S
Sexy Celebrity
Guest
You can like Office Space after a few repeated viewings? I'll have to try that sometime.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 55: June 24th, 2010
The House Of The Devil
At Least They Got The 80's Feel Right.
Strapped for cash and needing to pay first and last months rent for a new place, Samantha sees an ad for a babysitter. She calls the place and takes the job. The house is in the middle of nowhere and the job isn't exactly what it seems.
When I first saw the trailer for this film, I was left scratching my head. Why does it look so old? Upon research I found out that they were going for that look. Not only did it take place in the 80's, but it was made to look like it was filmed in the 80's as well. Ti West does an excellent job of accomplishing this, the mood, the environment, the style of the film all scream 1980's horror.
This is my second Ti West film, the first being the horrible and clunky Cabin Fever 2. It's so bad that even he wants to distance himself from it. So going into The house of the devil, I had mediocre expectations. First of all, 80's horror has it's ups and downs. Sure the film can get the feel right, but will I like it? It takes the classic tale of a babysitter in trouble. Most of the film is unnerving and long set ups to the climax.
Those long and suspenseful set ups are what drive the film. We are in this house with Samantha and we know that the end result will not be good for her. We are eagerly awaiting something bad to happen to her the entire time, but West takes his time in building the tension. This works extremely well, but it doesn't pay off for the climax. I felt that the climax wasn't sufficient enough for all the anticipation we had.
Everyone does a good job filling their roles, Jocelin Donahue is great as Samantha and the real stand out here is Tom Noonan as Mr. Ulman, the one who hires her. His mannerisms and calm way of speaking send chills down your spine. How someone so calm, polite and relatively normal looking can be so horrific. It's no spoilers that the house she goes into is going to cause trouble and we know he is behind it, otherwise there would be no film. Her best friend Megan is played by Greta Gerwig and she has the most surprising scene in the whole film, probably my favourite scene.
The house of the devil is a throwback horror film. it's for those people who grew up watching horror in the 80's and want to relive that experience. Those expecting some horrifying grotesque things may be disappointed.
[rating]3[/rating]
The House Of The Devil
At Least They Got The 80's Feel Right.
Strapped for cash and needing to pay first and last months rent for a new place, Samantha sees an ad for a babysitter. She calls the place and takes the job. The house is in the middle of nowhere and the job isn't exactly what it seems.
When I first saw the trailer for this film, I was left scratching my head. Why does it look so old? Upon research I found out that they were going for that look. Not only did it take place in the 80's, but it was made to look like it was filmed in the 80's as well. Ti West does an excellent job of accomplishing this, the mood, the environment, the style of the film all scream 1980's horror.
This is my second Ti West film, the first being the horrible and clunky Cabin Fever 2. It's so bad that even he wants to distance himself from it. So going into The house of the devil, I had mediocre expectations. First of all, 80's horror has it's ups and downs. Sure the film can get the feel right, but will I like it? It takes the classic tale of a babysitter in trouble. Most of the film is unnerving and long set ups to the climax.
Those long and suspenseful set ups are what drive the film. We are in this house with Samantha and we know that the end result will not be good for her. We are eagerly awaiting something bad to happen to her the entire time, but West takes his time in building the tension. This works extremely well, but it doesn't pay off for the climax. I felt that the climax wasn't sufficient enough for all the anticipation we had.
Everyone does a good job filling their roles, Jocelin Donahue is great as Samantha and the real stand out here is Tom Noonan as Mr. Ulman, the one who hires her. His mannerisms and calm way of speaking send chills down your spine. How someone so calm, polite and relatively normal looking can be so horrific. It's no spoilers that the house she goes into is going to cause trouble and we know he is behind it, otherwise there would be no film. Her best friend Megan is played by Greta Gerwig and she has the most surprising scene in the whole film, probably my favourite scene.
The house of the devil is a throwback horror film. it's for those people who grew up watching horror in the 80's and want to relive that experience. Those expecting some horrifying grotesque things may be disappointed.
[rating]3[/rating]
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 14: May 14th, 2010
Planes, Trains & Automobiles
Why Did It Take Me 22 Years To Watch This?
Trying to get back home to be with his family on Thanksgiving, a serious of unfortunate events prevents one tight ass salesman from doing so. Along the way he makes an unlikely friendship with another salesman, who always tries to look at the bright side of things, much to the annoyance of the other.
John Hughes is a great writer, talented director and had this special skill for comedy that has yet to be matched. The man nearly defined the 80's with his films about teens and this adult comedy starring the late John Candy and the funny man Steve Martin. I don't know why I haven't seen this film until now, I never had the urge to. After seeing it now I am slapping myself on the forehead for not seeing it earlier.
The comedy is great, it lies within the writing from John Hughes. Only to be brought to life perfectly and added upon by the two great leads. John Candy is both irritating and lovable. His scenes near the end are heartbreaking and his outlook on life is uplifting. Steve Martin is the everyday guy who tries to get back home to his family. Things are just not going his way. I'm sure every normal person would act the way he does in this film if these events were to happen to them. The pairing of these two comedians for this script was perfection.
I've seen bits and pieces, but never sat through the entire thing. So I've seen many of the funniest parts. The funny thing is, they were still funny when watching them. The film has classic lines like "Those aren't pillows" and many memorable scenes, like the swearing tirade and the going the wrong way home near death experience. The film has many more, which is why it is so great to watch.
This just might be my favourite John Hughes film, it's got heart, great comedic timing and is so well written that it makes my cry that he did his first draft in 3 days. As a wannabe writer, I'd kill to do that and have it be a fraction of what this is. Planes, Trains and Automobiles is a great comedy and the best Thanksgiving film. It's a shame I waited so long to see it, if you haven't, get it now.
[rating]4[/rating]
Planes, Trains & Automobiles
Why Did It Take Me 22 Years To Watch This?
Trying to get back home to be with his family on Thanksgiving, a serious of unfortunate events prevents one tight ass salesman from doing so. Along the way he makes an unlikely friendship with another salesman, who always tries to look at the bright side of things, much to the annoyance of the other.
John Hughes is a great writer, talented director and had this special skill for comedy that has yet to be matched. The man nearly defined the 80's with his films about teens and this adult comedy starring the late John Candy and the funny man Steve Martin. I don't know why I haven't seen this film until now, I never had the urge to. After seeing it now I am slapping myself on the forehead for not seeing it earlier.
The comedy is great, it lies within the writing from John Hughes. Only to be brought to life perfectly and added upon by the two great leads. John Candy is both irritating and lovable. His scenes near the end are heartbreaking and his outlook on life is uplifting. Steve Martin is the everyday guy who tries to get back home to his family. Things are just not going his way. I'm sure every normal person would act the way he does in this film if these events were to happen to them. The pairing of these two comedians for this script was perfection.
I've seen bits and pieces, but never sat through the entire thing. So I've seen many of the funniest parts. The funny thing is, they were still funny when watching them. The film has classic lines like "Those aren't pillows" and many memorable scenes, like the swearing tirade and the going the wrong way home near death experience. The film has many more, which is why it is so great to watch.
This just might be my favourite John Hughes film, it's got heart, great comedic timing and is so well written that it makes my cry that he did his first draft in 3 days. As a wannabe writer, I'd kill to do that and have it be a fraction of what this is. Planes, Trains and Automobiles is a great comedy and the best Thanksgiving film. It's a shame I waited so long to see it, if you haven't, get it now.
[rating]4[/rating]
T
thracian dawg
Guest
Yeah, Ramis estimates he was trapped for about 10 years.
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 29: May 29th, 2010
Igor
Igor Should Have Been A Success
...but the film fails to deliver on it's actually interesting premise.
Igor is the sidekick to an evil scientist, we always get the evil scientist story, but never the story of the sidekick. This is where this film comes in. Igor, even though he is a sidekick, wants to be an evil scientist himself. Insert some humour that most kids won't get and some dark material that will scare them away, then you are left with an animated film that seemed to have lost it's target audience. It's also completely obvious they are trying to target the Tim Burton crowd as well, but it feels really third rate in terms of anything in that department.
Igor is voiced by John Cusack, interesting choice. My problems with some animated films these days is that we no longer have voice actors in the lead roles, who are trained in this sort of thing, but any actor who is looking for a paycheck to just sit behind a microphone and speak the words from the script out loud. I found that Cusack is at fault here, despite everyone else in the film actually doing a decent job.
The animation is nothing special. If looked at in comparison to other films, it looks very basic and that it belonged to the year 1998, not 2008. The dark and brooding atmosphere is not brooding enough, and not childish enough. It feels very boring and bland. Almost as if no effort was put into it.
The writing is very bad and the script is below par. For a film that could have been filled with some funny jokes about the cliched parts of this genre, it had none that made me laugh. The supporting characters are good, for adults, but not children. I think some kids might be scared that there is a suicidal bunny....even more scared when they find out it is voiced by Steve Buscemi.
With so many good animated films out there, it's easy to close your eyes and blindly pick one up off the shelf that is better than Igor. It falls in the category of completely forgettable, with films like Valiant, Space Chimps, Fly Me To The Moon and others I can't even remember....because they are that forgettable.
I'm sure there are people who had no intention of seeing this. Consider this review as confirmation to those who were maybe a little interested, that you should just skip it.
[rating]1.5[/rating]
Igor
Igor Should Have Been A Success
...but the film fails to deliver on it's actually interesting premise.
Igor is the sidekick to an evil scientist, we always get the evil scientist story, but never the story of the sidekick. This is where this film comes in. Igor, even though he is a sidekick, wants to be an evil scientist himself. Insert some humour that most kids won't get and some dark material that will scare them away, then you are left with an animated film that seemed to have lost it's target audience. It's also completely obvious they are trying to target the Tim Burton crowd as well, but it feels really third rate in terms of anything in that department.
Igor is voiced by John Cusack, interesting choice. My problems with some animated films these days is that we no longer have voice actors in the lead roles, who are trained in this sort of thing, but any actor who is looking for a paycheck to just sit behind a microphone and speak the words from the script out loud. I found that Cusack is at fault here, despite everyone else in the film actually doing a decent job.
The animation is nothing special. If looked at in comparison to other films, it looks very basic and that it belonged to the year 1998, not 2008. The dark and brooding atmosphere is not brooding enough, and not childish enough. It feels very boring and bland. Almost as if no effort was put into it.
The writing is very bad and the script is below par. For a film that could have been filled with some funny jokes about the cliched parts of this genre, it had none that made me laugh. The supporting characters are good, for adults, but not children. I think some kids might be scared that there is a suicidal bunny....even more scared when they find out it is voiced by Steve Buscemi.
With so many good animated films out there, it's easy to close your eyes and blindly pick one up off the shelf that is better than Igor. It falls in the category of completely forgettable, with films like Valiant, Space Chimps, Fly Me To The Moon and others I can't even remember....because they are that forgettable.
I'm sure there are people who had no intention of seeing this. Consider this review as confirmation to those who were maybe a little interested, that you should just skip it.
[rating]1.5[/rating]
N
nebbit
Guest
Must check The Rundown out Thanks
N
nebbit
Guest
Wow I hope you didn't watch them one after another
N
nebbit
Guest
Wow I am all up to date now thanks Sussy
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 20: May 20th, 2010
Blood Simple.
A man hires a Private Investigator to follow his wife, whom he assumes is having an affair with one of his employees. He's right and he goes a little berserk. He wants the Private Investigator to kill them and will pay him $10,000. But nothing is that simple.
The Coen's first feature film is something to marvel at. They shot the trailer and used that to interest investors, claiming this is what the film will look like, only 90 minutes long. With the help of Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, they got what they wanted. Blood Simple. with a period after the title like it should be spelled, is a modern noir film that has that signature Coen style ending that gets the audience pondering it's meaning, even if it's just a joke from the directors.
Blood Simple starts off slow, really slow. I found myself having no interest in the film until the Private Investigator pulled his stunt on Marty. The film then took an interesting turn into a suspenseful film that actually got me excited for what would happen next. The events that happen after the slow, boring and uninteresting beginning make up for it. Maybe upon repeated viewings I'll like the opening scenes more, but I just found them long and drawn out.
M. Emmet Walsh stands out above the rest of the cast, he looks like he is having the most fun and it suits his character. Hedaya plays his usual prick self and there is a young Frances McDormand who plays his cheating wife. John Getz as Ray is sometimes frustrating, from the look of his career now, others find him lacking as well. He is not leading material.
Blood Simple is a well done directorial debut from the brothers who've become some of the best working directors today. As it stands in their filmography, it's obvious they've outdone Blood Simple. Yet it still has a place in their books, since it was their first effort and it is better than the likes of the more Hollywood budgeted films like The Ladykillers or Intolerable Cruelty.
The Coen's have always been doing their own thing, you can tell from this film. They don't cater to the audience, instead they play on their expectations. Simply put, Blood Simple is good, but not great.
[rating]3[/rating]
Blood Simple.
A man hires a Private Investigator to follow his wife, whom he assumes is having an affair with one of his employees. He's right and he goes a little berserk. He wants the Private Investigator to kill them and will pay him $10,000. But nothing is that simple.
The Coen's first feature film is something to marvel at. They shot the trailer and used that to interest investors, claiming this is what the film will look like, only 90 minutes long. With the help of Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, they got what they wanted. Blood Simple. with a period after the title like it should be spelled, is a modern noir film that has that signature Coen style ending that gets the audience pondering it's meaning, even if it's just a joke from the directors.
Blood Simple starts off slow, really slow. I found myself having no interest in the film until the Private Investigator pulled his stunt on Marty. The film then took an interesting turn into a suspenseful film that actually got me excited for what would happen next. The events that happen after the slow, boring and uninteresting beginning make up for it. Maybe upon repeated viewings I'll like the opening scenes more, but I just found them long and drawn out.
M. Emmet Walsh stands out above the rest of the cast, he looks like he is having the most fun and it suits his character. Hedaya plays his usual prick self and there is a young Frances McDormand who plays his cheating wife. John Getz as Ray is sometimes frustrating, from the look of his career now, others find him lacking as well. He is not leading material.
Blood Simple is a well done directorial debut from the brothers who've become some of the best working directors today. As it stands in their filmography, it's obvious they've outdone Blood Simple. Yet it still has a place in their books, since it was their first effort and it is better than the likes of the more Hollywood budgeted films like The Ladykillers or Intolerable Cruelty.
The Coen's have always been doing their own thing, you can tell from this film. They don't cater to the audience, instead they play on their expectations. Simply put, Blood Simple is good, but not great.
[rating]3[/rating]
M
meatwadsprite
Guest
I'm too interested to not check this out now. The director, directing a shot for shot remake of his own movie ... brilliant ?
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 82: July 21st, 2010
The Aviator
For some men, the sky was the limit. For him, it was just the beginning.
The Aviator is in one word "Fantastic". It details the life of Howard Hughes, his bizarre obsessions and his love for planes. Leonardo DiCaprio gives a great performances in one of his roles that told us how dedicated he was to his craft. It's when I really started to take notice of him and what he will be giving us in the future. The second film in which Scorsese has used him, and the most dedicated to the role.
Cate Blanchett earns herself a much deserved Academy Award for her performance and the rest of the supporting cast is fleshed out by the likes of John C. Reilly, Kate Beckinsale, Alec Baldwin, Alan Alda, Jude Law and Ian Holm. Just to name a few. Scorsese directs the film with confidence and skill. The film is very ambitious and an interesting film to complete after Gang of New York, probably his most ambitious film to date.
The music, the cinematography, everything is on a grand scale. A very solid effort from everyone involved and Scorsese's attention to detail and his dedication to the craft is marvelous. The film is a little on the long side and seems to go through predictable stages in Hughes life, even for those unfamiliar with him. The Aviator is indeed a great film, but seems to be in the shadows of Scorsese's greater films.
[rating]4[/rating]
The Aviator
For some men, the sky was the limit. For him, it was just the beginning.
The Aviator is in one word "Fantastic". It details the life of Howard Hughes, his bizarre obsessions and his love for planes. Leonardo DiCaprio gives a great performances in one of his roles that told us how dedicated he was to his craft. It's when I really started to take notice of him and what he will be giving us in the future. The second film in which Scorsese has used him, and the most dedicated to the role.
Cate Blanchett earns herself a much deserved Academy Award for her performance and the rest of the supporting cast is fleshed out by the likes of John C. Reilly, Kate Beckinsale, Alec Baldwin, Alan Alda, Jude Law and Ian Holm. Just to name a few. Scorsese directs the film with confidence and skill. The film is very ambitious and an interesting film to complete after Gang of New York, probably his most ambitious film to date.
The music, the cinematography, everything is on a grand scale. A very solid effort from everyone involved and Scorsese's attention to detail and his dedication to the craft is marvelous. The film is a little on the long side and seems to go through predictable stages in Hughes life, even for those unfamiliar with him. The Aviator is indeed a great film, but seems to be in the shadows of Scorsese's greater films.
[rating]4[/rating]
N
nebbit
Guest
I this movie
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 4: May 4th, 2010
How To Train Your Dragon
One Of Dreamworks Better Efforts
Hiccup is a viking, the only problem is he doesn't seem to fit in with everyone else. He's scrawny, scared and can't kill a dragon when given the opportunity. Instead, he makes a unique friendship with the one dragon that people never seem to see. He learns that everything he knew about dragons was wrong and he must stop his father and the other vikings from killing more of them.
How To Train Your Dragon seemed like another animated film that would come and go at the snap of a finger. Yet, it somehow managed to be the best review film of the year (so far) and rake in the cash. Word of mouth spread and along with the critical backing, the film has managed to stay in the top spot for awhile. So I decided to give it a chance. While the film is not as emotionally engaging as other animated films of recent years, it still manages to have fun and entertain.
The voice acting from all was really well done. I had fun spotting who was who and each one gives their character that unique little bit of spice. Jay Baruchel has whiny brat down to a tee, almost to the point of annoyance. With the exception of America Ferrera, I was able to point out every voice actor, yes even the guy from Cloverfield. Her character, Astrid, who isn't in the book, is the love interest of our lead. She is the tough one who is jealous of Hiccup when he starts to get the spotlight for knowing how to handle the dragons. This relationship is never the focus point and seemed rushed, but I can live with it.
The animation at times looks marvelous, the fur the vikings wear looks great. At other time it looks a bit weak, specifically the lead dragon. I don't know if it was the stylistic choice of making him look like a cat, but it looked like the weakest part of the animation to me. Which is funny, because the dragon was the best part of the film. Toothless, as he is called, was funny, cute and kick-ass. The scenes in which he is flying with Hiccup were really well done and added the sense of excitement and adventure the film needed.
It has laughs here and there, but never did I find it overly funny. Instead it plays out the family friendly adventure spin. The story itself is nothing new, young outcast needs to win the hearts of those around him. Finds an unfamiliar friendship and uses it to his advantage. The setting of dragons and vikings was the new angle the film gave us. The relationship between Hiccup and toothless is a nice addition to a spew of films in which the lead character makes friends with an animal.
While How To Train Your Dragon doesn't go leaps and bounds over anything else, it is one of the better films Dreamworks has managed to kick out recently. Both adults and kids will enjoy this film.
[rating]4[/rating]
How To Train Your Dragon
One Of Dreamworks Better Efforts
Hiccup is a viking, the only problem is he doesn't seem to fit in with everyone else. He's scrawny, scared and can't kill a dragon when given the opportunity. Instead, he makes a unique friendship with the one dragon that people never seem to see. He learns that everything he knew about dragons was wrong and he must stop his father and the other vikings from killing more of them.
How To Train Your Dragon seemed like another animated film that would come and go at the snap of a finger. Yet, it somehow managed to be the best review film of the year (so far) and rake in the cash. Word of mouth spread and along with the critical backing, the film has managed to stay in the top spot for awhile. So I decided to give it a chance. While the film is not as emotionally engaging as other animated films of recent years, it still manages to have fun and entertain.
The voice acting from all was really well done. I had fun spotting who was who and each one gives their character that unique little bit of spice. Jay Baruchel has whiny brat down to a tee, almost to the point of annoyance. With the exception of America Ferrera, I was able to point out every voice actor, yes even the guy from Cloverfield. Her character, Astrid, who isn't in the book, is the love interest of our lead. She is the tough one who is jealous of Hiccup when he starts to get the spotlight for knowing how to handle the dragons. This relationship is never the focus point and seemed rushed, but I can live with it.
The animation at times looks marvelous, the fur the vikings wear looks great. At other time it looks a bit weak, specifically the lead dragon. I don't know if it was the stylistic choice of making him look like a cat, but it looked like the weakest part of the animation to me. Which is funny, because the dragon was the best part of the film. Toothless, as he is called, was funny, cute and kick-ass. The scenes in which he is flying with Hiccup were really well done and added the sense of excitement and adventure the film needed.
It has laughs here and there, but never did I find it overly funny. Instead it plays out the family friendly adventure spin. The story itself is nothing new, young outcast needs to win the hearts of those around him. Finds an unfamiliar friendship and uses it to his advantage. The setting of dragons and vikings was the new angle the film gave us. The relationship between Hiccup and toothless is a nice addition to a spew of films in which the lead character makes friends with an animal.
While How To Train Your Dragon doesn't go leaps and bounds over anything else, it is one of the better films Dreamworks has managed to kick out recently. Both adults and kids will enjoy this film.
[rating]4[/rating]
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 5: May 5th, 2010
The Amateurs
If Only It Were That Easy...
Andy (Jeff Bridges) is a guy who doesn't do a whole lot with his life. He comes up with these extravagant ideas but none of them ever lead to anything. His wife leaves him because he can't go anywhere in life. Years later he comes up with the idea to make a porno film and he gets the townsfolk to help him.
For one thing, if only it were that easy to get women to agree to do pornography and for another, to make a film. The Amateurs, or The Moguls, whichever you want to call it, makes it seem like it is incredibly easy. Sure the characters have their problems on the sets, but in my experience it would never happen like that. Its all played up for comedic purposes I know, but it's just my one little nit pick.
The film has an all-star cast. Jeff Bridges leads this crazy cast of characters and it was really the characters that made the film work for me. Ted Danson is Moose, the gay guy who thinks he's straight. Tim Blake Nelson is Barney, a guy who's been in love with this one woman who always turns him down. Joe Pantoliano plays some idiot (that's his characters name) who gets made fun of a lot, but he wants to prove himself as a writer/director. William Fichtner is Otis, the guy who knows how to get things done and Patrick Fugit is the whiz kid who knows how to film everything. There are two other characters who are always together, they go by the names of Moe and Ron. Everyone calls them moron.
The Amateurs works on a few levels and comes just underneath on others. The cast is great and really help the film. The writing is fine, the comedy is there and some of it is funny. One scene in which two characters discuss the logistics of the size of a black man's penis is interesting. Unfortunately the film never feels like the comedy it should be. To compare it to another film in the same area would be Zack and Miri Make A Porno. Both involve porno films, both involve porno jokes and both seem like they could have been so much funnier.
Jeff Bridges narrates the film much like Robert Downey Jr. does in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. He knows this is a movie and he address the audience as such. His character Andy, tries to prove to himself he can make something of his life. He wants to be able to have a relationship with his son. His wife has remarried and the guy is stinking rich. We've seen that before. What this film does differently is that Andy doesn't seem to care about the new husband. He is never jealous and doesn't try to win back the heart of his ex-wife. It was interesting to see it play out like that because 90% of the time it would go the other way.
Lauren Graham and Jeanne Tripplehorn are both in the film and both are severely underused. Specifically Graham, I still do not know why she exists in this film. She is suppose to be the romantic interest of the lead character, but none of that happens until the last 5 minutes. She is completely useless. To sum up, the cast really makes the film better than what it actually is. There is a good movie here, but it just falls short in too many areas for me to be able to recommend it as a funny comedy, instead it's just a decent flick.
[rating]3[/rating]
The Amateurs
If Only It Were That Easy...
Andy (Jeff Bridges) is a guy who doesn't do a whole lot with his life. He comes up with these extravagant ideas but none of them ever lead to anything. His wife leaves him because he can't go anywhere in life. Years later he comes up with the idea to make a porno film and he gets the townsfolk to help him.
For one thing, if only it were that easy to get women to agree to do pornography and for another, to make a film. The Amateurs, or The Moguls, whichever you want to call it, makes it seem like it is incredibly easy. Sure the characters have their problems on the sets, but in my experience it would never happen like that. Its all played up for comedic purposes I know, but it's just my one little nit pick.
The film has an all-star cast. Jeff Bridges leads this crazy cast of characters and it was really the characters that made the film work for me. Ted Danson is Moose, the gay guy who thinks he's straight. Tim Blake Nelson is Barney, a guy who's been in love with this one woman who always turns him down. Joe Pantoliano plays some idiot (that's his characters name) who gets made fun of a lot, but he wants to prove himself as a writer/director. William Fichtner is Otis, the guy who knows how to get things done and Patrick Fugit is the whiz kid who knows how to film everything. There are two other characters who are always together, they go by the names of Moe and Ron. Everyone calls them moron.
The Amateurs works on a few levels and comes just underneath on others. The cast is great and really help the film. The writing is fine, the comedy is there and some of it is funny. One scene in which two characters discuss the logistics of the size of a black man's penis is interesting. Unfortunately the film never feels like the comedy it should be. To compare it to another film in the same area would be Zack and Miri Make A Porno. Both involve porno films, both involve porno jokes and both seem like they could have been so much funnier.
Jeff Bridges narrates the film much like Robert Downey Jr. does in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. He knows this is a movie and he address the audience as such. His character Andy, tries to prove to himself he can make something of his life. He wants to be able to have a relationship with his son. His wife has remarried and the guy is stinking rich. We've seen that before. What this film does differently is that Andy doesn't seem to care about the new husband. He is never jealous and doesn't try to win back the heart of his ex-wife. It was interesting to see it play out like that because 90% of the time it would go the other way.
Lauren Graham and Jeanne Tripplehorn are both in the film and both are severely underused. Specifically Graham, I still do not know why she exists in this film. She is suppose to be the romantic interest of the lead character, but none of that happens until the last 5 minutes. She is completely useless. To sum up, the cast really makes the film better than what it actually is. There is a good movie here, but it just falls short in too many areas for me to be able to recommend it as a funny comedy, instead it's just a decent flick.
[rating]3[/rating]
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 68: July 7th, 2010
Panic Room
It was supposed to be the safest room in the house.
Fincher is a director who knows what he wants and he will stop at nothing to achieve that goal. He is so detail oriented that it in some way reminds me a bit of Kubrick. I've loved everyone of his films in one way or another, I always found that each one had something to offer. Panic Room is no different, sure it is one of his weaker films, but not every director can have masterpiece after masterpiece.
Panic Room stars Jodie Foster, who moves into this new house with her teenage daughter, new comer Kristen Stewart. She discovers that the house comes with a panic room. A safe room wired with camera monitors, separate telephone and a thick steel door. No one can get into it. Sure enough they need to go into it because some bad guys want inside the house. What can the film be without a little bit of a twist? What they want is actually inside the panic room.
Kristen Stewart does a pretty good job here, she was roughly 11 years old when she acted in this film. I don't really know what happened to her acting ability, but this film shows that at some point in her life she did have some talent. Maybe given the right material she can work something out. It's even more impressive that she is able to hold up well against Jodie Foster. To be honest, I've never really been a big fan of her. I find her too cold in all her roles for me to be able to connect to her, even in this one. She does a decent enough job for the film as a thriller, but as a mother with her daughter, I needed more.
Fincher's usual style is here, brooding and dark. He uses the camera to gives us a unique view of things and blends it with the use of CGI to go through inanimate objects, like a chair or coffee pot handle. These small details are why Fincher is one of my favourite directors working today. He loves the craft of filmmaking and it shows in all his films. He doesn't make a film for the sake of it, he wants to tell a story and contribute some form of art to the history of cinema.
The three bad guys all do well and each have their own little conflicts with themselves. The thrills are here, but the final act of the film tends to fall apart. The cliches show up and the finale doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the film. Sledgehammer to the face, yet still have the ability to wrestle another human being down to the ground is a bit far fetched, specifically for a film so dead set on being based in reality. There are many little things littered throughout the film that frustrate me that lower the film in my opinion. Panic Room is mild entertainment, don't expect another Fincher film here. While it does have his style here and there, Panic Room lacks the originality and dedication of his other films. He does show care for it though, it just feels like the lonely kid in the corner that the other kids make fun of.
[rating]2.5[/rating]
Panic Room
It was supposed to be the safest room in the house.
Fincher is a director who knows what he wants and he will stop at nothing to achieve that goal. He is so detail oriented that it in some way reminds me a bit of Kubrick. I've loved everyone of his films in one way or another, I always found that each one had something to offer. Panic Room is no different, sure it is one of his weaker films, but not every director can have masterpiece after masterpiece.
Panic Room stars Jodie Foster, who moves into this new house with her teenage daughter, new comer Kristen Stewart. She discovers that the house comes with a panic room. A safe room wired with camera monitors, separate telephone and a thick steel door. No one can get into it. Sure enough they need to go into it because some bad guys want inside the house. What can the film be without a little bit of a twist? What they want is actually inside the panic room.
Kristen Stewart does a pretty good job here, she was roughly 11 years old when she acted in this film. I don't really know what happened to her acting ability, but this film shows that at some point in her life she did have some talent. Maybe given the right material she can work something out. It's even more impressive that she is able to hold up well against Jodie Foster. To be honest, I've never really been a big fan of her. I find her too cold in all her roles for me to be able to connect to her, even in this one. She does a decent enough job for the film as a thriller, but as a mother with her daughter, I needed more.
Fincher's usual style is here, brooding and dark. He uses the camera to gives us a unique view of things and blends it with the use of CGI to go through inanimate objects, like a chair or coffee pot handle. These small details are why Fincher is one of my favourite directors working today. He loves the craft of filmmaking and it shows in all his films. He doesn't make a film for the sake of it, he wants to tell a story and contribute some form of art to the history of cinema.
The three bad guys all do well and each have their own little conflicts with themselves. The thrills are here, but the final act of the film tends to fall apart. The cliches show up and the finale doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the film. Sledgehammer to the face, yet still have the ability to wrestle another human being down to the ground is a bit far fetched, specifically for a film so dead set on being based in reality. There are many little things littered throughout the film that frustrate me that lower the film in my opinion. Panic Room is mild entertainment, don't expect another Fincher film here. While it does have his style here and there, Panic Room lacks the originality and dedication of his other films. He does show care for it though, it just feels like the lonely kid in the corner that the other kids make fun of.
[rating]2.5[/rating]
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 44: June 13th, 2010
The A-Team
"Ten years ago, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The A-Team."
That voice over was used for the show every episode. This film is the story that precursors the show, sort to speak. They are double crossed while doing a job and are sent to prison. They break out and look to clear their names. If this sounds really familiar, but you've never seen the show, it might be because a film that is almost identical to it was released earlier this year, The Losers. With almost every review, you'll most likely get comparisons to this film. I'll try to get it out of the way quickly. The A-Team is a better film, you'll have more fun with it.
I never followed the show, so I can't comment on how reliable the film is to the characters, but to me they pulled off their roles nicely. Cooper has the playboy handsome role down pat. Neeson, I am starting to like more and more. I usually find him a tad boring, but with Taken and now The A-Team, it seems he has found a calling in action films. Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson plays the famous role of B.A., originally played by Mr. T. He throws out some catchphrases here and there and is used as some comedic relief. The star of the film is without a doubt Sharlto Copley. I give the producers credit for giving such a role to someone who's only had one screen credit from the year prior. Copley pulls it off, yet again. Two roles that are outstanding.
When I first saw the trailer, it had the scene in which a tank is falling through the air and Cooper gets to the gun and shoots a plane down. It was over the top and ridiculous. This film is full of moments like this, so I knew going in that I had to be in the right mindset. I tend to forgive films for being over the top if they are in on the joke themselves. Wanted would be a nice example of this. The A-Team is full of next to impossible stunts that would never work in this world of physics and gravity. We go to films to escape and be entertained, The A-Team does this.
Joe Carnahan does a good job at keeping the action intense and the pace of the film at a brisk pace. We only settle down for a minute here and there to catch our breath and advance that thing we like to call a plot. The film is predictable and by the numbers, but you can expect that. People seem to be hating on Carnahan, just like they did with Smokin' Aces. I liked both films. The A-Team isn't a critic film, it's a movie for action junkies who can appreciate unique ways of upping the ante.
Jessica Biel and Patrick Wilson show up in supporting roles. Biel is Sossa, ex-girlfriend of Cooper and on their heels wherever they go trying to catch them after breaking out of prison. She looks great and does the job that is needed. Which is to look good with Cooper. Wilson plays Lynch, a CIA guy who first gives the job to them. He helps them break out of prison and wants them to continue on with the mission. For some odd reason his role did remind me of Jason Patrick's role in The Losers. Patrick also had that weird vibe about him and both roles were a little similar, minus the lame jokes Patrick used.
Some shoddy CGI bits at the climax of the film might take you out of the experience for a moment or two, but The A-Team works as a summer movie popcorn flick. I don't know what the critics were expecting, but movie does what it is suppose to: Have good looking women, comedic bits to have the audience laughing, explosions, shootouts, car chases, foot chases and actors who look to be actually enjoying themselves. Both The A-Team and The Losers are good films, one is better than the other. So if you were choosing between the two, I'd pick The A-Team. If you've seen The Losers and thought the story was ridiculous and didn't like it, you might want to skip this one. The comparisons, again, are inevitable.
Oh yeah...I Pity The Fool.
[rating]3.5[/rating]
The A-Team
"Ten years ago, a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The A-Team."
That voice over was used for the show every episode. This film is the story that precursors the show, sort to speak. They are double crossed while doing a job and are sent to prison. They break out and look to clear their names. If this sounds really familiar, but you've never seen the show, it might be because a film that is almost identical to it was released earlier this year, The Losers. With almost every review, you'll most likely get comparisons to this film. I'll try to get it out of the way quickly. The A-Team is a better film, you'll have more fun with it.
I never followed the show, so I can't comment on how reliable the film is to the characters, but to me they pulled off their roles nicely. Cooper has the playboy handsome role down pat. Neeson, I am starting to like more and more. I usually find him a tad boring, but with Taken and now The A-Team, it seems he has found a calling in action films. Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson plays the famous role of B.A., originally played by Mr. T. He throws out some catchphrases here and there and is used as some comedic relief. The star of the film is without a doubt Sharlto Copley. I give the producers credit for giving such a role to someone who's only had one screen credit from the year prior. Copley pulls it off, yet again. Two roles that are outstanding.
When I first saw the trailer, it had the scene in which a tank is falling through the air and Cooper gets to the gun and shoots a plane down. It was over the top and ridiculous. This film is full of moments like this, so I knew going in that I had to be in the right mindset. I tend to forgive films for being over the top if they are in on the joke themselves. Wanted would be a nice example of this. The A-Team is full of next to impossible stunts that would never work in this world of physics and gravity. We go to films to escape and be entertained, The A-Team does this.
Joe Carnahan does a good job at keeping the action intense and the pace of the film at a brisk pace. We only settle down for a minute here and there to catch our breath and advance that thing we like to call a plot. The film is predictable and by the numbers, but you can expect that. People seem to be hating on Carnahan, just like they did with Smokin' Aces. I liked both films. The A-Team isn't a critic film, it's a movie for action junkies who can appreciate unique ways of upping the ante.
Jessica Biel and Patrick Wilson show up in supporting roles. Biel is Sossa, ex-girlfriend of Cooper and on their heels wherever they go trying to catch them after breaking out of prison. She looks great and does the job that is needed. Which is to look good with Cooper. Wilson plays Lynch, a CIA guy who first gives the job to them. He helps them break out of prison and wants them to continue on with the mission. For some odd reason his role did remind me of Jason Patrick's role in The Losers. Patrick also had that weird vibe about him and both roles were a little similar, minus the lame jokes Patrick used.
Some shoddy CGI bits at the climax of the film might take you out of the experience for a moment or two, but The A-Team works as a summer movie popcorn flick. I don't know what the critics were expecting, but movie does what it is suppose to: Have good looking women, comedic bits to have the audience laughing, explosions, shootouts, car chases, foot chases and actors who look to be actually enjoying themselves. Both The A-Team and The Losers are good films, one is better than the other. So if you were choosing between the two, I'd pick The A-Team. If you've seen The Losers and thought the story was ridiculous and didn't like it, you might want to skip this one. The comparisons, again, are inevitable.
Oh yeah...I Pity The Fool.
[rating]3.5[/rating]
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
One each day Nebs, one each day.
M
mark f
Guest
Yes, I recommend The House of the Devil to everyone although my "legit" rating is [rating]2.5[/rating]. It's just that my cult rating (after less than a year) is [rating]4[/rating], and I personally find it twice as good as Carpenter's Halloween, a "'70s horror film".
N
nebbit
Guest
Oh ok I did watch the whole 5 once on a very rainy day
T
TheUsualSuspect
Guest
Day 45: June 14th, 2010
Crank: High Voltage
Crank 2 Is Off The Wall Insanity.
After surviving a fall from a helicopter, Chev Chelios is kidnapped directly from the spot he landed in and is taken to a place where they remove his heart. He is given an artificial one that requires an electrical charge to keep running, every hour or so. Now Chelios is on the run trying to find his old heart and to keep charged.
I had an appreciation for the first Crank, it was a live action Grand Theft Auto. Creating as much chaos as possible within the running time. It ended perfectly, with his death. Crank 2 comes around and ruins that. At least, for my own sanity, right from the beginning they have a telecaster look directly to the viewer and tell them how implausible all of this is. Could this be the writers and directors telling the audience that this was a studio decision?
Crank 2 doesn't hold any punches, it goes all out and doesn't stop. It somehow finds a way to be even more chaotic than the original, but it sacrifices any kind of logical straight forward story. The first, even though it was far fetched, seemed like it might possibly happen. Crank 2 doesn't seem to be based in any kind of reality. I do still like the city and world these characters live in. It's just like a video game/comic book come to life.
Statham once again shows us why he is the new face of the action genre. The Rock has moved on to Disney family films and Statham continues to be in films that he knows his fans will love. Crank 2 is violent and obscene. Just like it wants to be, Chelios is a despicable character, just like he wants to be. Statham plays the role with a bit of charm that makes him likable. Amy smart is here again, but she seems even more useless now than before. Was her purpose in this one just to re-enact the famous sex in public scene from original?
The Crank films are without a doubt a guys film. Crank 2 even more so. Sex, violence, harsh language and insane sequences like a shotgun shoved up a guy's ass or two characters transforming into Godzilla like creatures, it's something that requires a viewer to leave their brain not only at the door, but at the door of another house. The comedy is unique and in your face, it doesn't hold back with any subject matter. It's degrading to women and homosexuals and maybe even intellectuals. If you liked the first Crank, you'll like this one.
For what it is worth, I dug the craziness of the film. The style it was shot in was fast and dirty, that reflects the story and the characters in it. I can see a third film coming out, just wondering what they plan on doing with it makes my head hurt though.
[rating]3[/rating]
Crank: High Voltage
Crank 2 Is Off The Wall Insanity.
After surviving a fall from a helicopter, Chev Chelios is kidnapped directly from the spot he landed in and is taken to a place where they remove his heart. He is given an artificial one that requires an electrical charge to keep running, every hour or so. Now Chelios is on the run trying to find his old heart and to keep charged.
I had an appreciation for the first Crank, it was a live action Grand Theft Auto. Creating as much chaos as possible within the running time. It ended perfectly, with his death. Crank 2 comes around and ruins that. At least, for my own sanity, right from the beginning they have a telecaster look directly to the viewer and tell them how implausible all of this is. Could this be the writers and directors telling the audience that this was a studio decision?
Crank 2 doesn't hold any punches, it goes all out and doesn't stop. It somehow finds a way to be even more chaotic than the original, but it sacrifices any kind of logical straight forward story. The first, even though it was far fetched, seemed like it might possibly happen. Crank 2 doesn't seem to be based in any kind of reality. I do still like the city and world these characters live in. It's just like a video game/comic book come to life.
Statham once again shows us why he is the new face of the action genre. The Rock has moved on to Disney family films and Statham continues to be in films that he knows his fans will love. Crank 2 is violent and obscene. Just like it wants to be, Chelios is a despicable character, just like he wants to be. Statham plays the role with a bit of charm that makes him likable. Amy smart is here again, but she seems even more useless now than before. Was her purpose in this one just to re-enact the famous sex in public scene from original?
The Crank films are without a doubt a guys film. Crank 2 even more so. Sex, violence, harsh language and insane sequences like a shotgun shoved up a guy's ass or two characters transforming into Godzilla like creatures, it's something that requires a viewer to leave their brain not only at the door, but at the door of another house. The comedy is unique and in your face, it doesn't hold back with any subject matter. It's degrading to women and homosexuals and maybe even intellectuals. If you liked the first Crank, you'll like this one.
For what it is worth, I dug the craziness of the film. The style it was shot in was fast and dirty, that reflects the story and the characters in it. I can see a third film coming out, just wondering what they plan on doing with it makes my head hurt though.
[rating]3[/rating]