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
Friday, March 20, 2009
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.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
..read the book. (Running with Scissors review).
"The book was much better." These were the words of my gf on Sunday night. How many times will I hear that? Not necessarily from her, but from anyone that reads books. I can actually say that 3 times: Congo, Rising Sun and The Da Vinci Code. But, unless they start adapting some Kurt Vonnegut books, I may never say those words again.
I am forced to think that this phenomenon only exists because of the energy put towards reading the book. Has anyone ever tried reading a book AFTER watching the movie first? If you have, I'd like to know your thoughts. I thought the book, The Da Vinci Code, was the greatest thing ever--and then I thought the movie, The Da Vinci Code, was the worst thing ever. But whats weird, is that I know some people that like the movie, but never read the book.
Whatever, despite my feelings on those 3 books, I'll take the 2 hour movie over the book any day.
Anyways, Running With Scissors. Based on a book by Augusten Burroughs. This movie was a little out there. Its a movie about a disfuncitonal family that intertwines with another disfunctional family.
The good: It has some funny moments, but not laugh out loud funny. The fact that EVERYONE in this movie is literally crazy makes you wonder what will happen almost every scene.
The bad: The story doesn't really go anywhere. Just seems like a mass of crazy nothingness. I don't know if the book tied it together well, but the movie did not. Lots of plot holes. None of the characters really hold my attention.
I'm sad to say that I don't have much else to say about this movie. Don't watch it.
Rating: 4 out of 10
I am forced to think that this phenomenon only exists because of the energy put towards reading the book. Has anyone ever tried reading a book AFTER watching the movie first? If you have, I'd like to know your thoughts. I thought the book, The Da Vinci Code, was the greatest thing ever--and then I thought the movie, The Da Vinci Code, was the worst thing ever. But whats weird, is that I know some people that like the movie, but never read the book.
Whatever, despite my feelings on those 3 books, I'll take the 2 hour movie over the book any day.
Anyways, Running With Scissors. Based on a book by Augusten Burroughs. This movie was a little out there. Its a movie about a disfuncitonal family that intertwines with another disfunctional family.
The good: It has some funny moments, but not laugh out loud funny. The fact that EVERYONE in this movie is literally crazy makes you wonder what will happen almost every scene.
The bad: The story doesn't really go anywhere. Just seems like a mass of crazy nothingness. I don't know if the book tied it together well, but the movie did not. Lots of plot holes. None of the characters really hold my attention.
I'm sad to say that I don't have much else to say about this movie. Don't watch it.
Rating: 4 out of 10
Monday, February 16, 2009
...recognize the dude that played the bad guy in Tombstone. (Frailty review)
Another lost bet...another movie watched that I probably never would've watched otherwise. At first I said "no," since I don't like scary movies and end up crying like a little girl--but he assured me that it wasn't really scary, just more of a thriller. We have a rule (Shmovies and I) that whenever we make one of these "movie wagers", the movie has to be at least a 7 rating or higher. I will give him the benefit of the doubt since I don't like thrillers that much.
Starring Bill Paxton, Matthew Macohnekahhehankshgayahay, and Wiley Bill from Tombstone, Powers Boothe.
The good: It was surprising to say the least. The story was pretty interesting: "God" asks a man to kill demons in the world. The man teaches his young children to kill these demons as well. Police search for this serial killer.
Seemed like the typical serial killer movie at first, but as the movie progressed, there were a lot of elements of the movie that stirred some intrigue.
SEMI-SPOILER: There are a couple twists at the end--my gf was able to call it before it happened. I didn't.
The bad: Yet another "Bill P." that I dislike. Although he directed this film fairly well, Bill Pullman's character in the movie is just not very believable. He made me want to punch him in the face every time he talked.
The way Wiley Bill's character acted throughout the movie seemed unbelievable. No one would ever blindly act the way he did.
Overall, it was a good experience. Lovers of the thriller movie would enjoy this.
Rating: 6.5 out of 10
Starring Bill Paxton, Matthew Macohnekahhehankshgayahay, and Wiley Bill from Tombstone, Powers Boothe.
The good: It was surprising to say the least. The story was pretty interesting: "God" asks a man to kill demons in the world. The man teaches his young children to kill these demons as well. Police search for this serial killer.
Seemed like the typical serial killer movie at first, but as the movie progressed, there were a lot of elements of the movie that stirred some intrigue.
SEMI-SPOILER: There are a couple twists at the end--my gf was able to call it before it happened. I didn't.
The bad: Yet another "Bill P." that I dislike. Although he directed this film fairly well, Bill Pullman's character in the movie is just not very believable. He made me want to punch him in the face every time he talked.
The way Wiley Bill's character acted throughout the movie seemed unbelievable. No one would ever blindly act the way he did.
Overall, it was a good experience. Lovers of the thriller movie would enjoy this.
Rating: 6.5 out of 10
Thursday, February 12, 2009
...stop watching Heroes.
So I watched the season premiere of Heroes the Monday after the Superbowl...it was mediocre at best. I decided that I would give it a couple more weeks to draw me--bad idea. This week was possibly worse that the first. And how many times do we have to hear this story? Man hunts mutants. Sound familiar? I think this will again be a recurring theme in the Watchmen movie.
Anyways, the whole idea of gaining powers, losing powers, temporarily having powers is getting ridiculous. It leaves too much room for bad story telling, which, unfortunately is the problem with this show.
Do I give it one more week? How long does it take for one to decide that a show is bad. It took me SIX shows to decide that I didn't like the show Jekyll.
Halleluiah for 24! Still going strong.
Anyways, the whole idea of gaining powers, losing powers, temporarily having powers is getting ridiculous. It leaves too much room for bad story telling, which, unfortunately is the problem with this show.
Do I give it one more week? How long does it take for one to decide that a show is bad. It took me SIX shows to decide that I didn't like the show Jekyll.
Halleluiah for 24! Still going strong.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
...Documentary happy. (Man on Wire review)
I don't get it. I never WANT to watch a documentary...but, every time I start watching one, I always get involved and normally end up liking it. An Inconvenient Truth, Planet B-Boy, Sicko...all pretty good.
So I hear about this documentary on a podcast that I listen to, then it ends up being nominated for Best Documentary at the Oscars. And luckily, its on Netflix instant streaming (Netflix, are you reading this? Show me the money!)
Man on Wire is a true story of a French dude that decides that he wants to walk across the twin towers (r.i.p.) by way of a tight rope. It shows how he has done the same sort of thing at other famous buildings, like Notre Dame. This dude was crazy.
The Good: Its pretty amazing to see how confident this guy was. Whats funny is that he never gets permission to do any of these tight rope stunts on any of the famous buildings, so he always ends up getting arrested.
In a way, its like a caper movie because it shows how he plots his way to the top of the world trade center.
The Bad: A lot of the film is re-enactments. Since they had to sneak their way to the top, they didn't have any real documentation (mind you, this was in 1974). The only thing that there is documentation for is that he actually did walk on a tight rope across. How they actually get up there is just story telling.
Overall, I found this documentary to be entertaining enough. Not the best, but worth a watch. I'm surprised that I had never heard of this person before until this film came out. A man walking across the tallest buildings in the world seems like something I wouldve heard about. Maybe my brother heard about, since he's the only one that was alive back then...
Rating: 6 out of 10
So I hear about this documentary on a podcast that I listen to, then it ends up being nominated for Best Documentary at the Oscars. And luckily, its on Netflix instant streaming (Netflix, are you reading this? Show me the money!)
Man on Wire is a true story of a French dude that decides that he wants to walk across the twin towers (r.i.p.) by way of a tight rope. It shows how he has done the same sort of thing at other famous buildings, like Notre Dame. This dude was crazy.
The Good: Its pretty amazing to see how confident this guy was. Whats funny is that he never gets permission to do any of these tight rope stunts on any of the famous buildings, so he always ends up getting arrested.
In a way, its like a caper movie because it shows how he plots his way to the top of the world trade center.
The Bad: A lot of the film is re-enactments. Since they had to sneak their way to the top, they didn't have any real documentation (mind you, this was in 1974). The only thing that there is documentation for is that he actually did walk on a tight rope across. How they actually get up there is just story telling.
Overall, I found this documentary to be entertaining enough. Not the best, but worth a watch. I'm surprised that I had never heard of this person before until this film came out. A man walking across the tallest buildings in the world seems like something I wouldve heard about. Maybe my brother heard about, since he's the only one that was alive back then...
Rating: 6 out of 10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)