as Anne Bancroft's.
The second is Denzel Washington presenting Sidney Poitier with an Honorary Oscar at the 2002 Awards.
The third is Denzel Washington's second Oscar win, also at the 2002 Awards and his first Oscar in the Best Actor Category for Training Day. Why I'm sharing it? It has Sidney Poitier in it and Julia Robert's reaction is pretty much the same as Anne Bancroft's.
THE B-LIST: 6 CATEGORIES THE OSCARS OVERLOOKED IN 2015
Well, the Oscars are here and I’ve had my say on the Best Picture nominees. As usual, though, I can’t help but feel the Academy’s list is lacking in the low budget department. We’ve done this before, so you know it works. Since the Academy Awards tend to ignore the types of movies we watch around these parts, we’re going to hand out some awards of our in categories that the Oscars overlooked.
BEST MOVIE STARRING OSCAR ISSAC AND DOHMNALL GLEESON THAT WASN’T STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS
EX MACHINA
Actually, all kidding aside, Ex Machina is the probably the best pure science fiction film of 2015 (Star Wars is a space opera, you know). It’s actually up for best original screenplay at this year’s Oscars, but deserves more recognition in other areas, especially Oscar Isaac’s turn as the off-kilter genius who has possibly created the world’s first self aware artificial intelligence. Yes, it’s a standard man meddling in God’s territory set-up, but it is never anything but compelling. Also, there’s an eerie scene in which Issac spontaneously breaks into dance that will stick with you for some time to come. Really, you just can’t beat a movie that has all the brains and all the moves.
BEST MOVIE YOU’VE PROBABLY HEARD ABOUT BUT DIDN’T THINK YOU WANTED TO SEE
IT FOLLOWS
As long as we’re talking about 2015’s best, we may as well mention its finest horror movie as well. Not everyone is going to agree with that assessment, of course, but for fans of intelligently written, truly creepy slow burns peopled with characters who are actually likeable, It Follows has to be at the top of the list. It portrays a group of teenagers toying with adulthood in a world in which no functioning grown-ups seem to be around to help guide them who end up getting stalked by a supernatural boogie man as a consequence of their actions. Yep, might just be some social commentary going on there. Plus, the movie gets bonus points for its fantastic retro-80s score.
BEST MOVIE YOU’D SWEAR WAS MADE IN THE 1980s
TURBO KID
Speaking of the 1980s… while Kung Fury is hands down 2015’s best parody of 80s sci-fi action movies, it doesn’t actually feel like it was made during that decade. Turbo Kid, on the other hand, does. It’s cheap looking, drags in parts like a true Mad Max ripoff, and most important, it has Michael Ironsides as the bad guy! Now, because it’s a feature length film, Turbo Kid can’t really sustain the concentrated level of insanity Kung Fury does over its brief 30 minute running time. Still, with characters like Skeletron and the completely adorable Apple, Turbo Kid is just plain old goofy fun just like the kind you used to find on the shelves of your favorite mom and pop video store. It ain’t deep, but there’s nothing in the Catechism that says everything has to be.
BEST MOVIE THAT ISN’T AT ALL WHAT YOU PROBABLY THINK IT IS
THE FINAL GIRLS
With all the 1980s parodies and tributes released in 2015 (seriously, this list hardly scratches the surface), it’s easy to see why someone might look at the promo art for The Final Girls and think, “No thanks, I’ve had enough.” But despite the fact that it looks like just another slasher film full of nudity and gore (of which it surprisingly has neither), The Final Girls is actually something a little bit different. This story of a teenager named Max who, along with some of her friends, gets magically transported into an old 1980s slasher movie they were watching is often funny and occasionally touching. That last bit stems from the fact that one of the victims in “Camp Bloodbath” was portrayed by Max’s late mother, raising the possibility that Max might just be able to find a way to get her mom back. If she can find a way to subvert all of those old slasher clichés, that is. This one’s a hidden gem.
BEST MOVIE ABOUT COWBOYS THAT DIDN’T GET HYPED OUT THE WAZOO
BONE TOMAHAWK
While we’re on the subject of hidden gems, we have to discuss Bone Tomahawk, the movie Kurt Russell actually grew that mustache for. Thanks to their admittedly beautiful cinematography and their high profile directors, The Hateful Eight and The Revenant got all of Oscar’s attention this year as far as westerns are concerned. But truthfully, this tale of a disparate group of cowboys who put aside their differences in order to try and rescue a woman from a vicious tribe of cannibals is a better movie than both of them. The characters are more finely drawn than in The Revenant (sorry, it’s true) and, while the mid-section does involve a lot of talking, the movie knows when to have its characters shut up (unlike, say, The Hateful Eight). This is the type of film that’s going to develop a cult following over the years and it deserves it, mustache and all.
BEST MOVIE ABOUT VAMPIRE ROOMMATES YOU NEVER KNEW YOU WANTED
WHAT WE DO IN THE SHAODWS
And finally we have What We Do In The Shadows, a movie that already has its cult firmly in place. Filmed in a mock-umentary style, What We Do In The Shadows follows a small clan of vampires as they try to adjust to the modern world while simultaneously dealing with the trials and tribulations that come with living in the same house as your buddies. Yes, apparently vampires argue over whose turn it is to do the dishes just like we do. The concept sounds like it would work better as a five minute sketch on SNL, but it manages to stay fresh all the way through, especially as the vamps make friends with a new human buddy and get drawn into a rivalry with a local group of werewolves who have problems of their own. Definitely worth sinking your teeth into.
And that’s about it for this year’s missing Oscar categories. Don’t feel too bad for the films on this list, though. Like many a good Christian, these movies may never receive the wide acclaim that comes with red carpets and gold statues, but having examined them, we know their worth. And in the years to come, as most of this year’s Best Picture nominees gather dust on video shelves, these movies will come into their final rewards and earn the viewers they so richly deserve.
Two More New eBook Collections: SUPERHERO CINEMA and GEEK STREAK
You have seen yesterday that I've begun rolling out my new series of MovieBob Anthology eBooks, which collect the best of my written work from this blog, The Escapist and elsewhere into a series of individually-themed volumes. Yesterday saw MOVIEBOB'S REEL BREAKDOWN drop, which collected the best of my written (read: non-Escape to The Movies) film reviews. Today, I'm proud to make available two new volumes: MOVIEBOB'S SUPERHERO CINEMA and MOVIEBOB'S GEEK STREAK; which collect a selection of non-review features on comic book movies and "geek culture," respectively.
Digital-storefront-specific versions are pending, but you can buy all three in epub-format (which works on almost all devices and desktops) directly from Lulu NOW by clicking their respective titles above. Hit the jump for more info...
There's a lot to recommend in SUPERHERO CINEMA, which surprised me as I thought I'd have to forego republishing a lot of such material because so much of it was timestamped to various stages of development for now-completed films. But quite a bit turned out to be (largely) evergreen and/or worth preserving for posterity's sake, including "look ahead" pieces for Dark Knight Rises, Spider-Man and the broader MCU itself and just-for-fun stuff like a comprehensive look at who can/cannot lift Thor's hammer and why.
What I'm happiest to include in this volume are the retrospectives of the various pre-MCU Marvel TV attempts; including full writeups on The Incredible Hulk, the three Hulk TV movies, the failed attempts at Captain America and Doctor Strange, Generation X, the live-action Spiderman, Japanese Spider-Man, Hasselhoff as Nick Fury and four whole decades of Marvel-based cartoons.
GEEK STREAK, meanwhile, contains a great number of the most-requested "thinkpiece"-style work I've published over the years. If you enjoyed the "Re-Tales" series (possibly my favorite thing in the Anthology, period) from the old Intermission column, or "Bat-Mitt Vs. Obamavengers" from this blog, or "I May Have Been Wrong About Maleficent," or my introduction to the philosophy of C.S. Lewis, or "On Geek Privilege," those are all in here - finally yours to own directly from the author.
So is more just-for-fun stuff like my Renaissance Fair travelogue and my two-part report on the behind-the-scenes work of guest-paneling on the sci-fi/fantasy convention circuit. "The 50 Most Boring Opinions in Geek Culture" are in here, too, as in "The Movie Nerd Bible" folks have frequently requested links to. This is some of my more divisive work, I've found, but I'm really proud of this volume and I hope you enjoy it.
Price is $4.00 US each for all three, incidentally, and I'm expecting that the remaining 5-6 volumes will be similarly priced. Could I have charged more? Yes, but I marked-down of my own volitition
Finally, just to address some questions about the format: Right now, these are all available directly for self-publishing site Lulu in ".epub" format, which is compatible with most tablets, readers, etc and also with desktops. Device-specific versions for certain digital storefronts like Kindle and Nook are pending, but I have no control over how long that will take given their approval process. Obviously, you're free to buy or not buy in any format you want; but if it makes a difference to anyone (and, sincerely, bless you if it does) buying the .epub directly from Lulu is significantly better for my bottom line. So there's that.
Depending on how things go over the next few days, the volumes-yet-to-come will likely include a volume of television writing, reviews of classic films and volume devoted entirely to video-games - including a selection of early Game OverThinker transcripts and several of the original GamerGate essays. So look out for those. Once I get these all out, I'm planning to put together a YouTube campaign laying them out in more lively detail. As for printed copies? Ideally, I want to make them - at least for the 'Con circuit so I have more things to sell and sign; but that's an expensive undertaking and I need to let these ebooks play out for awhile so I can gauge interest and costs.
I'm also looking at how this does as a model for how to proceed with some plans to potentially enter the fiction-writing realm, so keep an eye out for that as well :)
P.S. Have you been following my new gig at ScreenRant? If not, you may enjoy these three new editorials:
Why R-Rated Batman V Superman Could Be Bad News For Superhero Movies
Let's Give Stan Lee An Honorary Academy Award
Will Luke Cage Be Marvel's Most Political Show Yet?
Digital-storefront-specific versions are pending, but you can buy all three in epub-format (which works on almost all devices and desktops) directly from Lulu NOW by clicking their respective titles above. Hit the jump for more info...
What I'm happiest to include in this volume are the retrospectives of the various pre-MCU Marvel TV attempts; including full writeups on The Incredible Hulk, the three Hulk TV movies, the failed attempts at Captain America and Doctor Strange, Generation X, the live-action Spiderman, Japanese Spider-Man, Hasselhoff as Nick Fury and four whole decades of Marvel-based cartoons.
So is more just-for-fun stuff like my Renaissance Fair travelogue and my two-part report on the behind-the-scenes work of guest-paneling on the sci-fi/fantasy convention circuit. "The 50 Most Boring Opinions in Geek Culture" are in here, too, as in "The Movie Nerd Bible" folks have frequently requested links to. This is some of my more divisive work, I've found, but I'm really proud of this volume and I hope you enjoy it.
Price is $4.00 US each for all three, incidentally, and I'm expecting that the remaining 5-6 volumes will be similarly priced. Could I have charged more? Yes, but I marked-down of my own volitition
Finally, just to address some questions about the format: Right now, these are all available directly for self-publishing site Lulu in ".epub" format, which is compatible with most tablets, readers, etc and also with desktops. Device-specific versions for certain digital storefronts like Kindle and Nook are pending, but I have no control over how long that will take given their approval process. Obviously, you're free to buy or not buy in any format you want; but if it makes a difference to anyone (and, sincerely, bless you if it does) buying the .epub directly from Lulu is significantly better for my bottom line. So there's that.
Depending on how things go over the next few days, the volumes-yet-to-come will likely include a volume of television writing, reviews of classic films and volume devoted entirely to video-games - including a selection of early Game OverThinker transcripts and several of the original GamerGate essays. So look out for those. Once I get these all out, I'm planning to put together a YouTube campaign laying them out in more lively detail. As for printed copies? Ideally, I want to make them - at least for the 'Con circuit so I have more things to sell and sign; but that's an expensive undertaking and I need to let these ebooks play out for awhile so I can gauge interest and costs.
I'm also looking at how this does as a model for how to proceed with some plans to potentially enter the fiction-writing realm, so keep an eye out for that as well :)
P.S. Have you been following my new gig at ScreenRant? If not, you may enjoy these three new editorials:
Why R-Rated Batman V Superman Could Be Bad News For Superhero Movies
Let's Give Stan Lee An Honorary Academy Award
Will Luke Cage Be Marvel's Most Political Show Yet?
9 (2009)
Genre
Animation | Action | Adventure
Director
Shane Acker
Country
USA
Voice Cast
Elijah Wood, Fred Tatasciore, Jennifer Connelly, Crispin Glover, John C. Reilly, Martin Landau, Christopher Plummer, Alan Oppenheimer, Tom Kane, Helen Wilson
Storyline
In a world destroyed in a war between man and machine, a hand-stitched doll with the number 9 on its back (Elijah Wood) comes to life, and with the help of others like him he must save humanity.
Visually appealing though not providing a lot of food for thoughts, "9" is a breath of fresh air in terms of dystopian fiction and animation.
Shane Acker brought to the big screen a tale about the classical conflict between humans and machines, following "WALL·E" footprints, and borrowing maybe a little too much from other apocalyptic films like the abovementioned and "Terminator", but in the right way.
Still the film is not a nine. It suffers from a straightforward plot which ends exactly how one would expect it to, there aren't any real twists, or anything in the plot that makes it really engaging. Also there isn't a real explanation of what is going on. The characters had a lot of potential, all wasted though, and there is no character development.
The film also suffers from some dead moments and a swinging pace - very fast paced moments followed by long narrative pauses.
However, the animation, which is basically the reason I watched the film in the first place, is stunning. The scenery and landscapes are beautifully crafted, and although it is computer generated it really resembles the style of Tim Burton's stop-motion animation.
Overall it is quite enjoyable, and it's definitely worth checking out for the visuals.
Opinion
Back in 2005 a young Shane Acker made a short film that was nominated for an Oscar. Four years later, thanks to creative genius Tim Burton and Timur Bekmambetov, he was able to make an animated feature length out of it, and it's quite good.Visually appealing though not providing a lot of food for thoughts, "9" is a breath of fresh air in terms of dystopian fiction and animation.
Shane Acker brought to the big screen a tale about the classical conflict between humans and machines, following "WALL·E" footprints, and borrowing maybe a little too much from other apocalyptic films like the abovementioned and "Terminator", but in the right way.Still the film is not a nine. It suffers from a straightforward plot which ends exactly how one would expect it to, there aren't any real twists, or anything in the plot that makes it really engaging. Also there isn't a real explanation of what is going on. The characters had a lot of potential, all wasted though, and there is no character development.
The film also suffers from some dead moments and a swinging pace - very fast paced moments followed by long narrative pauses.
However, the animation, which is basically the reason I watched the film in the first place, is stunning. The scenery and landscapes are beautifully crafted, and although it is computer generated it really resembles the style of Tim Burton's stop-motion animation.
Overall it is quite enjoyable, and it's definitely worth checking out for the visuals.
Saturday 27 February 2016
The Weekly Watch Volume 84
This week I watched Chi-Raq, What We Do in the Shadows, 99 Homes, Z, Heavenly Creatures.
I watch movies every week and then write down my thoughts. Read my previous reviews!
My rating is simple, Watch It, It Depends, Skip it.
Chi-Raq (2015)
Watch Chi-Raq
Written by: Kevin Willmott and Spike Lee (written by), Aristophanes (play)
Directed by: Spike Lee
Starring: Nick Cannon , Teyonah Parris , Wesley Snipes, John Cusack, Angela Bassett, Samuel L. Jackson
Rated: R
Plot:
Based on an Aristophanes play and set in modern day Chicago, Lysistrata unites women worldwide to end the violence by committing to temporary celibacy.
Verdict:
Chi-Raq often feels like a stage play or musical due to the sing song delivery of rhyming lines, contrasting with the over the top but wholly serious performances. It explores systemic issues that contribute to violence, but the tone of the film often overshadows the message. Women unite and abstain from sex until their men agree to end the violence. It's an absurd situation. Despite tending to be more absurd than enlightening, I enjoyed it.
Watch it.
Review:
Nick Cannon is rapper Chi-raq. It's difficult to disassociate Cannon from his previous roles, but he did a good job in this. Snipes was over the top and Jackson felt like just a box to tick.
Jackson's role was to deliver exposition, but it never felt necessary, instead slowing the pace.
The rhyming couplets throughout the movie can be distracting and often feel forced. Some of the rhyming words don't actual rhyme. The dialog is sometimes clever, but often bad too.
It's based on a play, but the style takes away from the message. It's a great concept of transposing the play to modern day Chi-Raq and gang violence. Lysistrata devises a plan to stop gang violence after a stray bullet kills a child.
She creates a worldwide movement, but it's hard to find that kind of solidarity believable because someone always relents. In Chi-Raq, you just have to accept it.
Cusack delivers an impassioned speech about the systemic and community issues. What allows for death and destruction in the community?
The scale and scope of Lysistrata's plan is comical exaggeration which obscures the severity of the issues the movie is trying investigate. The government's plan to stop the strikes is called "Hot and Bothered." I think the comical moments are going to cause people to remember this as comedic exaggeration and miss what this movie is trying to do, at least what I think it's trying to do.
Lysistrata organizes the women, but her role as powerful is derived from treating women as sex objects. Her power is withholding sex.
While it's become more prominent with how many movies treat female characters as nothing more than a sex companion for the male lead, it seems weird this movie blatantly ignores that issue. It's female characters are one note, but then so are the male characters.
What We Do in the Shadows (2014)
Watch What We Do in the Shadows
Written by: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi
Directed by: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi
Starring: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi, Jonny Brugh, Cori Gonzalez-Macuer
Rated: R
Plot:
Four vampires sharing a flat in the modern world leads to tension, comedy... and death.
Verdict:
What We Do in the Shadows is understated and hilarious. It treats vampires with such banality. Their conflict is getting into the clubs and cleaning the house. This could easily be a cult classic, nearly every line is quotable often playing off words. It doesn't rely on shock or gross out humor. It's legitimately funny. One of the funniest movies I've seen in a while, and one I've been quoting for a few days
Watch it.
Review:
I was wary of the faux documentary style of shooting. but they use it to great effect. Its a great concept, showing modern day vampires in common situations. There is a lot of clever dialog that might go right over your head. It deals with immortality, love, human friends, and even were wolves.
They don't show up in mirrors, but wouldn't their clothes show? How are their clothes invisible?
They have difficulty clubbing because they have to be invited in, per vampire code. The vampire bar is dead, ha. No one is there. I love how it treats vampires with such banality. It makes them absolutely hilarious as they try to cope.
Vlago is on a date and brings a girl back to the flat. He's putting down newspapers and towels for the impending mess. After the date he states, while covered in blood, "I hit a main artery. It's a bit of a mess there. On the upside I think she had a good time."
They look like middle aged guys, but they're from the middle ages. Modern society is completely foreign to them. They have to rely on an assistant to get them 'food' and interact with the world on their behalf. As powerful as they are, there are downsides.
When their assistant brings two of her friends for dinner, one of them is turned into a vampire. He's able to update the vampires with televisions, computers, and phones. They watch a video on Youtube of a sunrise.
The movie does an excellent job of setting up scenes and utilizing vampire powers as part of the joke. When the cops come to inspect the house, Vlago has to hypnotize them, though he admits his power isn't very good. It's a standout sequence. The movie sets up multiple jokes and delivers the pay offs. It's very smart.
99 Homes (2015)
Watch 99 Homes
Written by: Ramin Bahrani (story) & Ramin Bahrani (writer) and Amir Naderi (writer) & Bahareh Azimi (story)
Directed by: Ramin Bahrani
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Michael Shannon, Laura Dern
Rated: R
Plot:
After being evicted from his home, Dennis Nash begins working for the real estate broker that evicted him.
Verdict:
99 Homes has strong performances. Michael Shannon is at his best when playing an aloof, despicable character like Rick Carver. Andrew Garfield does a good job of playing the sympathetic single father Dennis Nash who will do anything to get his house back. That includes working for and becoming an apprentice to the man that evicted him.
Do you help people or do you kick them out when they've violated the law and not paid back a loan, in essence stealing? That's the main question, though the story adds a few layers of deceit and treachery. While it goes too far in making Rick Carver cartoon evil, there are a number of intense scenes that stand out. The ending was a bit over the top, though in line with the themes of the movie. I enjoyed the story and performances.
Watch it.
Review:
This movie puts a face on the people losing their homes and the ones doing the taking. The two aren't so far apart.
99 Homes grabs you from the start with Rick Carver (Michael Shannon) at a suicide crime scene, though thoroughly disinterested. He's a wheeling and dealing real estate broker. He just saw the man alive and wonders if it was the pizza toppings that led the man to commit suicide. You wonder if Carver was involved in the crime scene as he's on the phone telling an associate to cut off power and water to force someone to sell their house. He's unscrupulous, but is he a murderer?
Dennis Nash (Andrew Garfield) is a single father construction worker facing foreclosure on his childhood home that he shares with his mother (Laura Dern). The court states he has thirty days to pay the back what he owes or he loses the house. The very next day Rick Carver evicts him.
It's a dramatic scene with the music underscoring their frustration. You feel bad for Nash as he's told he is now trespassing in what he still considers his home. Just the day before he caught a break and was trying to figure out how to gather the money. He's bewildered as cops push him out the door.
Nash needs money, and he reluctantly takes a job from Carver to remove feces from a foreclosed house. The joke wasn't lost on me. Nash has hit rock bottom as he now shovels crap.
Why did Carver take Nash under his wing? I wondered if he sensed someone vulnerable and just wanted to exploit him.
Carver possess no empathy as he kicks people out on the street, now with Nash at his side. It's legal, but it doesn't make it easier to accept. Carver is also scamming the government. He removes heat pumps and appliances from foreclosed homes just to sell them back. The government compensates the banks to make foreclosed homes sale ready. The movie makes a point to make Carver completely unlikable. Thankfully through Nash, it shows that the guy evicting you isn't always bad. While Nash joins the scam, he's doing everything he can to put a roof over his son's head. It doesn't make it right, but at least we see his reasons.
When Nash delivers his first eviction, Garfield does a great job of acting tormented and torn. He's repeating what he heard when he was evicted. You wonder if he'll break down or stop. He's ashamed to admit to his family what he's doing. He's living a good life, and he can finally afford to buy his son a birthday present.
Nash has to deliver a forged document to the court to settle a foreclosure dispute. Nash wants the money, but doesn't want to sabotage a human being. Nash was upset about evicting people, but it was within legal boundaries. Now he has to cross that line.
The finale goes big instead of going home. It's easy to hate Carver. He's the e-cig smoking, Range Rover driving jerk the movie continually pushes us to hate, but we watch as Nash follows in his footsteps. Nash goes from joining the scams because he needs the money, to becoming greedy. Nash has to confront his actions in the last scene. We don't know the repercussions as it's left open. I'm willing to bet that Carver gets out of it. He's just slimy enough that I don't think anything would stick to him.
Z (1969)
Watch Z
Written by: Vasilis Vasilikos (novel), Jorge Semprun
Directed by: Costa-Gavras
Starring: Yves Montand , Irene Papas , Jean-Louis Trintignant
Rated: --
Plot:
When a Greek politician dies, the state rules it an accident, but the autopsy rules it murder. It's up the investigating magistrate to determine what happened.
Verdict:
The mystery isn't who did what, but how high the cover up goes and it it will be revealed. Flashbacks are woven into the narrative seamlessly, no two people seeing the same thing. Any witnesses that corroborate the murder claim suffer swift 'accidents.' It's a tense thriller that recounts actual events. It's a subtitled foreign film, and I feel like I need to watch it again to better understand it.
It depends.
Review:
This political thriller is set in Greece. A pacifist group attempting to hold a rally is attacked. The group is expected to win the next election and the police state in power oppose them. The calls for peace beget violence from the police state. The police state hires goons to attack the politician, though they make it look like a car hit the politician. How can those that wish for peace triumph against open violence?
The film slips in and out of small memories that bolster the characters. It depicts simple actions like a phone ringing or even an embrace triggering painful memories.
We see from the start that the ruling party ordered the attack and is now covering it up, though the investigator is unaware. The investigator catches a break when the hospital autopsy reveals the politician was murdered. Witnesses that step forward are attacked.
The ruling party deems anyone that opposes them an enemy and a communist. The investigator is able to indict military officers, but will the truth be revealed?
The ending is not happy. Weeks before the election the military seizes control and exonerates their men, among other atrocities.
The movie had far reaching consequences. Those that worked on it were black listed. Even FBI director J. Edgar Hoover stated that anyone who watched the film wasn't a true American.
I don't know if it's the presentation or the subtitles, but it wasn't as exciting as I hoped it would be. While the movie at large was a big deal, I felt removed from the action
Heavenly Creatures (1994)
Watch Heavenly Creatures
Written by: Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson (screenplay)
Directed by: Peter Jackson
Starring: Melanie Lynskey, Kate Winslet, Sarah Peirse
Rated: R
Plot:
Two teenagers form a friendship that turns obsessive and overly-dependent.
Verdict:
This movie starts as a slice of life genre with two outcast teenagers bonding, but then it becomes bonkers. Peter Jackson does a great job of capturing that madness. It's based on a true story and both actresses do a great job. If you're interested in early Jackson and Winslet work, this is it. Lynskey had a recurring role in Two and a Half Men. It's an interesting story and well made, but I can't find an anchor point. I don't get the why, other than some people are delusional and crazy.
It depends.
Review:
This movie is bonkers. You get a hint with the opening Pauline and Juliet (Lynskey and Winslet) run through the woods screaming, drenched in blood. Then it cuts to a classroom and I'm left wondering what I just saw. It is the trope of showing the end first which I can't stand. It's cheap storytelling, but at least in this instance it left me bewildered, which is better than revealing the entire ending.
The story is about two high school girls who become friends. This is based on a true story, but if it wasn't I would have to question the sanity of Pauline. If this were a different movie I could argue Juliet is her imaginary friend since Juliet is some sort of genius. She can do everything expertly and knows more than her teachers. From the top the movie stated it's viewpoint is Pauline's as told from her diary. Juliet could be how Pauline saw her, the events could be fictitious as Pauline's grasp on reality is tenuous at best.
The girls are highly imaginative, creating this fantasy world of kings and queens. For high school girls, it felt off. They get really involved in these stories and even experience a shared hallucination. The hallucination was a crazy left turn. As I learn more about the girls, the crazier they and the movie becomes, working in tandem. We go deeper down the rabbit hole and I question where reality begins and ends. Were both girls mad or did Pauline turn Juliet. Our narrator is unreliable because she's certifiable. Are they friends, lovers, or something else entirely?
Their bond is completely unhealthy and they begin plotting ways to stop their parents from separating them. I won' t spoil the ending, but title cards inform us the girls went to jail and a stipulation of their release was that they would never contact each other.
Jackson does a great job directing. The movie maintains a manic level of energy that intensifies as reality slips away and madness descends. There is a lot of CGI work that often looks bad. Even as old as this movie is, Jurassic Park came out a year earlier and it's a world of difference, though the budget difference is huge.
I watch movies every week and then write down my thoughts. Read my previous reviews!
My rating is simple, Watch It, It Depends, Skip it.
 |
| Chi-Raq - It explores serious issues, overshadowed by a campy setting. |
Watch Chi-Raq
Written by: Kevin Willmott and Spike Lee (written by), Aristophanes (play)
Directed by: Spike Lee
Starring: Nick Cannon , Teyonah Parris , Wesley Snipes, John Cusack, Angela Bassett, Samuel L. Jackson
Rated: R
Plot:
Based on an Aristophanes play and set in modern day Chicago, Lysistrata unites women worldwide to end the violence by committing to temporary celibacy.
Verdict:
Chi-Raq often feels like a stage play or musical due to the sing song delivery of rhyming lines, contrasting with the over the top but wholly serious performances. It explores systemic issues that contribute to violence, but the tone of the film often overshadows the message. Women unite and abstain from sex until their men agree to end the violence. It's an absurd situation. Despite tending to be more absurd than enlightening, I enjoyed it.
Watch it.
Review:
Nick Cannon is rapper Chi-raq. It's difficult to disassociate Cannon from his previous roles, but he did a good job in this. Snipes was over the top and Jackson felt like just a box to tick.
Jackson's role was to deliver exposition, but it never felt necessary, instead slowing the pace.
The rhyming couplets throughout the movie can be distracting and often feel forced. Some of the rhyming words don't actual rhyme. The dialog is sometimes clever, but often bad too.
It's based on a play, but the style takes away from the message. It's a great concept of transposing the play to modern day Chi-Raq and gang violence. Lysistrata devises a plan to stop gang violence after a stray bullet kills a child.
She creates a worldwide movement, but it's hard to find that kind of solidarity believable because someone always relents. In Chi-Raq, you just have to accept it.
Cusack delivers an impassioned speech about the systemic and community issues. What allows for death and destruction in the community?
The scale and scope of Lysistrata's plan is comical exaggeration which obscures the severity of the issues the movie is trying investigate. The government's plan to stop the strikes is called "Hot and Bothered." I think the comical moments are going to cause people to remember this as comedic exaggeration and miss what this movie is trying to do, at least what I think it's trying to do.
Lysistrata organizes the women, but her role as powerful is derived from treating women as sex objects. Her power is withholding sex.
While it's become more prominent with how many movies treat female characters as nothing more than a sex companion for the male lead, it seems weird this movie blatantly ignores that issue. It's female characters are one note, but then so are the male characters.
 |
| What We Do in the Shadows - Subtle, clever, hilarious. |
Watch What We Do in the Shadows
Written by: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi
Directed by: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi
Starring: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi, Jonny Brugh, Cori Gonzalez-Macuer
Rated: R
Plot:
Four vampires sharing a flat in the modern world leads to tension, comedy... and death.
Verdict:
What We Do in the Shadows is understated and hilarious. It treats vampires with such banality. Their conflict is getting into the clubs and cleaning the house. This could easily be a cult classic, nearly every line is quotable often playing off words. It doesn't rely on shock or gross out humor. It's legitimately funny. One of the funniest movies I've seen in a while, and one I've been quoting for a few days
Watch it.
Review:
I was wary of the faux documentary style of shooting. but they use it to great effect. Its a great concept, showing modern day vampires in common situations. There is a lot of clever dialog that might go right over your head. It deals with immortality, love, human friends, and even were wolves.
They don't show up in mirrors, but wouldn't their clothes show? How are their clothes invisible?
They have difficulty clubbing because they have to be invited in, per vampire code. The vampire bar is dead, ha. No one is there. I love how it treats vampires with such banality. It makes them absolutely hilarious as they try to cope.
Vlago is on a date and brings a girl back to the flat. He's putting down newspapers and towels for the impending mess. After the date he states, while covered in blood, "I hit a main artery. It's a bit of a mess there. On the upside I think she had a good time."
They look like middle aged guys, but they're from the middle ages. Modern society is completely foreign to them. They have to rely on an assistant to get them 'food' and interact with the world on their behalf. As powerful as they are, there are downsides.
When their assistant brings two of her friends for dinner, one of them is turned into a vampire. He's able to update the vampires with televisions, computers, and phones. They watch a video on Youtube of a sunrise.
The movie does an excellent job of setting up scenes and utilizing vampire powers as part of the joke. When the cops come to inspect the house, Vlago has to hypnotize them, though he admits his power isn't very good. It's a standout sequence. The movie sets up multiple jokes and delivers the pay offs. It's very smart.
 |
| 99 Homes - Foreclosure isn't fun for those receiving. |
Watch 99 Homes
Written by: Ramin Bahrani (story) & Ramin Bahrani (writer) and Amir Naderi (writer) & Bahareh Azimi (story)
Directed by: Ramin Bahrani
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Michael Shannon, Laura Dern
Rated: R
Plot:
After being evicted from his home, Dennis Nash begins working for the real estate broker that evicted him.
Verdict:
99 Homes has strong performances. Michael Shannon is at his best when playing an aloof, despicable character like Rick Carver. Andrew Garfield does a good job of playing the sympathetic single father Dennis Nash who will do anything to get his house back. That includes working for and becoming an apprentice to the man that evicted him.
Do you help people or do you kick them out when they've violated the law and not paid back a loan, in essence stealing? That's the main question, though the story adds a few layers of deceit and treachery. While it goes too far in making Rick Carver cartoon evil, there are a number of intense scenes that stand out. The ending was a bit over the top, though in line with the themes of the movie. I enjoyed the story and performances.
Watch it.
Review:
This movie puts a face on the people losing their homes and the ones doing the taking. The two aren't so far apart.
99 Homes grabs you from the start with Rick Carver (Michael Shannon) at a suicide crime scene, though thoroughly disinterested. He's a wheeling and dealing real estate broker. He just saw the man alive and wonders if it was the pizza toppings that led the man to commit suicide. You wonder if Carver was involved in the crime scene as he's on the phone telling an associate to cut off power and water to force someone to sell their house. He's unscrupulous, but is he a murderer?
Dennis Nash (Andrew Garfield) is a single father construction worker facing foreclosure on his childhood home that he shares with his mother (Laura Dern). The court states he has thirty days to pay the back what he owes or he loses the house. The very next day Rick Carver evicts him.
It's a dramatic scene with the music underscoring their frustration. You feel bad for Nash as he's told he is now trespassing in what he still considers his home. Just the day before he caught a break and was trying to figure out how to gather the money. He's bewildered as cops push him out the door.
Nash needs money, and he reluctantly takes a job from Carver to remove feces from a foreclosed house. The joke wasn't lost on me. Nash has hit rock bottom as he now shovels crap.
Why did Carver take Nash under his wing? I wondered if he sensed someone vulnerable and just wanted to exploit him.
Carver possess no empathy as he kicks people out on the street, now with Nash at his side. It's legal, but it doesn't make it easier to accept. Carver is also scamming the government. He removes heat pumps and appliances from foreclosed homes just to sell them back. The government compensates the banks to make foreclosed homes sale ready. The movie makes a point to make Carver completely unlikable. Thankfully through Nash, it shows that the guy evicting you isn't always bad. While Nash joins the scam, he's doing everything he can to put a roof over his son's head. It doesn't make it right, but at least we see his reasons.
When Nash delivers his first eviction, Garfield does a great job of acting tormented and torn. He's repeating what he heard when he was evicted. You wonder if he'll break down or stop. He's ashamed to admit to his family what he's doing. He's living a good life, and he can finally afford to buy his son a birthday present.
Nash has to deliver a forged document to the court to settle a foreclosure dispute. Nash wants the money, but doesn't want to sabotage a human being. Nash was upset about evicting people, but it was within legal boundaries. Now he has to cross that line.
The finale goes big instead of going home. It's easy to hate Carver. He's the e-cig smoking, Range Rover driving jerk the movie continually pushes us to hate, but we watch as Nash follows in his footsteps. Nash goes from joining the scams because he needs the money, to becoming greedy. Nash has to confront his actions in the last scene. We don't know the repercussions as it's left open. I'm willing to bet that Carver gets out of it. He's just slimy enough that I don't think anything would stick to him.
 |
| Z - A political thriller based on actual events. |
Watch Z
Written by: Vasilis Vasilikos (novel), Jorge Semprun
Directed by: Costa-Gavras
Starring: Yves Montand , Irene Papas , Jean-Louis Trintignant
Rated: --
Plot:
When a Greek politician dies, the state rules it an accident, but the autopsy rules it murder. It's up the investigating magistrate to determine what happened.
Verdict:
The mystery isn't who did what, but how high the cover up goes and it it will be revealed. Flashbacks are woven into the narrative seamlessly, no two people seeing the same thing. Any witnesses that corroborate the murder claim suffer swift 'accidents.' It's a tense thriller that recounts actual events. It's a subtitled foreign film, and I feel like I need to watch it again to better understand it.
It depends.
Review:
This political thriller is set in Greece. A pacifist group attempting to hold a rally is attacked. The group is expected to win the next election and the police state in power oppose them. The calls for peace beget violence from the police state. The police state hires goons to attack the politician, though they make it look like a car hit the politician. How can those that wish for peace triumph against open violence?
The film slips in and out of small memories that bolster the characters. It depicts simple actions like a phone ringing or even an embrace triggering painful memories.
We see from the start that the ruling party ordered the attack and is now covering it up, though the investigator is unaware. The investigator catches a break when the hospital autopsy reveals the politician was murdered. Witnesses that step forward are attacked.
The ruling party deems anyone that opposes them an enemy and a communist. The investigator is able to indict military officers, but will the truth be revealed?
The ending is not happy. Weeks before the election the military seizes control and exonerates their men, among other atrocities.
The movie had far reaching consequences. Those that worked on it were black listed. Even FBI director J. Edgar Hoover stated that anyone who watched the film wasn't a true American.
I don't know if it's the presentation or the subtitles, but it wasn't as exciting as I hoped it would be. While the movie at large was a big deal, I felt removed from the action
 |
| Heavenly Creatures - Being in love is a crazy thing. |
Watch Heavenly Creatures
Written by: Fran Walsh and Peter Jackson (screenplay)
Directed by: Peter Jackson
Starring: Melanie Lynskey, Kate Winslet, Sarah Peirse
Rated: R
Plot:
Two teenagers form a friendship that turns obsessive and overly-dependent.
Verdict:
This movie starts as a slice of life genre with two outcast teenagers bonding, but then it becomes bonkers. Peter Jackson does a great job of capturing that madness. It's based on a true story and both actresses do a great job. If you're interested in early Jackson and Winslet work, this is it. Lynskey had a recurring role in Two and a Half Men. It's an interesting story and well made, but I can't find an anchor point. I don't get the why, other than some people are delusional and crazy.
It depends.
Review:
This movie is bonkers. You get a hint with the opening Pauline and Juliet (Lynskey and Winslet) run through the woods screaming, drenched in blood. Then it cuts to a classroom and I'm left wondering what I just saw. It is the trope of showing the end first which I can't stand. It's cheap storytelling, but at least in this instance it left me bewildered, which is better than revealing the entire ending.
The story is about two high school girls who become friends. This is based on a true story, but if it wasn't I would have to question the sanity of Pauline. If this were a different movie I could argue Juliet is her imaginary friend since Juliet is some sort of genius. She can do everything expertly and knows more than her teachers. From the top the movie stated it's viewpoint is Pauline's as told from her diary. Juliet could be how Pauline saw her, the events could be fictitious as Pauline's grasp on reality is tenuous at best.
The girls are highly imaginative, creating this fantasy world of kings and queens. For high school girls, it felt off. They get really involved in these stories and even experience a shared hallucination. The hallucination was a crazy left turn. As I learn more about the girls, the crazier they and the movie becomes, working in tandem. We go deeper down the rabbit hole and I question where reality begins and ends. Were both girls mad or did Pauline turn Juliet. Our narrator is unreliable because she's certifiable. Are they friends, lovers, or something else entirely?
Their bond is completely unhealthy and they begin plotting ways to stop their parents from separating them. I won' t spoil the ending, but title cards inform us the girls went to jail and a stipulation of their release was that they would never contact each other.
Jackson does a great job directing. The movie maintains a manic level of energy that intensifies as reality slips away and madness descends. There is a lot of CGI work that often looks bad. Even as old as this movie is, Jurassic Park came out a year earlier and it's a world of difference, though the budget difference is huge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)