Recent East Asian Cinema #4: Oldboy.

Welcome to the fourth of seven posts that will detail East Asian cinema, giving genre history leading up to a recent movie which will be reviewed! I hope you enjoy the series. For more information or previous entries, check the posts below this one.

----------------

Genre: Mystery/Thriller/Revenge Tale.

History: Because the genres of this movie are so vast, this section will, inevitably, be much shorter than the others (You know that makes sense!). Mysteries are basically those stories and/or movies in which something has occurred, and it is up to one or more characters (usually a detective of some sort) to figure it out. There is usually a plot twist at the end. The Thriller (sans Michael Jackson) is typically a fast-paced story focusing strongly on plot and action, moving forward at a quick yet suspenseful rate. The Revenge Tale is about as old as fiction itself, which usually involves either the protagonist or antagonist of the story doing something to exact vengeance on the other character.

These aren’t themes/genres that are specific to East Asia; however, when you mix the three together into one story that comes from the mind of an East Asian, you have the possibility of creating something amazing. And such was done in 2003 when South Korean director Chan-wook Park adapted to film a Manga by the name of Oldboy. It would become the second movie of his Revenge trilogy (the other two being Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance), though, in my opinion, it would turn out to be the greatest of the three. It was in talks for a long time about being remade in America, but that's been put on hold for now. Let's hope it stays that way (seriously, there's no way this could be Americanized and still stay true). So let’s get to it.

Oldboy (2003).

Country of Origin: South Korea.

Original Title: Oldboy.

Director: Chan-wook Park.

Oldboy starts as a mysterious man with messy hair is holding another man over the edge of a building by his tie. He wants to tell this man his story, and, thus, we flash back 15 years. Oh Dae-su (Min-sik Choi), a normal Korean businessman, is kidnapped and kept imprisoned in a bedroom. He has nothing to keep him entertained in the room except for a television. Here he learns that his wife was murdered and that Oh Dae-su himself, who had gone missing, was to blame for it. He teaches himself to fight over the years of captivity, as well as keeps time by tattooing himself. Then, after 15 years, he's released with a new suit and a cell phone. After telling the poor man on the roof all of this, he moves on. He meets the young and beautiful sushi chef Mi-do (Hye-jeong Kang), and they quickly fall in love. Oh Dae-su is then told by mysterious Woo-jin (Ji-tae Yu) that he has 5 days to find out why he had been captured in the first place or Mi-do will be killed.

This movie, quite frankly, is phenomenal. It’s one of my favorite foreign films. The story and concept is awesome, and it’s executed well. There really isn’t a time where anything drags. You wonder at first how these two characters could have fallen in love so quickly, but everything is perfectly explained and not left to be questioned (with one big exception, which I’ll get to in a minute) by the end of the movie.

There are some great shots in the movie, such as the huge 5 minute or so hallway brawl that is one continuous shot (it took about 17 takes and 3 days to get it right). They really went all out in the movie. There’s a scene where Oh Dae-su has to eat a live octopus. Do they CGI it? Nope. They actually made the actor eat a real live octopus. That’s hardcore.

The ending of the movie is great, as the plot twist is literally one of the most twisted I’ve ever seen. It’s intricate and detailed. Woo-jin is really not a guy I’d want to cross (The plot twist is actually on my list of best movie twists from way back). However, the one thing I do somewhat dislike about the movie (though it’s growing on me) is the ‘epilogue’ of the movie. It’s weird when movies have epilogues, especially when you can tell it has that epilogue feel to it (not important to the plot, but tacked on to give some more closure). The snow setting with the hypnotist is bizarre and almost doesn’t seem as if it fits with the rest of the movie, but I can see why it’s there and why it needed to be done. However, even though it’s there, everything is left incredibly ambiguous, so you still don’t know if it was real or not. Nevertheless, I love the part at the very end, when the movie is closing. It was a perfect way to end it, and it wouldn’t have been able to end it that way had they stopped right before the epilogue. So, in that sense, I’m happy it was there. Still, the scene isn’t even 5 minutes long in this 2 hour movie, so it doesn’t ruin anything for me.

So yeah, cool action, great shots, amazing story and concept (albeit twisted), and really fun and pumped music that really fit the scenes. Everything was great all around. I’d recommend this movie to just about anybody that doesn’t mind subtitles (as long as they aren’t close-minded and easily turned-off by certain things). I’m sure you’ve already guessed this rating.

Royale With Cheese

Recent East Asian Cinema #3: Audition.

Welcome to the third of seven posts that will detail East Asian cinema, giving genre history leading up to a recent movie which will be reviewed! I hope you enjoy the series. For more information or previous entries, check the posts below this one.

-----------

Genre: J-Horror.

History: Horror films go way back, but we’ll be discussing a certain brand of horror here: movies of gore. To begin with this subgenre, we must begin with the two movies that inspired them all. In 1960, Alfred Hitchcock created one of the most iconic horror films with one of the most iconic murder scenes (even though the shower scene doesn’t really show the knife penetrating and has an insanely small amount of blood). However, in 1968, George A. Romero created Night of the Living Dead (inspired by the novella I Am Legend), the movie to really make the gore-movie popular. And it was only outdone by its sequel, Dawn of the Dead, ten years later.

It was a mix of these types of movies that went on to inspire the first true slasher movie, Black Christmas (1974), as well as the famous Friday the 13^th (1980) and Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) movies. Also in 1974, we were introduced to the movie that really began the torturous splatter-gore subgenre with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Throughout the 70s and 80s, we were introduced to numerous slasher flicks and gore-fest flicks until the genre wore itself silly (much like the monster movie did).

Then, in 1996, the gore-loving slasher flicks would get a revival in the form of Wes Craven’s self-aware, homage-paying Scream. The revival of the genre was short-lived, however, as it soon began to wear itself thin again with countless additions to the genre, such as I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997), Urban Legend (1998), and the more original and better-liked Final Destination (2000). Because the subgenre was riding its last threads, it seemed as if everything had to be knocked up a few notches. The gore would become the center of the movie, and Eli Roth’s Hostel in 2005 would be responsible for garnering the term torture porn and coining it into mainstream cinema.

Meanwhile, while all of this was occurring in American cinema, something else entirely was happening with Japanese Horror (J-Horror). J-Horror was taking two different approaches: the supernatural/psychological and the gore-fest. Famed director Hideo Nakata would create movies (which would later be remade in America) such as Ringu (1998) and Dark Water (2002). These were on the supernatural/psychological side of the spectrum. On the other side of the spectrum was famed and controversial director Takashi Miike, who made movies such as Ichi The Killer (2001), One Missed Call (2004), and Audition (1999). The latter of this list, which has its roots deeply set in everything previously mentioned (slasher/gore/psychological), is truly one of the scariest and most disturbing movies Japan has to offer… which is why it’s the movie I’m going to discuss now.

Audition (1999).

Country of Origin: Japan.

Original Title: Ōdishon.

Director: Takashi Miike.

Audition is about Shigeharu (Ryo Ishibashi), a man who lost his wife to an illness seven years prior. His son, Shigehiko (Tetsu Sawaki), as well as his movie producer friend, Yoshikawa (Jun Kunimura), talk him into getting back into the field and trying to find another wife. Yoshikawa talks him into holding a fake audition, where the women will think they’re auditioning for a movie role, but are really auditioning for the role as Shigeharu’s wife-to-be. During these auditions, Shigeharu meets Asami Yamazaki (Eihi Shiina), a young, shy woman who claims to have been a ballerina. Shigeharu thinks he’s finally found his perfect match, even against Yoshikawa’s warnings that Asami doesn’t seem right. Asami lives in an empty apartment with nothing but a telephone and a burlap sack (though Shigeharu doesn’t know this). They continue to date until Asami makes Shigeharu promise that he won’t love anybody else but her. However, things don’t start checking out right. Asami’s references are either fake or missing. Shigeharu has to figure out what’s going on with Asami before it’s too late (and we all know what happens next!).

The movie has an incredibly slow pacing, especially at the beginning. But it’s done like that on purpose. The movie wants you to get to like Asami as this cute, shy young woman before the ending hits like a bag of bricks. It’s the suspense that keeps you watching. What’s in that burlap sack? What happened to Asami’s music producer ex? Just when you think it’s dragging a bit too long, the movie throws you a curveball and makes you go ‘what the hell?’ (Specifically the scene where the burlap sack moves, and Asami’s just listening to the phone ring, staring down at her lap, and a small smile crosses her lips. It’s the creepiest scene in the whole movie. I even knew it was coming beforehand, and I still jumped and got creeped out).

But the movie all builds up to that insanely graphic 15-minute conclusion, which is really the only scene anybody remembers (or cares about). The only bad thing about that scene is that I remember being incredibly confused the first time I saw it. Halfway through, it cuts away to some other crazy things and makes you wonder if the whole thing was a dream… but then cuts back to it after what seems like ages. It was just an odd moment for me.

The movie is close to two hours long, but not much actually happens until the very end. I know the slow-rising pacing was done purposefully, but I think some of it could have been a bit better (primarily toward the beginning). The ending is hardcore, and it has even made famed directors John Landis and Rob Zombie admit they had trouble watching it (which they admitted on Bravo’s Top 100 Scariest Movie Moments, in which Audition came in at #11. It was where I first heard about the film, actually). Regardless of any negatives, the slower parts did allow for character development, which allowed you to actually care for some of these characters (making the ending even crazier). So I suppose I should rate it.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

Recent East Asian Cinema #2: Spirited Away.

Welcome to the second of seven posts that will detail East Asian cinema, giving genre history leading up to a recent movie which will be reviewed! I hope you enjoy the series. For more information or previous entries, check the posts below this one.

-----------

Genre: Anime.

History: Anime is short for animation, and is primarily used to describe Japanese animation that usually stems from Manga (Japanese comic books). The term itself, in Japan is used for all animation; however, it is used, as stated, to describe Japanese animation for English speakers. Anime isn’t your typical animated family-type film. It can be, but that’s not what it’s stuck to. The genres of Anime are just as broad (and then some) as any other type of movie.

Believe it or not, Anime as we know it began because of Walt Disney. Japanese animators were impressed with the style of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, so they decided to try and mimic the style. It was only meant, however, to be temporary for animators with little skill when production companies were in a pinch.

But when Manga became popular in the 1970s, they began to become adapted into an animated format in this Anime style. The “father of Anime,” and overall Japanese equivalent to Disney himself, is Osamu Tezuka, who was both a creator of Manga and Anime. He was responsible for such works as Astro Boy and Kimba the White Lion (which, ironically, later came into controversy with Disney's own The Lion King).

But Anime was still primarily a Japanese thing. It wasn’t until the 1988 anime film Akira (based on the Manga of the same name) that Anime began to become popular in the Western World. After Akira, which brought a second wave of Anime fans all around, the style began to grow and expand even more, having any movie type from giant robot action/dramas to slapstick comedy to gay porn. There wasn’t a subject that anime wouldn’t tackle.

Currently, the most acclaimed director of Anime is Hayao Miyazaki, co-founder of Studio Ghibli. He became well-known in the Western World with his film Princess Mononoke in 1997, which was, at that time, the highest grossing film of all time in Japan. He later created Spirited Away, the film we will be focusing on today, which was the first Anime film to ever win an Academy Award.

Spirited Away (2001).

Country of Origin: Japan.

Original Title: Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi.

Director: Hayao Miyazaki (and Kirk Wise for English version).

Spirited Away is a weird (as most Anime can be considered… cultural thing), yet endearing movie. Chihiro is a rather whiny and stubborn young girl moving to a new town with her parents. When her dad tries to make a shortcut to their new house, they get lost and end up in front of an old, abandoned theme park (or so it seems). Even with Chihiro’s refusals to go in, they end up wandering around until they find some food, which they chow down on (except for Chihiro, who denies). Chihiro wanders off and discovers and old bathhouse. But when it starts to get dark, a mysterious young man, Haku, warns her to hurry and get across the river before it gets dark. She goes to her parents, but they have been literally transformed into pigs… and then the previously empty riverbed is now so full it’s like an ocean. Chihiro has thus been ‘spirited away’ into the spirit realm. Haku helps her to get a job at the bathhouse, run by the cranky old witch Yubaba, who takes her name away and re-dubs her Sen. There, Chihiro/Sen must work it out with spirit creatures/gods, as well as face the hatred from the other workers for being human, until she can figure out a way to get her parents back to normal and get home.

There’s a lot of bizarre things in this movie, but it all works for the world we’re given. My favorite scene in the movie has to be the ‘stink spirit’ (who is more than he seems), and Chihiro has to work harder than she ever has before to help make this situation right. It’s a great scene in the movie, and is really a turning point.

If there was anything that would be negative about this movie, it’s that there’s no real plot. The purpose is about Chihiro making it through long enough until she can find a way to return her parents to normal and get home. It’s a basic enough thing. But in between that time, so many other random things happen. They all do have some sort of purpose to the ending of the movie, but it’s really difficult to put this into a first/second/third act. It’s almost as if the movie has 4 acts: The human world, bathhouse part 1 (up through the stink spirit), bathhouse part 2 (the No-Face stuff), and the Zeniba stuff. It just makes the movie feel disjointed at points. But that’s probably just me.

The animation style is great, as it’s a mix of hand-drawn animation and computer graphics. And, amazingly enough, the American dubbing actually doesn’t suck. Chihiro is kinda shouty at times, but that’s how the character is anyway. Another thing I loved about the movie were its usually subtle commentaries. It touched a lot on gluttony and greed, via the food/pig stuff and No-Face respectively. And, ironically, Chihiro is renamed Sen (sin), and she’s the only character who doesn’t give in to any of the bad things in the movie.

Overall, the movie is a great film. It has amazing character development with Chihiro, which is really what the whole thing was about. The English dub actually, I think, added something to it that worked really well. Miyazaki has stated that, in the original Japanese version, Chihiro doesn’t remember a thing about the spirit world and there’s no real proof that she learned anything from the experience. However, in the English dubbing, they add in a line at the end that contrasts feelings Chihiro had about her new school, showing that she’s really grown as a person. And that really gives the movie meaning. However, regardless, it is still a great movie either way.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

Recent East Asian Cinema #1: The Host.

Welcome to the first of seven posts that will detail East Asian cinema, giving genre history leading up to a recent movie which will be reviewed! I hope you enjoy the series. For more information, check here.

---------

Genre: Monster Movie.

History: Monster movies are those in which something non-human (and usually huge) terrorizes a town/city. The oldest monster movies began with such human-esque creatures as Dracula, Nosferatu, or Frankenstein. However, one of the first examples of the modern-day view of a monster movie was King Kong in 1933. The genre began to expand until The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms came out in 1953. This movie was about a dinosaur that was awakened from a frozen block of ice after an atomic bomb test. Sound familiar? It should. It inspired the Japanese film, Godzilla (Gojira) in 1954. It also inspired numerous other works, such as Rodan and Mothra, which would inevitably spin off into one of Godzilla’s numerous ‘versus’ movies. The Godzilla movies ended up having their own spin-off series, Gamera, in 1965. It would go to rival the Godzilla movies. The genre itself would wear itself out, mostly because of these endless Godzilla-type movies with cheesy dubbing and bad acting and similar plots every round.

In the 80s and 90s, the monster movie even tried a different approach to bring back the monster movie with comedy, such as with the Tremors movies. But then Peter Jackson tried to revive the genre from the beginning with his remake of King Kong in 2005. 2006, however, would be the year to jumpstart the monster movie back to its prime. It was the year that South Korea made the widely-praised movie The Host, which is the movie I am going to discuss in further detail now.

The Host (2006).

Country of Origin: South Korea

Original Title: Gwoemul

Director: Joon-Ho Bong

The Host is interesting in its portrayal of the monster movie, because it focuses more on the people than the monster. The Host is about a poor family that works at an old food stand, including slacker Gang-Du (Kang-ho Song), his daughter Hyun-seo (Ah-sung Ko), and his father Hie-bong (Hie-bong Byeon). The family later comes to include Gang-Du’s archery-loving sister Nam-Joo (Du-na Bae) and grumpy brother Nam-il (Hae-il Park). After a whole load of formaldehyde is poured down the drain to mix into the Han River, a mutated monster forms. Years later, it exits the water and starts killing/eating people. But when Hyun-seo is taken by the monster and supposedly killed and/or eaten, the family goes into a large depression (especially her father, Gang-Du). To make matters worse, it seems that anybody who had come into contact with the monster might have some crazy lethal virus, putting Gang-Du and his family into quarantine. While in quarantine, Gang-Du gets a phone call… from Hyun-seo. Apparently she’s still alive and in a sewer-like place somewhere. So now the family must escape quarantine and do whatever it takes to find Hyun-seo before it’s too late.

For me, the movie started off okay. There were some things that didn’t really blow my shirt up, to use the expression. For instance, some of the more dramatic or sad scenes came off as over-the-top and unintentionally funny (like the mourning of Hyun-seo near the beginning). I mean, at least I don’t think they would want a scene like that to be funny. But as the movie went on and they had to escape quarantine and travel the city, it started getting better. By the time the movie reached its climax, I was really into it.

But then it started to irk me again, and I don’t mean the overly depressing ending. I mean, the whole movie, the monster looks pretty awesome. The special effects were really good. But then when the fire stuff starts happening toward the end, both the fire and the monster suddenly look obviously fake and took me out of the moment… making me wonder if the production company just started running out of money or what. I mean, they can make a super-cool monster, but they can’t make fire? Or, worse yet, a monster and fire at the same time?

There were also a few characters that weren’t really expanded on and I guess were just there for one specific purpose. For instance, Nam-Joo only seemed to be there for the archery thing (she barely even had a speaking line), and the homeless kids’ subplot was probably only added to give the movie some semblance of a happy ending.

I got confused at first, as well, as to who was who in the family. It took me a while to realize that Gang-Du was Hyun-seo’s father, because he seemed to be like… 18 or 19 years old (I think it was the hair), and Hyun-seo was like… 12 or so.

All of the negatives aside, the story was really good and reminded me somewhat of Cloverfield (because I saw Cloverfield first, even though this one came out first). The acting was pretty good, for the most part, especially by Hyun-seo’s actress. I know I mentioned quite a few negative aspects, but I really did enjoy this movie quite a bit. There were some really tense moments, some really (intentionally) funny moments, a few really sad moments… it was all around the board. There was good character development, specifically with Gang-Du. I don’t know what else to say about it. It has its flaws, but it’s a really good monster movie.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

2 In 1: MirrorMask and Stardust.

The theme for this 2 In 1 is Neil Gaiman. That’s right, the man of twisted fantasy. He has a great imagination and his work truly shows it. In fact, the first on this list, MirrorMask, is the movie I always turn to when I’m writing anything fantastical and have writer’s block. It always seems to help pull me out of it. So here goes.

MirrorMask.

MirrorMask is pure imagination, truly. It is twisted, imaginative, and incredibly hard to describe. But I’ll give it a shot, anyway. Most people want to run away and join the circus. Helena (Stephanie Leonidas) is in the circus and wants to run away and join real life. But after a big argument with her mother (Gina McKee), and her mother falls ill with some type of cancer, Helena grows depressed at having said certain things to her mother. So Helena falls asleep, has a crazy nightmare, and wakes up. But when she wakes up, she wakes up in another realm: a realm of imagination and incredibly bizarre things based on Helena’s drawings. She joins up with witty Valentine (Jason Barry) and discovers that a Shadow is destroying the kingdom of Light because the Queen of Light (Gina McKee, again) has basically fallen into a coma because a ‘charm’ has been stolen by the kingdom of Dark’s princess (Stephanie Leonidas, again). And to top it all off, this Anti-Helena has taken Helena's place in the real world to mess up her life. So now it’s up to Helena and Valentine to travel this realm and try to find this charm, even though they have no idea what it is or where to look, and find a way back home before it's too late.

Like The Wizard of Oz, almost every character portrayed in the fantasy realm is played by an actor or actress that portrays a character in the reality realm. The acting is great and a lot of the characters are pretty funny/witty, especially Valentine (so the script/dialogue is great, as well). And the plot is great and touching. You really feel Helena’s pain and fear for her mother. The whole movie can really be seen on a whole other level, for this dream reality being Helena’s way of dealing with her life (much like the kids in Bridge to Terabithia, except more constant).

The special effects are phenomenal. You can tell stuff isn’t real, but it’s so fitting with the world that it works, because the world is imagination. It’s all based on Helena’s drawings and surroundings in the normal world. Some of my favorite scenes include Giants Orbiting (amazing scene), the monkey/bird ‘Bobs’ scene, and the scene in which Helena is becoming Dark Helena via the jack-in-the-box women (which can be seen as a runner-up in my Best Random Song/Dance Numbers article). Visually, this movie is pure special effects, really.

When I first saw this movie, I was like ‘what the hell did I just watch?’ But the more I thought about it, and the more times I watched it, I grew to love it more and more. In fact, I watched it again last night and gained even more love for it. Not many movies do that with me (Shaun of the Dead was another movie that this happens to me with). This was really a tough movie to score. I went back and forth a lot, but I suppose its gotta be done.

Royale With Cheese

Stardust.

This one is much more light-hearted than the previous (and that’s a cool thing about Neil Gaiman. He can write the full spectrum. If you see/read Stardust, you would never think he was the same person to write American Gods. Well, maybe I would, because I’m the same way with my writing, some dark some light). Anyway, this one is about Tristan (Charlie Cox), who lives in the town of Wall, which is, amazingly enough, surrounded by a wall. Outside the wall is a realm of magic. Tristan is in love/lust with Victoria (Sienna Miller), even though she’s going to be proposed to in a week by somebody else. So when they see a falling star, he promises that he will cross the wall and bring her back the fallen star in exchange for her hand in marriage. But when he gets there, the star turns out to have taken a human form, Yvaine (Claire Danes). Meanwhile, a witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) is after the fallen star for her heart so she can gain youth. Simultaneously, evil Prince Septimus (Mark Strong) is after a jeweled necklace that knocked Yvaine out of the sky that she now wears around her neck, so that he can become the next king. Complicated much?

Anywho, this is one heck of an adventure. From Robert De Niro’s Captain Shakespeare and beyond, this movie is just plain fun. There is magic all over the place, comedy spread throughout, and it just has a cool story. Sure, there’s a ton going on, but it never seems convoluted in any way.

The acting is great, especially from Michelle Pfeiffer and Robert De Niro, who you could tell had loads of fun with their roles (especially De Niro). And once Tristan gets his makeover, his character gets a bit cooler, as well.

The special effects are pretty decent. The coolest scene has to be the Voodoo doll sword fight toward the end. The actor basically had to be on wires and act as a marionette, fighting with his eyes closed (avoiding saying who to not spoil those who haven’t seen it yet, though it’s relatively spoiled in the movie’s trailer anyway).

There’s not much more to say about the movie. It was a magical, fun, and funny adventure. I think it would be really hard to dislike this movie, honestly. I could see some people being turned off by parts of it, but it just seems to me to be this feel-good fantasy adventure.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

RUN FATBOY RUN.

As Shaun of the Dead is basically one of my top favorite movies of all time, and Hot Fuzz is amazingly awesome, as well, I couldn’t help but go to see another Simon Pegg-vehicle (even if it’s directed by David Schwimmer, which still boggles my mind). Run Fatboy Run is about Dennis (Simon Pegg) who runs out on his bride-to-be, Libby (Thandie Newton), on their wedding day… and she was pregnant, as well. Five years later, he’s an out-of-weight lingerie store security guard who rents a small apartment underneath an Indian father/daughter. He still gets to see his son and such, but then he discovers that Whit (Hank Azaria) is now seeing Libby, and it’s pretty serious. Whit is also running this marathon that’s coming up in less than a month, so Dennis decides to try and prove he can finish something in his life by running and finishing the marathon, as well. Unfortunately, he kind of gets stuck in the situation when his best friend, Gordon (Dylan Moran), bets more than he has that Dennis will finish the race. So now they must work as hard as possible to get Dennis into better shape in time for the marathon so he can prove himself to his ex and his son and gain their respect (and maybe, just maybe, win her back, too).

I’ve read it all about this movie: If you liked Shaun or Fuzz, you’ll hate this one! That’s not even remotely true. See, I usually only laugh at movies in theater because other people are laughing and it’s contagious (only to later discover when I buy the movie and watch it alone at home that it wasn’t nearly as funny as I remember). But because there were literally only 3 other people in the theater with me, I can safely say that I laughed so much at this movie because it was truly funny. I actually laughed so much I thought the other people were gonna think I was weird for laughing at stuff they weren’t.

The acting was great, as always, and Simon Pegg has great comedic timing, as did Dylan Moran. One issue, though, is that he really isn’t fat as much as he’s relatively out of shape. Though the title really comes from an insult by another character. And the beginning is a bit slow at points, but once it really starts, it gets goin. Another slightly bothersome thing was that you have no idea why they used an American actor (Hank Azaria) for the Whit character until towards the end of the movie when it releases a plot point. But until then, you’re like “Interesting that they used an American for the role when the whole thing is set in England…” Also, funny side-note… Dennis has a poster of Team America in his apartment. I just thought that was mildly humorous in a few different ways…

I also really liked that it did something similar back to Shaun and Fuzz, which is where a lot of things are repeated in different scenarios (though not to the degree of the previous two movies). There’s really not all that much more I can say about it. Simon Pegg wins again. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It was no Shaun or Fuzz, but it was still done amazingly well.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

DRILLBIT TAYLOR.

Have you ever wondered what Superbad would have been like had the kids been starting their Freshman year of high school instead of ending their Senior year? And what if the movie was just rated PG-13 instead of R because all the dirty talk and sex jokes were removed? And the alcohol was also removed, so that the movie was just basically about acceptance (and getting a girl to notice you)? Then Drillbit Taylor is the movie for you! Drillbit Taylor is about a couple loser kids (who pick up a third along the way) who are starting high school off on the wrong foot. Wade (Nate Hartley), Ryan (Troy Gentile), and Emmit (David Dorfman) are three dorky kids trying to stay alive in high school, as two bullies, Filkins (Alex Frost) and Ronnie (Josh Peck), won’t leave them alone. So they go out and hire a bodyguard, Drillbit Taylor (Owen Wilson), who is actually a bum just trying to rip off the kids so he can get enough money to go to Canada. But then he starts getting attached to them.

I’ll start off by clarifying my opening statements. Really, if you strip down Superbad like I did, it really would be this movie. The three main kids are an incredible amount (even in looks) like the three from Superbad. However, that doesn’t make this movie super bad (… I know, bad joke). It was actually really funny. It’s hard to get me to laugh out loud in movies these days, but I found myself laughing quite a bit with this one.

Unfortunately, there are some downsides. A lot of the jokes were hit or miss. There were some pretty funny ones, but others were just silly and unneeded. One was actually kinda disturbing (the step-dad on the vibrating chair). The acting was… alright. Owen Wilson was good, as was Nate Hartley (for the most part). Troy Gentile was just awful at times, but sometimes he was okay. Alex Frost and Josh Peck as the bullies were really good, though Josh Peck’s character was really underused, I thought. Stephen Root makes a couple appearances as the high school principal, and his part is alright and has its moments. And then we have Leslie Mann (AKA Judd Apatow’s wife, who appears in every movie he’s linked to). Her part was completely unnecessary and added nothing to the movie. The relationship with Drillbit was pointless and had no chemistry whatsoever.

You can really tell this movie was toned down from the other Apatow productions, but it doesn’t suffer too much from it. The movie didn’t really need any excessive nudity, swearing, or sex-talk. It worked for what it was. I really wanted to give this movie a higher score, but there were just some things that brought it down a notch. However, I think giving it this rating is ironic within itself.

I Am McLovin!

Rental Review: Eye of the Dolphin.

I love dolphins. Kids’ movies can be cool when they’re done right. So I rented this in hopes it would be pretty good. Apparently, I was wrong. Alyssa (Carly Schroeder) is a troubled teen after her mother gets killed in a boating accident and drowns. She ends up acting out in school (by making excellent grades, listening to her iPod, and smoking pot), which makes her get expelled. So her grandmother decides to let her know that her father, Dr. James Hawk (Adrian Dunbar), is still alive and working with dolphins in the Bahamas. They decide to go (right when her father is facing issues with/cancellation of his research), and end up meeting her father’s friends and partners, the father/daughter Daniel (George Harris) and Tamika (Christine Adams). Her father proceeds to be an awful father to her, while Daniel, Tamika, and the dolphins try to work together to ‘fix’ her.

So let’s start with the acting. Carly Schroeder, who you may or may not recognize as an all-grown-up version of the best friend of the little brother from the old Disney show Lizzie McGuire (did I lose you there?), gives anywhere from a bad to a so-so performance. The grandmother is just awful. In fact, to make this short, the only good thing to come from this movie acting-wise was the vastly underused George Harris, but that’s to be expected. I mean, the man is Kingsley Shacklebolt. Christine Adams isn’t too bad, either.

The script and the dialogue are horrible, as well. The story is so by-the-books that it’s ridiculous. The dialogue is stiff, cheesy, and just plain bad (and, as I said, the delivery doesn’t help much, either). There’s really not much more to say about the story. Some of the characters are just plain jerks when it is really unnecessary and just being done to help further plot.

The cinematography is basic stuff you might see in a TV movie… nothing special… like the rest of the movie. I’m really not sure what else I can say about this movie. And the ending is mind-boggling. Ignore if you care, but they spend the whole movie trying to make it so that the dolphins won't have to deal with tourists in their space and they can be free and be studied in peace. So what is the final resolution? Basically to create a Sea World-like environment where the dolphins can be studied in tiny cages in which tourists can hang in and around. Seriously. There was more of a scientific reasoning behind it, but call it what you might... it's still taking away the entire point. Might as well score it now.

The Zed Word

(By the way, if you're curious, the only reasons I scored it that high was due to random bikini scenes throughout, as well as George Harris' performance).

2 In 1: Across the Universe and August Rush.

This 2 In 1 focuses on two movies where the music is key to the movie. The first, Across the Universe, is one I’ve been wanting to see for a while and just recently rented. The second, August Rush, is one I first saw in theater and just watched for a second time. So without further ado…

Across the Universe.

Across the Universe was not what I expected, and, frankly, as a fan of musicals, I was a bit disappointed. Jude (Jim Sturgess) goes to America to find his father and meets Max (Joe Anderson) and falls in love with Max’s sister, Lucy (Evan Rachel Wood). A bunch of Beatles songs are sung. Max is drafted. The 1960s ensue.

I guess I’ll start with the good. The movie’s renditions of the songs were, for the most part, really good. And the singing was good. I also liked how some of the props and such became part of the music (like in Atonement). Also, visually, the movie was stunning (with a few exceptions around the middle, such as The Magic Schoolbus and the incredibly random circus, which were just annoying). My favorite song is “Let It Be” near the beginning. It just felt like a really powerful song and scene in the movie. I also liked “Come Together” right afterward, because it was so random (hobos, hookers, and pimps singing bluesy). Ironically, neither of these songs were sung by the main cast (with the exception of one line at the end of “Come Together.”

Now for the bad. The story is nearly non-existent and disjointed, and the songs sometimes suffered from what I like to call “High School Musical Syndrome.” In other words, it was overly obvious that the actors were lip-syncing to a pre-recorded track. And oftentimes the musical numbers weren’t musical numbers at all. They would either start as a musical number and turn into a music video with the songs playing over a nearly unrelated-to-the-song montage where you never see the singer, or it would start with said montage and end with the singer. It just didn’t feel like a musical, but instead one really long music video medley of Beatles covers. And a lot of the time (though not all the time), as I said, the songs didn’t seem to match up with what was going on… or it was overly forced and just seemed to be a random fluff scene that was only in the movie so the song could be included (which was a huge chunk of the movie). A lot of this was remedied by the end of the movie (to a degree), but by that point, the movie had become so disjointed and boring that I no longer really cared.

As for the acting, it was… okay. The only character I really grew attached to was Jude, and I wasn’t even overly caring about him. It was just hard to get attached to anything in the movie. I really can’t think of anything else to say about this movie. It was good to look at (most of the time, when it wasn’t being just plain weird), and it was good to listen to, but I don’t think it really worked as a movie, nor as a musical.

Stop Saying Okay! Okay.

August Rush.

There are a couple good ways to describe this movie. The first is actually said near the beginning of the movie: “I believe in music the way some people believe in fairy tales.” This movie is basically like a modern day fairy tale with a strong musical theme. The second way to describe this movie would be as a musical with (almost) nothing but instrumentals. August Rush is about three different stories: The first is about young Evan (Freddie Highmore), left to an orphanage, who has a keen ear for music. He runs away from the orphanage to the big city of New York and meets up with Wizard (Robin Williams), a homeless musician who uses homeless kids to help make a profit in exchange for giving them a place to stay. Wizard ends up dubbing Evan with a better performer name, August Rush. His adventure grows from there. The second story is about his mother, Lyla (Keri Russell), a concert musician who learns of her son’s existence and tries to find him. The third story is about his father, Louis (Jonathan Rhys Meyers), an Irishman in a rock band who loses the musical faith and tries to find the woman (Lyla) he once had a one-night fling with.

This movie is all about the music, and the music is beautiful. From the mixing of concert strings and rock guitar to church choir to just noises of the busy streets, the music is mesmerizing. As I stated previously, this movie is like a musical for instrumental music (with a few vocals thrown in every now and then), and the music is wonderful.

There are also some great visual effects, as well, such as the stunning opening sequence in the tall grass. There’s some good camera choices and lighting choices, as well, which make the movie a joy to watch. There are a couple mistakes noticeable here and there, such as a scene in which Louis is speaking but his mouth is saying something completely different. There was also a scene that was fixed between theater and DVD, apparently, as in the theater version you could clearly see Freddie Highmore’s mic pack as he stood up after first meeting Terrence Howard’s character. But those are just nitpicky things, really.

The acting is pretty good all around, even to Robin Williams, whose character you can’t help but both equally dislike and feel sorry for (he alludes very clearly the kind of childhood he had). Yeah, it’s completely not the type of character advertised in the previews. There’s really not much else to say. Great music, good visuals, good acting, good story… overall great movie.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

Rental Review: Gone Baby Gone.

This is for movies I rent instead of see in theater that I just feel like reviewing for the heck of it… and to start it off, we’ll go with Gone Baby Gone.

Ben Affleck’s directorial debut was even better than I thought it was gonna be. Gone Baby Gone is about two private detectives (and couple), Patrick (Casey Affleck) and Angie (Michelle Monaghan), who are hired to find a missing girl by the girl’s aunt and uncle. Teaming up with police Captain Doyle (Morgan Freeman) and Detectives Remy Bressant (Ed Harris) and Nick Poole (John Ashton), they try to uncover what actually happened to the little girl so they can get her back to her druggie mother (Amy Ryan).

The movie was confusing at times, moreso toward the middle when they’re going through all the suspects and giving rapid-fire gangster names left and right, making it hard to remember who is who and who is doing what. But by the end of the movie, everything is so perfectly explained, the confusion is just a distant issue. But the story is magnificent. There are some great moral dilemmas showcased by the movie, which is great (yet uncomfortable) for the audience, as it makes you think about what you would do in the situation. What is right and what is wrong? Does it change due to circumstance? Those are the main questions the movie asks.

The acting is top notch, with great performances by Affleck, Freeman, and Harris. But the real performance was given by Amy Ryan, and I can see why she was nominated for the part. It might be hard to hear what is being said due to the thick Boston accents (and the fact that Casey Affleck kinda slurs his words together, an issue I had with him in The Assassination of Jesse James). I’ve read about people who had to watch this movie with subtitles so they knew what was being said. But I followed it well enough.

Overall, it was a great movie, and I thought it was a lot tighter and, dare I say, better than No Country For Old Men (great movie, but horrible ending that pretty much ruins the rest of it). I’m now rather shocked that Gone Baby Gone didn’t get more nominations for the Oscars. It really was snubbed.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

(P.S. In an age where a lot of movies are given odd titles that have little reference to the movie, I was happy when I heard the title of this movie actually used in dialogue within it. You don’t see that incredibly often anymore (“There Will Be Blood”…?).)

DOOMSDAY.

The best way to describe Doomsday is “oddly entertaining.” The first half is like mixing 28 Days/Weeks Later with Mad Max, and the second half is like mixing King Arthur, Gladiator, and Mad Max. Like I said: odd. It’s like a comic-book premise without being a comic book. The plot of Doomsday is thus: Roughly 30 years after a major plague (the Reaper Virus) spread through the upper section of Britain (namely Scotland), the virus has reappeared in the safe zone. The government gets Bill Nelson (Bob Hoskins) to get his best soldier, Eden Sinclair (Rhona Mitra), to head up a team into the quarantined area before the Doomsday Contingency Plan (flooding and killing all of London) is performed. Why? Because they’ve noticed that there are people still alive inside (via satellite images), which means there must be a cure. And the only way there could possibly be a cure is if Dr. Kane (Malcolm McDowell), a scientist/doctor who got stuck behind, had found one. Unfortunately, when they get there, they discover that they really aren't alone... and that's a problem.

As I said, Doomsday is an odd mixture of things. In all honesty, it should have been called Doomsday: Randomness on Screen. The first major section of the movie was a lot like the 28 ___ Later… movies, in a way. It was really a horror/suspense kinda deal. Then, quite a ways in, the punk guys show up, led by a crazy dude named Sol (pronounced Saul). They’re survivors of the initial outbreak who have broken from all law and are living savagely, violently, and sado-masochistically (…seriously, there’s a random dude in all black leather, including a full leather mask over his face, and he’s constantly in chains). They’re also cannibalistic. Not too long after that, the movie gets medieval with people dressed up like they are walking about the Renaissance Festival. But during this stuff, there’s a Gladiator-like coliseum fight (Telamon is freakin awesome looking). After that, there’s a huge and incredibly crazy car chase sequence. For a car chase with no traffic, this sequence is maybe a few notches below Death Proof (because that one was awesome. This one doesn’t come close to that, but it’s still really cool).

Oh, and did I mention the blood and gore? My God, was there a lot of it. Nothing is safe in this movie, from people to bunnies and cows. Blood is excessive (It’s almost a ridiculous amount, as you might find in any Comic Book). The action is pretty cool, for what there is of it. I think my favorite fight was the (too short) sword fight about halfway in. Oh, and the main character can remove her eyeball from her socket and use it like a wireless webcam kinda thing. Nifty (and random). As for music, it was pretty cool, though the main theme reminded me WAY too much of the main theme from the 28 ____ Later… movies. It was almost identical, but with a few differences.

So really, if you shut off your brain and don’t think about all the movies this is ripping off (and don’t mind a bit of blood), this movie is really cool. The acting is done pretty well, for the most part, except for the dude who played Canaris. He got on my nerves with his whispery voice that sounded like he’d had one too many cigarettes, not to mention his stiff acting ability. The movie was over-the-top, random, and pretty fun when you just give yourself in to it.

I Am McLovin!

(Update: Thinking about it... this is a lot like this director's previous film, The Descent, in one specific way: The first half (pre-Punks) has very good atmosphere and is naturally suspenseful. The second half just gets bizarre and introduces random things that almost make the movie worse than it could have been (i.e. the creatures of The Descent).

Overrated Movies: Gosford Park.

Warning: Minor Alluded Spoiler (as to who dies, not to who kills).

I had thought about doing a Top 10 for Overrated Movies, but felt it might be better to just do a recurring article and do one at a time. So that brings us to this movie: Gosford Park. I had the (dis)pleasure of watching this movie for the first time last night (I DVR’d it off IFC). Gosford Park is about…um… absolutely nothing up until somebody gets killed about an hour and a half into the movie. Okay, honestly, it’s about a bunch of rich English aristocrats (and Ryan Phillippe) and their servants who all get together at this mansion to go shooting/hunting. When one of them dies, it turns into a (relatively boring and slightly predictable) who-dun-it.

So this movie has a massive cast full of top-notch actors: Maggie Smith, Michael Gambon, Stephen Fry, Geraldine Somerville, Emily Watson, Clive Owen, Helen Mirren, Derek Jacobi, Ryan Phillippe, and a whole bunch of others. As I’ve joked, Ryan Phillippe seems to be the most out of place (and he’s not even the only American in the movie. Bob Balaban plays an American movie producer/director, and even he seems like he could be there. Ryan Phillippe’s character just seems to be like a random red herring that normally wouldn’t be there otherwise).

Anyway… so the movie starts off with this young woman (I didn’t really bother to learn anybody’s names, because not only did they change once they got to the mansion, but there were too many people to bother remembering), going out into the rain to help Maggie Smith’s character open a thermos. Yeah. I’m not kidding. So then they get to the mansion and everybody meets up, they talk in quiet voices about stuff you can’t understand and move on to the next person before you can get a grasp on what was being said. Then they cook dinner and then eat it. And the process cycles for the next hour and a half. And then Dumbledore dies TWICE. Then what has to be the most incompetent detective (Stephen Fry) shows up (though he was one of my favorite parts of the movie, albeit insanely out of place).

The movie was incredibly obvious as to whom at least one of the killers was. The other was what I like to call a ‘pull-out-your-ass’ ending. These types of twist endings are those that leave absolutely no clues for the reader or watcher to pick up on to figure it out, and then pull this random ending out their ass so they can point and laugh at you because they pulled a fast one on you, when in reality, there is no respect for that type of ending. For shame, Robert Altman… for shame.

So yeah… incredibly boring and pointless first half (save for a few key scenes in dropping ‘killer’ hints) that you can’t even understand. Then a really random second half that is only made up for by the funny and random Stephen Fry. I know this movie was supposed to be this social commentary thing, but I didn’t even care for it as that, and I like movies with social commentary. I can’t believe this movie won Best Original Screenplay over Memento (or, hell, even Amélie or The Royal Tenenbaums… neither of which I’ve seen, but I’m sure both are much better movies). I can’t believe I’m about to use the following rating… as even Stephen Fry’s short character appearance couldn’t make me watch this again.

She's Gone From Suck to Blow!

(P.S. I think it’s funny how at least half the cast has either been in, is related to somebody who has been in, or is somehow linked to Harry Potter. Gotta love British ensemble casts).

2 In 1: Chaos and Dog Day Afternoon.

Alrighty. After watching The Bank Job this past Friday, I got in the mood to check out some more heist movies, so I went to rent Dog Day Afternoon. While there, I rented some other movies, one of which was a movie called Chaos with Jason Statham, which could also be considered a heist movie (and better, I thought, than The Bank Job, also starring Jason Statham). Watching both, I felt I could turn this into a 2 in 1, so here we go.

Chaos.

Chaos has an interesting take on the heist film. It actually reminded me a bit of my last novel (without the supernatural/religious elements). The plot of Chaos is thus: After a disastrous hostage situation on a bridge in which both hostage and hostage taker die, Detective Conners (Jason Statham) is suspended and basically blacklisted, while his partner is fired. But when a bank robber who calls himself Lorenz (Wesley Snipes) takes hostages and seemingly tries to rob the place, he only has one request: to have Conners be the negotiator in charge. So Conners is brought back in and is partnered up with the young Detective Dekker (Ryan Phillippe). But when the robbers escape and people start dying randomly, the two detectives believe it has to do with the Chaos Theory—a bunch of seemingly unrelated events are all connected somehow.

The movie is just plain fun, really. The acting is alright… it’s basic thriller-genre acting (and Jason Statham). The plot is really cool, I thought, though highly predictable (though that could be a bad thing, considering the point of the plot is to be unpredictable). I figured out way too much early on, but that honestly didn’t stop me from enjoying the movie. Even though I figured out the final twist before it happened, I was still able to enjoy it with a smile on my face as it was revealed.

I think this is really the first time Jason Statham hasn’t really done his thing in one of his movies. He does kick some ass at one point, but its more cop-type brawling than anything. But I don’t think that’s a drawback or anything. And Wesley Snipes plays a pretty cool bad guy. He just has this “Oh, I’m cool, I’m a badass, I’m totally big pimpin. Look at my hat!” air about him every time you see him. And all the characters were more than just one-dimensional. They each had some kind of backstory to deepen their characters (at least to a degree).

So yeah, really, this is just one of those movies you have to not look too much into, but just sit back and enjoy it. But you also gotta pay attention toward the end, or it might go too fast for you to keep up (I know my dad started trying to talk to me during this point, and I was trying to pay attention to the movie, too. But I got the basic gist of what was going on; plus, I had already figured it out by that point, anyway).

I Am McLovin!

Dog Day Afternoon.

So I just saw it for the first time last night. Better late than never, right? Dog Day Afternoon is based on the true story of a simple bank robbery gone bad. Sonny (Al Pacino) and Sal (John Cazale) go to rob a bank, but being the down-on-their-luck overall nice guys, they take too long and attract police attention. The day lingers on with the employees no longer feeling any threat from the two men (except maybe Sal), and some even refusing to leave when they have the opportunity (by the way, just a random bit of trivia: this is known as Stockholm Syndrome, when the hostages begin to become attached to their hostage takers). Anyway, it gets all over the news, and the two men (moreso Sonny) start getting many fans. The only question left is… how are they gonna get out of this?

I thought this movie was excellent. Its two hours flew by. It was hilarious, sad, and dramatic. The acting was phenomenal, especially by the then young Al Pacino. The subtle performance by the late John Cazale was good, too, making you feel both frightened of and worried for him. The twist about halfway in when you find out exactly why Sonny is robbing the bank was unexpected (at least for me). But it worked (I’d hope so, considering it actually happened that way).

Afterwards I read an article from the real ‘Sonny’ and said he loved the movie, but was highly upset at how some of the things were portrayed and “Hollywood-ized,” and that the movie was really only about 30% true. Still, the movie version of the events was great in its own right. I just rented this movie, but I have a feeling I’m gonna end up going out and buying it. Let’s all go to the country of Wyoming!

Royale With Cheese

THE BANK JOB.

Apparently I couldn’t be a professional movie critic, because I’d be disagreeing with what seems to be everybody on the planet. I thought I was going to see a heist movie… and I did, I suppose… though I’m not too sure… and I don’t think the movie was sure, either. The Bank Job is the true story about this one guy who is this drug dealing pimp black radical gangster who gets accused of all said charges, but the cops can’t do anything because he has illicit photos of one of the royal family that he can use as blackmail. So the cops get this one chick to get Jason Statham (who gets a crew of his own) to find a way to rob the bank and safety deposit boxes that the photos are held in. Unfortunately, that’s not all they take, and they end up over their heads in numerous scandals such as dirty cops and compromising sexual photos of prominent figures.

I first have to say that, even though this was based on a true story, it seemed way too complicated for what it was. Don’t get me wrong, by the end of the movie I understood everything that was going on and wasn’t confused whatsoever, but during the movie, everything was twisting and turning and this was going on while that was happening and so-and-so was being undercover while this-that-and-the-other were doing whatever the hell else was going on. And to me, the undercover woman who was with the black radical guys seemed to be an unnecessary subplot just used to complicate the matter.

The first act of the movie seemed too random and confusing at the time (with an insane amount of nudity). The second act of the movie, the actual heist, was way too short. The third act of the movie, the part where all the crooked cops and whatnot are trying to get back their information and such, seemed way too long. It also seemed like the movie wasn’t sure what it was trying to be. The first act seemed like a dark comedy (with a bit of drama). The second act was like a heist drama (with a bit of dark comedy). And the third act was just a violent, overdramatic, depressing thriller. When that third act hit, I was shocked. I wasn’t expecting that amount of violence and such, or for some of the people to die who did. The first half of the movie just didn’t set me up for that.

It wasn’t a terrible movie by any means, but I don’t think it deserves the awesome praise it’s getting from what seems to be almost every professional critic. The acting was alright, and it was pretty funny at times. The big fight at the end of the movie was some Jason Statham action, as always. And I really liked the idea behind it: a bunch of small-time crooks robbing a bank, finding more than they can chew, and then trying to get out of the situation both alive and while trying to do the right thing. I just don’t think it was executed as well as it could have been.

Stop Saying Okay! Okay.

2 In 1: American Gangster and Inside Man.

The theme for this one would be Denzel Washington… and I can already tell I’ll probably be blasted for my views and opinions in this posting. Denzel, to me, is great. He’s great to watch, and he’s full of intensity. However, he really only plays one of two characters in each movie: good Denzel and bad Denzel (in respect to morals, not acting ability). This article has both. Please don't hurt me too bad.

American Gangster.

I had low expectations going into this movie. I figured it might have some exceptional acting, but overall, I thought it was going to be boring and overly long. Unfortunately, I was right. It’s the 1970s, Vietnam Era, and Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) is the new big heroin king. But Detective Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) is looking for somebody to bust, and Frank just happens to end up at the top of the list.

Let’s get the bad out first (assuming I have some good). The first 20 minutes of this movie lost me. I had almost no idea what was going on. Once I got a handle on the situation, I realized I really couldn’t give a rat’s behind about Frank Lucas. His character had no depth or development. He was just boring. Detective Roberts was at least a bit more interesting with the whole family trouble aspect, but even that kind of goes to the wayside. What’s sad is that I’m more of a fan of Denzel than Crowe, and I enjoyed Crowe more than Denzel in this movie.

The Lucas family was vastly underused in the movie, I felt. And how the hell does Ruby Dee (Frank’s mother) get a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination? She’s in probably a grand total of 5 minutes in the 2 and a half hour movie, and speaks probably a total of 3 of that, if even. The Academy must have been incredibly desperate.

Another random note… it felt that every time an f-bomb was dropped in this movie, it was used in the wrong place and felt forced. And it’s sad when you notice that kind of thing. But this brings us to the acting. The acting was pretty good. Denzel was “bad Denzel,” which is always entertaining. Crowe was good, as well.

I don’t know… I just didn’t dig the movie. It was too long, and it seemed as if it wasn’t sure what it was trying to do. When something of importance actually happens, you’re left wondering how they got to that point or how it actually came about. It has the Ridley Scott epic feel, but it fell flat for me. It was a good effort, but not good enough. In other words, I think this movie is a bit overrated and tries too hard.

Feed Me, Seymour!

Inside Man.

This movie, on the other hand, is very entertaining, and stars “good Denzel.” Dalton Russell (Clive Owen) and his crew show up in a bank dressed up as painters, lock the place down, and seemingly try to rob it. Detective Frazier (Denzel) is the cop trying to figure out what’s going on. Meanwhile, Madeline White (Jodie Foster) is hired to get some information taken safely out of the bank that could ruin the owner (Christopher Plummer).

Heist movies are always great, in my opinion. This movie actually helped me get inspired and stay in the mood for my last novel, which is, in essence, a ‘perfect heist’ story. I just really enjoy the idea of incredibly intelligent bad guys who always know what they’re doing and can easily outsmart the good guys at every level.

Denzel’s acting is great, as always. Clive Owen is Clive Owen: deeply monotone and mysterious. But this time he does it with a mask over his face the majority of the time. And both characters have depth. They have purpose and are just round characters. As for Jodie Foster's character, the idea behind her character is cool, but I don’t necessarily think she was needed. The first time I saw the movie, I thought her character was completely pointless. The next time I saw it, I gathered a bit more purpose for the character, but that’s about it. I still think the script could have been written in a way to exclude her completely, even though she gave it a bit of edge. And there were, I admit, one or two scenes that she gave meaning to.

It’s hard to talk about this movie without giving much away. It’s a much more entertaining movie than the previous one, I thought, and the pacing is much better, as well. It has its faults, of course, but I don’t think they’re nearly as big. Great movie all around, though.

A Keanu 'Whoa'

R2D2... The One With Superheroes.

Yeah, so... there's been a bunch of superhero movie (not the actual Superhero Movie, but movies with superheroes) news lately... felt like sharing.

- First, it was just recently confirmed that Harley Quinn is going to be in The Dark Knight, played by Sarah Jayne Dunn. It wasn't confirmed how much she's actually going to be in the movie, but she'll be there.

- Man, that new Iron Man trailer is sweet.

- I read a few days back that the reason Galactus was just a floating blob of a cloud in Fantastic Four 2 was because they're waiting to reveal the actual Galactus in the Silver Surfer prequel/origin movie they're working on (which does not involve the Fantastic Four). That should hopefully be much cooler.

- Good God, who ISN'T going to be in the upcoming Wolverine movie? Will.i.am from the Black-Eyed Peas, Dominic Managhan from Lost and LOTR, and even Ryan Reynolds is gonna be in it (which is exciting). The most exciting, however, is not an actor, but a character. GAMBIT is *finally* going to be on film! It's just odd that they waited until the Wolverine prequel to put him in.

- I don't know what's funnier: the fact they're actually making an Astro Boy movie, or the fact that Astro Boy is gonna be played by Freddie Highmore.

- Oh, I know what's funnier... they're making a Shazam! movie (Billy Batson and the Legend of Shazam!). Seriously... Captain Marvel? And The Rock is playing the badguy, Black Adam.

- I can't tell if it's ironic or disturbing that Heroes co-stars Milo Ventimiglia and Hayden Panettiere are now dating, since a lot of fans wanted their characters Peter and Claire (respectively) to hook up on the show prior to finding out the characters were uncle and neice.

Anywho, I think that's about it for now!