Matt Damon, check. Steven Soderberg, check. The guy from Quantum Leap, check. Recipe for success is obvious. Or is it? I listened to a movie review podcast the other day about The Informer! and it had a lot of good things to say about it. So I figured I would give it a try.
This movie is about a price fixing scandal in the early 90s. Based on a true story.
The good: I've mentioned before that I like movies that are based on true stories. I am fully aware that they are only BASED on true stories, not the actual truth. But more times than not, I end up looking up the info to find out the true story. This is how I learn history... There are a few moments that are really funny--unfortunately very few. Damon's character is very interesting...You love him, then you hate him, then you feel sorry for him, then you don't. But I won't say why.
The bad: Don't be tricked like me. This is a semi-comedy. But I found that this had a much more serious tone than I was prepared for. I think I laughed out loud maybe 2 or 3 times. I found the acting to be mediocre at best. It may have been intended, but the FBI agents (Quantum Leap guy and Talk Soup guy) are extremely over dramatic and they ended up being more annoying than anything. Then there is the wife, I know her as the crazy ex-girlfriend in Two and half men, who is supposed to be normal, but carries the same crazy vibe as the sitcom. And finally, I must reiterate...not funny.
DVD rental at best.
Rating: 5.5 out of 10
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
...wish they would stop with the WWII movies. (Defiance review)
IMDB: 7.3
Released in 2008, Defiance tried to ride the James Bond train with Daniel Craig. I remember seeing the trailers for this in the theaters and thinking "Oooooh...that should be good!" Silly me.
The good: I think that the acting was good. Daniel Craig and Liev Shreiber (sp?) had a good chemistry, which you would expect out of those 2. Ummm...
The bad: I don't know, I think I've just seen this story too many times. Only this time, it happens in the forest. Good guys hide from Nazis. Nazis come after good guys. Good guys kill Nazis. The end. The trailers made this out to be an action packed movie...not so much. There were a few fire fight scenes, but nothing special.
This is an easily forgetable movie. I'm not saying I hate it, I'm just saying you dont need to waste your time with it.
Rating: 6 out of 10
Released in 2008, Defiance tried to ride the James Bond train with Daniel Craig. I remember seeing the trailers for this in the theaters and thinking "Oooooh...that should be good!" Silly me.
The good: I think that the acting was good. Daniel Craig and Liev Shreiber (sp?) had a good chemistry, which you would expect out of those 2. Ummm...
The bad: I don't know, I think I've just seen this story too many times. Only this time, it happens in the forest. Good guys hide from Nazis. Nazis come after good guys. Good guys kill Nazis. The end. The trailers made this out to be an action packed movie...not so much. There were a few fire fight scenes, but nothing special.
This is an easily forgetable movie. I'm not saying I hate it, I'm just saying you dont need to waste your time with it.
Rating: 6 out of 10
Thursday, September 10, 2009
...like some prawns. (District 9 review)
IMDB score: 8.6
Whats weird is that I didn't hear anything that supported this. I either heard that it was "ok", or it "wasn't bad", or even a "it suuuucked."
Peter Jackson did not direct this. As deceiving as the trailers may be, he only produced it. However, fun fact of the day. The director, Neil Blaumkapmejflaidjfpa (not sure), was supposed to direct the Halo movie that fell through. So, Jackson gave this guy $30 million to make whatever he wanted. This is the movie that resulted.
The good: I love the story. Aliens get stranded on Earth. South Africans restrain the aliens to a certain area but are allowed to colonize and stay. Tensions rise. I think this is was well adapted (I believe it is based on some other story), and as the trend continues, it is a "realistic" view of how it may be handled in present day. And I like how this movie was filmed in the manner of a documentary. It is a quick and interesting way to give all the background information and allowed them to jump quickly into the story. Although not a comedy, there was a fair amount of comedic value...especially as the aliens pick up the habits of the slums. There were a couple of nods to video games in the alien weaponry (Gravity Gun from Half Life 2) which is always fun for us nerds.
The bad: I don't think I'm a fan of the alien design used. Not a fan of the ending.
This was a good movie, stop hating.
Rating: 9 out of 10
Whats weird is that I didn't hear anything that supported this. I either heard that it was "ok", or it "wasn't bad", or even a "it suuuucked."
Peter Jackson did not direct this. As deceiving as the trailers may be, he only produced it. However, fun fact of the day. The director, Neil Blaumkapmejflaidjfpa (not sure), was supposed to direct the Halo movie that fell through. So, Jackson gave this guy $30 million to make whatever he wanted. This is the movie that resulted.
The good: I love the story. Aliens get stranded on Earth. South Africans restrain the aliens to a certain area but are allowed to colonize and stay. Tensions rise. I think this is was well adapted (I believe it is based on some other story), and as the trend continues, it is a "realistic" view of how it may be handled in present day. And I like how this movie was filmed in the manner of a documentary. It is a quick and interesting way to give all the background information and allowed them to jump quickly into the story. Although not a comedy, there was a fair amount of comedic value...especially as the aliens pick up the habits of the slums. There were a couple of nods to video games in the alien weaponry (Gravity Gun from Half Life 2) which is always fun for us nerds.
The bad: I don't think I'm a fan of the alien design used. Not a fan of the ending.
This was a good movie, stop hating.
Rating: 9 out of 10
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
...listen, not hear. (Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist review)
I took a class in college called "Music in Film" or "Sound in Film"...I actually forget. But, the lesson was this, many movies use sound or music to drive the film. I have always been a fan of soundtracks to movies, but I figured this would actually be a good time to talk about it.
A couple weeks ago, I watched "I Love You, Man" (I need to write about it), and in the middle of a scene, I told my roommate to stop it and rewind. I then asked what song was playing in the background. I couldn't really make it out, but later looked it up and found it to be "Oxford Comma" by Vampire Weekend--awesome song. I know some of you readers are well versed with this group, but for the rest of us, paying a little attention to the music in a movie will find youself a nice little playlist for yourself.
Anyways, Nick and Norah's Infinite playlist is about 2 high-schoolers that love the underground music scene. They are trying to find some band all night--shenanigans ensue.
The good: As mentioned above, I like the music that is played...and there is a lot of it. Michael Sera (the Arrested Development kid) does his little dorky, witty, routine which he does so well. The story is fairly intriguing--trying to find a band that is supposedly everyones favorite band ever. SPOILER: I can't decide if its a good thing, or a bad thing, but this supposed "best band" called "Where's Fluffy?" never gets to play. You see them take stage at the end of the movie, but get left hanging.
The bad: The rest of the characters aren't very memorable. Kinda lame actually. Although there are hints of comedic genious, I didn't laugh quite as much as would've liked.
Entertaining enough.
Rating: 6.5 out of 10
A couple weeks ago, I watched "I Love You, Man" (I need to write about it), and in the middle of a scene, I told my roommate to stop it and rewind. I then asked what song was playing in the background. I couldn't really make it out, but later looked it up and found it to be "Oxford Comma" by Vampire Weekend--awesome song. I know some of you readers are well versed with this group, but for the rest of us, paying a little attention to the music in a movie will find youself a nice little playlist for yourself.
Anyways, Nick and Norah's Infinite playlist is about 2 high-schoolers that love the underground music scene. They are trying to find some band all night--shenanigans ensue.
The good: As mentioned above, I like the music that is played...and there is a lot of it. Michael Sera (the Arrested Development kid) does his little dorky, witty, routine which he does so well. The story is fairly intriguing--trying to find a band that is supposedly everyones favorite band ever. SPOILER: I can't decide if its a good thing, or a bad thing, but this supposed "best band" called "Where's Fluffy?" never gets to play. You see them take stage at the end of the movie, but get left hanging.
The bad: The rest of the characters aren't very memorable. Kinda lame actually. Although there are hints of comedic genious, I didn't laugh quite as much as would've liked.
Entertaining enough.
Rating: 6.5 out of 10
Monday, August 24, 2009
...re-read the history books. (Inglourious Basterds review)
So I had 2 texts come to me this weekend that both said "Have you seen District 9? Is it any good?" And to both texts I responded, "No, but I did see Inglourious Basterds. Go watch that...its really good." I'm still waiting on one response, but the other replied "It suuucked."--talking about District 9, of course.
Why do people ask if they aren't going to listen? I also come across many instances where people watch movies that I have clearly said not to watch on this blog...then complain about them. Stupid people.
So finally, after years of waiting, Inglourious Basterds arrives. Quentin Tarantino's story had apparently been written before the Kill Bill movies came out a while back, and originally slated to be called "Once Upon a time in Nazi-Occupied France." I don't know if I have conveyed this before...but I love me some Tarantino.
The good: Tarantino's story-telling and dialogue are far superior to any contemporary director. Every moment is as awkward and intense as the next. This movie isn't full of too much action, but enough satiate that itch we all have. The shock value is great. There oh so many scenes where you can't believe what you just saw. And its funny! Brad Pitt is ridiculous--in a very good way. Every scene that he is in, you will laugh out loud at least once, guaranteed. I also love how this movie is definitely NOT historically accurate. It gives a nice little twist. All other WWII movies you always know how things are gonna end because they try to stay true to history--not the case here.
The bad: Its loooong. Running a little over 2 and half hours. Luckily it doesn't feel that bad when watching. There are not enough Brad Pitt scenes. Although the supposed "main" character, he is probably in less than half of the movie.
Go watch it.
Rating: 9 out of 10
Why do people ask if they aren't going to listen? I also come across many instances where people watch movies that I have clearly said not to watch on this blog...then complain about them. Stupid people.
So finally, after years of waiting, Inglourious Basterds arrives. Quentin Tarantino's story had apparently been written before the Kill Bill movies came out a while back, and originally slated to be called "Once Upon a time in Nazi-Occupied France." I don't know if I have conveyed this before...but I love me some Tarantino.
The good: Tarantino's story-telling and dialogue are far superior to any contemporary director. Every moment is as awkward and intense as the next. This movie isn't full of too much action, but enough satiate that itch we all have. The shock value is great. There oh so many scenes where you can't believe what you just saw. And its funny! Brad Pitt is ridiculous--in a very good way. Every scene that he is in, you will laugh out loud at least once, guaranteed. I also love how this movie is definitely NOT historically accurate. It gives a nice little twist. All other WWII movies you always know how things are gonna end because they try to stay true to history--not the case here.
The bad: Its loooong. Running a little over 2 and half hours. Luckily it doesn't feel that bad when watching. There are not enough Brad Pitt scenes. Although the supposed "main" character, he is probably in less than half of the movie.
Go watch it.
Rating: 9 out of 10
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
...say "ooh shhh..."-nap. Say "oh snap", is what I mean. (Punisher: Warzone review)
I only saw bits and pieces of the Punisher with Thomas Jane. And only owned the DVD with Dolph, but never actually watched it. But for some reason unbeknownst to me, despite mediocre reviews, I decided to give this new one a shot.
The Good: Can I say that I said "Oh shh..."-nap out loud more times in this movie than I have in a long time. Meaning that there were more over the top ways to kill people in this movie than any other in while. This movie was entertaining if you are looking for something in the background to look up at every 10 mins to see something crazy. And I like the video game feel of it, with mini-bosses, then major bosses, and lots of goons in between.
The Bad: The bad is what you would expect before going into the movie. Bad story. Bad acting. I also don't like how some of the "mini-bosses" I referred to die so easily. I would've liked to see a little more fight in 'em.
Rating: 6 out of 10
The Good: Can I say that I said "Oh shh..."-nap out loud more times in this movie than I have in a long time. Meaning that there were more over the top ways to kill people in this movie than any other in while. This movie was entertaining if you are looking for something in the background to look up at every 10 mins to see something crazy. And I like the video game feel of it, with mini-bosses, then major bosses, and lots of goons in between.
The Bad: The bad is what you would expect before going into the movie. Bad story. Bad acting. I also don't like how some of the "mini-bosses" I referred to die so easily. I would've liked to see a little more fight in 'em.
Rating: 6 out of 10
Monday, August 3, 2009
...get a freeze ray. (Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog review)
Doogie, Doogie, Doogie...oh how I love your comedic performances.
My friend asked me, "Have you seen Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog?" Not only had I not seen it, I don't think I had ever heard of it. Yet, he was appalled and surprised that I hadn't. Oddly enough, now I have the same reaction. I find myself asking everyone "Have you seen Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog?" and then scream at them for not having seen it.
Dr. Horrible is an internet sensation. I was told that it was sort of an experiment--low budget, internet only, and free to watch (www.hulu.com). Its about a 45 minute movie, or should I say musical... I know that turns a lot of people off. I, for one, love musicals, so I may be a little bit biased towards liking it. But I think anyone should be able to watch it.
The good: NPH! He's my fav, thank you HIMYM and Harold and Kumar. The humor is very subtle, but extremely effective. The music is very original and catchy. The story is pretty deep for 45 mins. The rewatchability is very high...I have probably seen it about 6 times now. Moist--the partner in crime.
The bad: None.
Rating: 9 out of 10 (perhaps 10 out of 10 if they had a couple of swordfights and karate)
My friend asked me, "Have you seen Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog?" Not only had I not seen it, I don't think I had ever heard of it. Yet, he was appalled and surprised that I hadn't. Oddly enough, now I have the same reaction. I find myself asking everyone "Have you seen Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog?" and then scream at them for not having seen it.
Dr. Horrible is an internet sensation. I was told that it was sort of an experiment--low budget, internet only, and free to watch (www.hulu.com). Its about a 45 minute movie, or should I say musical... I know that turns a lot of people off. I, for one, love musicals, so I may be a little bit biased towards liking it. But I think anyone should be able to watch it.
The good: NPH! He's my fav, thank you HIMYM and Harold and Kumar. The humor is very subtle, but extremely effective. The music is very original and catchy. The story is pretty deep for 45 mins. The rewatchability is very high...I have probably seen it about 6 times now. Moist--the partner in crime.
The bad: None.
Rating: 9 out of 10 (perhaps 10 out of 10 if they had a couple of swordfights and karate)
Monday, June 29, 2009
...say, "What about Galvatron?" (Transformers 2 review)
Don't believe the negative hype.
I love me some IMAX. The last movie that I went to watch in IMAX was The Dark Knight...which, if you didn't get a chance to do that, I feel sorry for you. My next opportunity, Transformers 2. Luckily the just put an IMAX next to my parents house. Why not Cville?
So 6.7 on IMDB. Not so hot right? But to put this in perspective...The Rock, possibly one of the best action flicks ever (thats right, I said it) is a 7.2. Armageddon=6.0. Now, I am talking about action-only flicks, so please don't say that the Bourne movies are better, or Empire Strikes Back. Obviously, those are "better" movies because of story, acting, editing, etc. But Transformers 2 is non-stop from start to finish...its like eating ice cream in a cake cone.
The good: Can I say that I love some Shia Labeouf? Not so much as Megan Fox...but that dude is funny. I swear, I think I laughed out loud more times in this movie than in The Hangover...well, close at least. The comedy left off where the first one started and had some good laughs the whole time.
Action, action, action. There were like 30 robots in this movie--including the Constructacons and Soundwave. The fight scenes were awesome, and there were lots of them, which was a problem in the first one (not enough fights). They pulled a lot of the slow motion parts where it shows the robots getting busted up--there are some brutal scenes.
And did I mention Megan Fox?
The bad: Although there are lots of robots, there is nearly no characterization--which I don't care too much about. But if you didn't see the first one, you will not understand a lot of it. There are just robots and characters popping out of no where with no explanations. So we can go ahead and say there are plot holes and bad story telling, but that was a given.
Also, there are a few action sequences that just dont look too good. It almost seems like they ran out of money for some of the CGI scenes, and they had to get cheaper programmers to do it.
But, whatever! I loved this movie. So to all of you nay-sayers...
Rating: 8 out of 10
I love me some IMAX. The last movie that I went to watch in IMAX was The Dark Knight...which, if you didn't get a chance to do that, I feel sorry for you. My next opportunity, Transformers 2. Luckily the just put an IMAX next to my parents house. Why not Cville?
So 6.7 on IMDB. Not so hot right? But to put this in perspective...The Rock, possibly one of the best action flicks ever (thats right, I said it) is a 7.2. Armageddon=6.0. Now, I am talking about action-only flicks, so please don't say that the Bourne movies are better, or Empire Strikes Back. Obviously, those are "better" movies because of story, acting, editing, etc. But Transformers 2 is non-stop from start to finish...its like eating ice cream in a cake cone.
The good: Can I say that I love some Shia Labeouf? Not so much as Megan Fox...but that dude is funny. I swear, I think I laughed out loud more times in this movie than in The Hangover...well, close at least. The comedy left off where the first one started and had some good laughs the whole time.
Action, action, action. There were like 30 robots in this movie--including the Constructacons and Soundwave. The fight scenes were awesome, and there were lots of them, which was a problem in the first one (not enough fights). They pulled a lot of the slow motion parts where it shows the robots getting busted up--there are some brutal scenes.
And did I mention Megan Fox?
The bad: Although there are lots of robots, there is nearly no characterization--which I don't care too much about. But if you didn't see the first one, you will not understand a lot of it. There are just robots and characters popping out of no where with no explanations. So we can go ahead and say there are plot holes and bad story telling, but that was a given.
Also, there are a few action sequences that just dont look too good. It almost seems like they ran out of money for some of the CGI scenes, and they had to get cheaper programmers to do it.
But, whatever! I loved this movie. So to all of you nay-sayers...
Rating: 8 out of 10
Monday, June 8, 2009
...say no to drugs. (The Hangover review)
Bachelor party in Vegas. Every man's dream.
I don't really have any related story to tell, so I will go straight into it.
The good: This movie is ridiculous! Very similarly to my beloved How I Met Your Mother, this movie tells the story by showing crazy outcomes, and then flashes back to see how they happened. I will say that it has a fair amount of bad jokes, but the level of good jokes definitely outweighs that. All of the cast were funny...and I generally HATE Zack Galifinakis. The story comes together pretty well as crazy as it is. I don't wanna give away too much, but there is quite a lot of shock value to this movie as well. Oh, and a Heather Graham flash??
The bad: No real complaints. I will say to those that are easily duped--don't believe the hype. Just so you won't be let down. I was reading some reviews that said this was the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I say nay to that. Oh, and maybe a little too much "man" shown.
Go watch it.
Rating: 8.5 out of 10
I don't really have any related story to tell, so I will go straight into it.
The good: This movie is ridiculous! Very similarly to my beloved How I Met Your Mother, this movie tells the story by showing crazy outcomes, and then flashes back to see how they happened. I will say that it has a fair amount of bad jokes, but the level of good jokes definitely outweighs that. All of the cast were funny...and I generally HATE Zack Galifinakis. The story comes together pretty well as crazy as it is. I don't wanna give away too much, but there is quite a lot of shock value to this movie as well. Oh, and a Heather Graham flash??
The bad: No real complaints. I will say to those that are easily duped--don't believe the hype. Just so you won't be let down. I was reading some reviews that said this was the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I say nay to that. Oh, and maybe a little too much "man" shown.
Go watch it.
Rating: 8.5 out of 10
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
...stop making fun of Trekkies. (Star Trek review)
Never seen an episode. Never seen a movie.
Of course I can rattle of the names of characters and things from the Star Trek franchise: Captain Kirk, Spock, Klingons, USS Enterprise, Kahn, "Beam me up, Scotty", Scotty, Checkov, Uharu, Vulcans, Romulans...Wookies? Star Trek is ridiculously intertwined with our culture that every person knows most of these terms.
And with the new trend of "beginnings," such as Batman and James Bond, it only makes sense to see how Star Trek came to be. It got my attention.
The good: This movie is great from start to finish. The mix of action, comedy, and story line is everything that I look for in a movie. And what made it fun for me was seeing all of the characters that I have only heard about, and where they come from. Thanks god they gave Captain Kirk a new persona. Imagine, a, young, William, Shatner, who, speaks, with, breaks, between, every, word. It, just, wouldnt, fly, with, today's, audience. And with two of my favorites, John Cho and Simon Pegg, I was smiling the whole way (although they have small parts).
The thing with Sci-Fi is that they can get away with ridiculous plots. Time travel. Exploding/Imploding planets. These are conventions that you expect when you go into it.
The bad: I would've liked to see more of the bad guy...Nero? Zero? I forget. But when you have a bad guy that is as sinister as this, you'd like to see him whip a little more butt.
Halleluiah for the most entertaining movie of 2009!
Rating: 9 out of 10
Of course I can rattle of the names of characters and things from the Star Trek franchise: Captain Kirk, Spock, Klingons, USS Enterprise, Kahn, "Beam me up, Scotty", Scotty, Checkov, Uharu, Vulcans, Romulans...Wookies? Star Trek is ridiculously intertwined with our culture that every person knows most of these terms.
And with the new trend of "beginnings," such as Batman and James Bond, it only makes sense to see how Star Trek came to be. It got my attention.
The good: This movie is great from start to finish. The mix of action, comedy, and story line is everything that I look for in a movie. And what made it fun for me was seeing all of the characters that I have only heard about, and where they come from. Thanks god they gave Captain Kirk a new persona. Imagine, a, young, William, Shatner, who, speaks, with, breaks, between, every, word. It, just, wouldnt, fly, with, today's, audience. And with two of my favorites, John Cho and Simon Pegg, I was smiling the whole way (although they have small parts).
The thing with Sci-Fi is that they can get away with ridiculous plots. Time travel. Exploding/Imploding planets. These are conventions that you expect when you go into it.
The bad: I would've liked to see more of the bad guy...Nero? Zero? I forget. But when you have a bad guy that is as sinister as this, you'd like to see him whip a little more butt.
Halleluiah for the most entertaining movie of 2009!
Rating: 9 out of 10
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
...watch it if, and only if you like Starwars. (Fanboys review)
In production for many, many years. Scenes shot, reshot, and shot again. This movie was "coming soon" for so long, that only a select group of starwars spoof underground movie-goers knew about it.
The story is simple. Die hard Starwars fans want to watch Episode 1 before it gets released to the public--so they decide to go steal a print of it. Enter shenanigans.
This is the type of movie that you have to have common knowledge of Starwars to enjoy. If you have never seen a Starwars movie before, I suggest not watching it. However, if you have seen any of them (like any normal person who knows what a good movie is), I suggest watching.
The Good: This is very Road Trip-esque, so if you like the "travel, jokes, travel, jokes" type of movie, this is perfect of you. The cast is great, although I don't really know any of their names. Lots of cameos such as William Shatner, Seth Rogan, Danny Trejo, Billy Dee Williams, Carrie Fisher, Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Ray Park(Darth Maul), Will Forte. This is like a dumbed down, smart comedy...if there is such a thing. The best parts are when Starwars fans and the Star Trek fans are just talking a lot of smack to each other. This epic battle between these subcultures traverses well into real world.
The Bad: The really good jokes were few and far between. Although the entire this is fairly well rounded, I only laughed out loud a few times. I'll go ahead and say that there are many plot holes, but thats to be expected.
Watch it...especially if you are reading this blog.
Rating: 7 out of 10
The story is simple. Die hard Starwars fans want to watch Episode 1 before it gets released to the public--so they decide to go steal a print of it. Enter shenanigans.
This is the type of movie that you have to have common knowledge of Starwars to enjoy. If you have never seen a Starwars movie before, I suggest not watching it. However, if you have seen any of them (like any normal person who knows what a good movie is), I suggest watching.
The Good: This is very Road Trip-esque, so if you like the "travel, jokes, travel, jokes" type of movie, this is perfect of you. The cast is great, although I don't really know any of their names. Lots of cameos such as William Shatner, Seth Rogan, Danny Trejo, Billy Dee Williams, Carrie Fisher, Kevin Smith, Jason Mewes, Ray Park(Darth Maul), Will Forte. This is like a dumbed down, smart comedy...if there is such a thing. The best parts are when Starwars fans and the Star Trek fans are just talking a lot of smack to each other. This epic battle between these subcultures traverses well into real world.
The Bad: The really good jokes were few and far between. Although the entire this is fairly well rounded, I only laughed out loud a few times. I'll go ahead and say that there are many plot holes, but thats to be expected.
Watch it...especially if you are reading this blog.
Rating: 7 out of 10
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
...go watch Star Trek instead.(X-Men Origins: Wolverine review)
I heard horrible things. Such horrible things about this movie that I wish not to repeat them on a public forum. However, these were things that I heard from people that had the "inside scoop" before the movie even came out--not actual reviews. The actual reviews that I heard seemed to give this movie some promise.
My brother was the first to tell me that he enjoyed this movie, then I had a co-worker tell me the same thing. But here's the thing, when someone follows up their opinion of a movie with a "because..." there is something wrong.
Example 1:
Me: "How was Wolverine?"
Brother: "It was good."
Brother: "Well, I liked it BECAUSE I didn't know much about Wolverine's background and that was kinda fun to watch."
Example 2:
Me: "How was Wolverine?"
Co-Worker: "I liked it a lot."
Co-Worker: "I liked it BECAUSE I used to read the comics when I was younger."
Now I'm not saying these are invalid reasons to enjoy a movie. I am just saying that these people know that its not a good movie. They have to justify themselves now, because they know later I will scrutinize them for liking the movie. Imagine back when someone told you Pulp Fiction was good. Did they say "It was good, because..."? NO! They just say its good...no explanation needed.
Example 1:
Me: "I never saw Shawshank Redemption, is it any good?"
Friend: "You haven't seen it?! Dude, its good."
Thats it. The lesson here is, good movies do not need explanations when giving your opinion. Bad movies do.
The Good: The idea of this is good. We have 3 X-Men movies, most of which were pretty good. Why not have separate movies for each of the characters? Marvel is crushing it with the Avenger series (Iron Man, Hulk, soon to be Thor). There was a good amount of action. I did have to cringe a little for a few scenes with horrible effects, but a lot of the fighting scenes were good. Thats
The Bad: CORNY!! It had so many cliche action scenes that it was annoying. The worst (SPOILER) being when Wolverine blows up the helicopter as he walks away (and you see the explosion behind him). I hate that soooo much. The effects were pretty bad(as noted earlier). The comedic level was much lower key than the X-Men movies. I think Wolverine's jokes had a huge impact on those movies.
Overall, it was a watchable movie, but waay too many crappy parts. It would go 15 minutes worth of good movie watching, then get followed up with 20 minutes of crap. Then 5 minutes of good, and another 20 mins of bad.
Rating: 6 out of 10
My brother was the first to tell me that he enjoyed this movie, then I had a co-worker tell me the same thing. But here's the thing, when someone follows up their opinion of a movie with a "because..." there is something wrong.
Example 1:
Me: "How was Wolverine?"
Brother: "It was good."
Brother: "Well, I liked it BECAUSE I didn't know much about Wolverine's background and that was kinda fun to watch."
Example 2:
Me: "How was Wolverine?"
Co-Worker: "I liked it a lot."
Co-Worker: "I liked it BECAUSE I used to read the comics when I was younger."
Now I'm not saying these are invalid reasons to enjoy a movie. I am just saying that these people know that its not a good movie. They have to justify themselves now, because they know later I will scrutinize them for liking the movie. Imagine back when someone told you Pulp Fiction was good. Did they say "It was good, because..."? NO! They just say its good...no explanation needed.
Example 1:
Me: "I never saw Shawshank Redemption, is it any good?"
Friend: "You haven't seen it?! Dude, its good."
Thats it. The lesson here is, good movies do not need explanations when giving your opinion. Bad movies do.
The Good: The idea of this is good. We have 3 X-Men movies, most of which were pretty good. Why not have separate movies for each of the characters? Marvel is crushing it with the Avenger series (Iron Man, Hulk, soon to be Thor). There was a good amount of action. I did have to cringe a little for a few scenes with horrible effects, but a lot of the fighting scenes were good. Thats
The Bad: CORNY!! It had so many cliche action scenes that it was annoying. The worst (SPOILER) being when Wolverine blows up the helicopter as he walks away (and you see the explosion behind him). I hate that soooo much. The effects were pretty bad(as noted earlier). The comedic level was much lower key than the X-Men movies. I think Wolverine's jokes had a huge impact on those movies.
Overall, it was a watchable movie, but waay too many crappy parts. It would go 15 minutes worth of good movie watching, then get followed up with 20 minutes of crap. Then 5 minutes of good, and another 20 mins of bad.
Rating: 6 out of 10
Friday, April 24, 2009
...go to Bhaliwood. (Slumdog Millionaire review)
I don't know if this was actually a Bahliwood movie, but it is based in India...so thats close enough, right? I'm so mad. I generally like to see the movies that were nominated for Best Picture, but I didn't get to see any! This is the first of that group that I have seen.
So this movie was the out-of-nowhere favorite of 2008. It won 8 Academy Awards, including Best Picture. It has an 8.5 on IMDB and has had ridiculous amounts of hype. Does it live up to the hype? Absolutely! Do I think its the best thing since sliced bread? No. But it's probably the best movie I have seen in several years.
I do have a question though. Does anyone know why Indians tend to bobble their head when they talk? I hope this isn't offensive, but I've never gotten an answer regarding that.
The Good: I love the story. It is based on an Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Everytime the contestant answers a question, it shows a flashback of how he actually knows the answer. This was a pretty sweet gimic that ties together a rather compelling story (although the story itself reminds me of The Kite Runner). They are all no name actors, at least in America, but all do a great job. The entire movie was paced well...I was never distracted by boredom--like the Mars scenes in Watchmen.
The music was awesome. There was a couple of pop songs that are familiar, but a lot of up-beat Indian music that I had never heard. I think one of the songs ended up winning an Academy Award as well.
The Bad: Nothing really. Maybe I would've like to laugh a little bit more, but not necessary.
Rating: 9 out of 10
So this movie was the out-of-nowhere favorite of 2008. It won 8 Academy Awards, including Best Picture. It has an 8.5 on IMDB and has had ridiculous amounts of hype. Does it live up to the hype? Absolutely! Do I think its the best thing since sliced bread? No. But it's probably the best movie I have seen in several years.
I do have a question though. Does anyone know why Indians tend to bobble their head when they talk? I hope this isn't offensive, but I've never gotten an answer regarding that.
The Good: I love the story. It is based on an Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire. Everytime the contestant answers a question, it shows a flashback of how he actually knows the answer. This was a pretty sweet gimic that ties together a rather compelling story (although the story itself reminds me of The Kite Runner). They are all no name actors, at least in America, but all do a great job. The entire movie was paced well...I was never distracted by boredom--like the Mars scenes in Watchmen.
The music was awesome. There was a couple of pop songs that are familiar, but a lot of up-beat Indian music that I had never heard. I think one of the songs ended up winning an Academy Award as well.
The Bad: Nothing really. Maybe I would've like to laugh a little bit more, but not necessary.
Rating: 9 out of 10
Thursday, April 9, 2009
...give up on Vin Diesel--if you haven't already. (Fast and Furious review)
C'mon! It should be a simple recipe: take some sweet cars, make them fast, use them a lot, and have good choreography...BUT, the most important ingredients are: keep the story and acting to a minimum. Why can't they figure that out? I really liked the first Fast and the Furious, kinda liked Tokyo Drift, hated Too Fast Too Furious. This one falls into 3rd place.
So we go to a late show on Tuesday...they apparently have $1 popcorn on Tuesdays. My gf doesn't want to watch (I don't blame her), so she goes to watch Monsters vs Aliens. I come to find out that she was the only person in that theater! And further, she said that the movie sucked. Check it out, 2 reviews in 1.
So I haven't verified this, but apparently this story takes place between the 1st and 2nd fast and furious movies. It also ties itself into Tokyo Drift as well with a 2 minute cameo by that Han dude.
The good: There are about 2 cool racing scenes. Ummm....done with this section.
The bad: Almost everything else. Bad acting, bad story is a given. There isn't enough action. Zero comedy. The beginning part of the movie has some computer generated action...horrible! They try way to hard to make the characters internally conflicted about everything! Every single scene has someone whining about something.
And the ending... really?
Rating: 5 out of 10
So we go to a late show on Tuesday...they apparently have $1 popcorn on Tuesdays. My gf doesn't want to watch (I don't blame her), so she goes to watch Monsters vs Aliens. I come to find out that she was the only person in that theater! And further, she said that the movie sucked. Check it out, 2 reviews in 1.
So I haven't verified this, but apparently this story takes place between the 1st and 2nd fast and furious movies. It also ties itself into Tokyo Drift as well with a 2 minute cameo by that Han dude.
The good: There are about 2 cool racing scenes. Ummm....done with this section.
The bad: Almost everything else. Bad acting, bad story is a given. There isn't enough action. Zero comedy. The beginning part of the movie has some computer generated action...horrible! They try way to hard to make the characters internally conflicted about everything! Every single scene has someone whining about something.
And the ending... really?
Rating: 5 out of 10
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
...play Zitch Dog. (How I Met Your Mother review)
Zitch dog!
Sitcoms? Really? Do those even still exist? I thought television had been taken over by one hour shows and reality shows. At least, those are the only ones I ever hear about.
So 4 years after the debut, I started watching How I Met Your Mother. This show is hilarious! Maybe it because its about a bunch of 27/28 year olds hanging out and I can relate, but I think its much more than that.
The good: The pranks and jokes that they play are always fresh and original. The cast has a great chemistry. I love how every little detail of the show has a story--usually portrayed with an immediate flashback, but sometimes they only mention a story, which then plays out in a later episode. The humor is very smart, and when they decide not to use smart humor...they just ask for a high five and it becomes funny.
The story is oddly deep. Although you can easily watch sporadic episodes and enjoy it, watching it in sequence provides enough story to grab bigger audiences.
The bad: None. Go Doogie!
Rating: 9 out of 10
Sitcoms? Really? Do those even still exist? I thought television had been taken over by one hour shows and reality shows. At least, those are the only ones I ever hear about.
So 4 years after the debut, I started watching How I Met Your Mother. This show is hilarious! Maybe it because its about a bunch of 27/28 year olds hanging out and I can relate, but I think its much more than that.
The good: The pranks and jokes that they play are always fresh and original. The cast has a great chemistry. I love how every little detail of the show has a story--usually portrayed with an immediate flashback, but sometimes they only mention a story, which then plays out in a later episode. The humor is very smart, and when they decide not to use smart humor...they just ask for a high five and it becomes funny.
The story is oddly deep. Although you can easily watch sporadic episodes and enjoy it, watching it in sequence provides enough story to grab bigger audiences.
The bad: None. Go Doogie!
Rating: 9 out of 10
Monday, April 6, 2009
...watch baseball! Or, at least look at the box scores.
I am prepared for the wrath of actually baseball fans...
Who knew that such a boring sport to watch could produce an overwhelmingly fun experience of Fantasy Baseball. Sure, go ahead..."its no fantasy football", "it takes up too much time", "there are too many games", blah blah blah. You people are missing the point of the great joys of competition, despite the lack of interest in the subject. For example, I know someone who plays fantasy with celebrities, based on how many headlines they make...ahem.
So most recently, we did an auction draft this past weekend. This is where you actually bid for players versus just picking them snake style. And I'd like to say, ITS MUCH MORE FUN. Imagine having to pay attention to every pick and having a chance to win them. There are so many more facets of strategy. I have 2 teams, the first team was standard drafting, the 2nd team was my auction.
Standard:
C: Geovany Soto
1B: Adrian Gonzalez
2B: Chase Utly
SS: JJ Hardy
3B: Jorge Cantu
LF: Matt Holiday
CF: Lastings Milledge
RF: Ryan Ludwick
Bench: Kazuo Matsui, Ryan Theriot, Jayson Werth, JD Drew
SP: Brandon Webb, John Lackey, Gil Meche, Jair Jurrjens, Brad Penny, Ubaldo Jimenez
RP: Joe Nathan, Fernando Rodney, Brandon Morrow, Joakim Soria, Brian Wilson
Auction:
C: Victor Martinez
1B: Miguel Cabrera
2B: Brian Roberts
SS: Jimmy Rollins
3B: Kevin youkilis
IF: Chris Davis
OF: Matt Holiday
OF: Matt Kemp
OF: Carlos Quentin
OF: Jermaine Dye
Bench: Carlos Pena, Ryan Theriot
SP: Gil Meche, Paul Maholm, Wandy Rodriguez, Clayton Kershaw, Chien-Ming Wang, Johnny Cueto
RP:Brian Wilson, Fernando Rodney, Brandon Morrow, Joel Hanrahan, Kevin Gregg, George Sherrill
My strategy for the auction was to go Closer heavy and get cheap starters. And to spend all my money on offense. Lets see how that works out.
Good luck Fantasy Filipinos.
Who knew that such a boring sport to watch could produce an overwhelmingly fun experience of Fantasy Baseball. Sure, go ahead..."its no fantasy football", "it takes up too much time", "there are too many games", blah blah blah. You people are missing the point of the great joys of competition, despite the lack of interest in the subject. For example, I know someone who plays fantasy with celebrities, based on how many headlines they make...ahem.
So most recently, we did an auction draft this past weekend. This is where you actually bid for players versus just picking them snake style. And I'd like to say, ITS MUCH MORE FUN. Imagine having to pay attention to every pick and having a chance to win them. There are so many more facets of strategy. I have 2 teams, the first team was standard drafting, the 2nd team was my auction.
Standard:
C: Geovany Soto
1B: Adrian Gonzalez
2B: Chase Utly
SS: JJ Hardy
3B: Jorge Cantu
LF: Matt Holiday
CF: Lastings Milledge
RF: Ryan Ludwick
Bench: Kazuo Matsui, Ryan Theriot, Jayson Werth, JD Drew
SP: Brandon Webb, John Lackey, Gil Meche, Jair Jurrjens, Brad Penny, Ubaldo Jimenez
RP: Joe Nathan, Fernando Rodney, Brandon Morrow, Joakim Soria, Brian Wilson
Auction:
C: Victor Martinez
1B: Miguel Cabrera
2B: Brian Roberts
SS: Jimmy Rollins
3B: Kevin youkilis
IF: Chris Davis
OF: Matt Holiday
OF: Matt Kemp
OF: Carlos Quentin
OF: Jermaine Dye
Bench: Carlos Pena, Ryan Theriot
SP: Gil Meche, Paul Maholm, Wandy Rodriguez, Clayton Kershaw, Chien-Ming Wang, Johnny Cueto
RP:Brian Wilson, Fernando Rodney, Brandon Morrow, Joel Hanrahan, Kevin Gregg, George Sherrill
My strategy for the auction was to go Closer heavy and get cheap starters. And to spend all my money on offense. Lets see how that works out.
Good luck Fantasy Filipinos.
Friday, March 20, 2009
...not watch a movie just because you saw the best part. (Legend of 1900 review)
So my roommate tells me I should watch this movie. I hadn't heard much about the movie, so as usual I said "maybe" (with no intention of actually watching). But he proceeded to show me a clip on his computer. This scene included the main character have a piano duel with one of the best jazz musicians around. These scene had good music and a bit a humor. I sat and watched, completely entertained for about 7 or 8 minutes.
SOLD!
So I burned a copy and watched it in my room. The first night I tried watching it, I fell asleep after about 20 minutes. The second time I tried watching it, I made it almost all the way through, but then the ending was so boring I stopped with about 5 or 10 minutes left in the movie...there was no 3rd time being a charm for this movie.
The good: Those 7 or 8 minutes of the piano duel.
The bad: Everything else. You would think Tim Roth could bring some redeeming factors to the movie, but absolutely not. The story? Baby found on cruise liner by worker that lives on the boat. Baby never leaves boat. Baby turns out to be a phenom piano player. Still never leaves the boat. Ummm...thats about it. I don't know if he ever leaves the boat, or if he dies on the boat because I stopped watching.
Damn you, good scene, we should've left it at that.
Rating: 3 out of 10
SOLD!
So I burned a copy and watched it in my room. The first night I tried watching it, I fell asleep after about 20 minutes. The second time I tried watching it, I made it almost all the way through, but then the ending was so boring I stopped with about 5 or 10 minutes left in the movie...there was no 3rd time being a charm for this movie.
The good: Those 7 or 8 minutes of the piano duel.
The bad: Everything else. You would think Tim Roth could bring some redeeming factors to the movie, but absolutely not. The story? Baby found on cruise liner by worker that lives on the boat. Baby never leaves boat. Baby turns out to be a phenom piano player. Still never leaves the boat. Ummm...thats about it. I don't know if he ever leaves the boat, or if he dies on the boat because I stopped watching.
Damn you, good scene, we should've left it at that.
Rating: 3 out of 10
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
...read the...comic? (Watchmen review)
I love me some midnight openings. What I don't like is watching 3 hour long movies at midnight then staying up another hour just to drive to airport 2 and half hours early because it is an international flight so I can zip through check-in and and security and get to the gate with 2 hours to spare, in the meantime, having a sprained ankle. So, my view of this movie may be a bit skewed.
I never read the comic, although I had heard about it (maybe I should call it a "graphic novel" so people don't get mad). And for those of you that don't know the conspiracy, this movie almost didn't get released. I forget the movie companies in question, but apparently someone made the movie that didn't have the rights for the movie. Then AFTER they finished the movie, the company that did own the rights said they couldn't release it... but thats another story, and we can see that it worked out in the end.
The Good: The action, the direction, the characters, the story. So pretty much all of the important things were good about this. The story was a lot deeper than I had imagined it. I thought it was just going to be a superhero versus humans sorta thing, I mean, that was still sorta that, but not really--I'm not explaining myself further here. I loved the montage at the beginning of movie.
When there was action, it was really good. It had a lot of the 300 gimic of slow motion action. Its kinda funny, because all of the "heroes" are very goofy looking and not menacing at all...but when it comes to fighting, its pretty sweet.
The Bad: Did I mention this movie was almost 3 hours long? There was a lot of character development flashbacks that I thought were done well enough, but since there are like 10 characters, that took up a lot of time. But thats not the time that was wasted. WAY to much self reflection for some of the characters. I feel like they could've conveyed the same messages in about 30 to 40 less minutes.
Overall: I liked it. I like it more now after thinking about the movie than I did at 4am. I am half curious to read the comic. This is the first time that I've heard that the movie may have been as good as the book--just made a little differently to adapt to the big screen.
Rating: 7.5 out of 10 (8 if it wasn't so long)
I never read the comic, although I had heard about it (maybe I should call it a "graphic novel" so people don't get mad). And for those of you that don't know the conspiracy, this movie almost didn't get released. I forget the movie companies in question, but apparently someone made the movie that didn't have the rights for the movie. Then AFTER they finished the movie, the company that did own the rights said they couldn't release it... but thats another story, and we can see that it worked out in the end.
The Good: The action, the direction, the characters, the story. So pretty much all of the important things were good about this. The story was a lot deeper than I had imagined it. I thought it was just going to be a superhero versus humans sorta thing, I mean, that was still sorta that, but not really--I'm not explaining myself further here. I loved the montage at the beginning of movie.
When there was action, it was really good. It had a lot of the 300 gimic of slow motion action. Its kinda funny, because all of the "heroes" are very goofy looking and not menacing at all...but when it comes to fighting, its pretty sweet.
The Bad: Did I mention this movie was almost 3 hours long? There was a lot of character development flashbacks that I thought were done well enough, but since there are like 10 characters, that took up a lot of time. But thats not the time that was wasted. WAY to much self reflection for some of the characters. I feel like they could've conveyed the same messages in about 30 to 40 less minutes.
Overall: I liked it. I like it more now after thinking about the movie than I did at 4am. I am half curious to read the comic. This is the first time that I've heard that the movie may have been as good as the book--just made a little differently to adapt to the big screen.
Rating: 7.5 out of 10 (8 if it wasn't so long)
Monday, March 16, 2009
...read this blog once again!
I apologize for the blogging hiatus... Especially for those who need this blog to pass about 5 to 10 minutes of their workday--I know how important that is. I have lots of excuses, mainly busy at work and a vacation.
Anyways, this post is not going to be very long since it is just a memo stating that I'm getting back into the game. The blogging game of abysmal banter about anything and everything (of course, mainly movies as usual). I have a few movies to talk about, perhaps touch on some March Madness, Fantasy baseball....in short, you will soon learn how little I actually know about sports. Luckily, I can fake my knowledge with the best of them.
Also, take this as an opportunity to give me some other topics that I can speak to. Perhaps rock collections, the weather, or even legal advice.
Anyways, this post is not going to be very long since it is just a memo stating that I'm getting back into the game. The blogging game of abysmal banter about anything and everything (of course, mainly movies as usual). I have a few movies to talk about, perhaps touch on some March Madness, Fantasy baseball....in short, you will soon learn how little I actually know about sports. Luckily, I can fake my knowledge with the best of them.
Also, take this as an opportunity to give me some other topics that I can speak to. Perhaps rock collections, the weather, or even legal advice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)