Children of the ’80s ain’t a hard sell

March 6, 2010

I don’t want to come off harsh, but Hollywood has pretty much ruined everything I held sacred and full of awesomeness when I was young. It’s as if there’s a thirty-something speaking to the producers of every major movie studio and telling them: “Here’s what my generation thought was cool. Ruin it anyway you want, cause they’ll still eat it up like Fun Dip.”

Let’s view the tape, in no particular order:

1. Transformers. While the first one was alright, the second movie was in every way the suck. It’s like Michael Bay was given a dumpster full of C-4 and a script written by a racist 8-year-old and told to go out and have fun. Alas, people ate it up despite more plot holes than Space Mutiny and character development than can only be called…enough with the metaphors – there are no characters in Transformers. There is only CGI and explosions. Great for a Disney movie meant for tweens with no appreciation for good film; bad for everyone else.

2. GI Joe. I didn’t even see this film because I knew I would get more out of the four cups of coffee I could buy for the price of a ticket. What tipped me to the scent of film crap? How about the typical Marlon Wayans joke-a-thon, which is fine for, say, a Wayans brothers comedy, but not so pleasant in a film that’s supposed to revive my adolescent love of “fighting for freedom”. How about show a little action without peppering it with low-brow jokes every ten seconds. Sure, humor covers the scent of crap, but only ’til it hits DVD and sells a dozen copies.

3. A-Team. I don’t care who’s starring as who: it’s gonna suck. Why? Because it has a captive audience – us ’80s kids wanting the adventure with Hannibal and the boys to continue. It’ll suck because it can. Because it doesn’t have to not suck. I foresee another long line of jokes and explosions with so little substance that you don’t know what to tell your fellow 30-something when they ask: “Was it awesome?” You don’t want to say “No, it sucked” because then you’re saying the A-Team sucked, which is blasphemy.

So, let me end this rant by saying that if you, too, are an ’80s brat and want fewer movies surrounding our childhood to suck, then do us all a favor and don’t pay for a ticket to a trash movie. It’s the age of DVD everything. Go and buy the A-Team series on disk, or find old GI Joe episodes and make something cool and clever with them, like the mashups of old GI Joe PSAs. Give the original writers and artists behind Thundercats and Wheeled Warriors some cred.

Just don’t come runnin’ to Hollywood looking for an extension on your lease on the ’80s, cause all they’re selling is a perversion of our memories.

Transformers with balls….Jesus!

In Theaters: “Edge of Darkness” will work for some

March 1, 2010

If you go see Mel Gibson’s new film Edge of Darkness hoping for Taken, then you might come away disappointed.

That’s not to say that Darkness is either a poor knockoff or not a good representation of the “father seeks revenge” story. Let’s take a comparative example. When Kevin Costner’s Robin Hood debuted, few remember another film of the same title coming out at the same time. The latter is more complex, political, and historically accurate. The former is full of fun, action, and a little history. This is the difference between Taken and Darkness. The later is – in a way – a more complex version of the former: for better or worse.

Gibson is good, not great in the role, and a cast of other talent means there’s little hurting for solid acting. Some will find it a little slow, however, despite sporadic scenes of intense energy and action. The film is subtle, and some audiences don’t respond as well to subtlety, preferring film to spoon feed clues and motives.

Despite the slow pace at times, the editing is actually quite good. No scenes stand out as too long, overdone, or redundant. The end is a little predictable, but offers some fitting “payoff” for the film’s progression.

Considering all this, is it really a good film to see in the theater? Maybe. But if you don’t see it in the theater, it is worth renting on DVD. While not terribly original, the acting, character progression, and complexity make it worth watching at some point, to be sure.

New to DVD: “Bedtime Stories” cute and simple

February 13, 2010

As you might expect from a Disney movie, new-to-DVD Bedtime Stories is a safe journey through imagination and comedy with Adam Sandler as under-appreciated hotel worker and uncle to kids who can alter reality based on storytelling. Sandler is pretty much how he is in every other Sandler comedy, so take that how you will. If you find him annoying elsewhere, nothing Disney does is going to change that, but if you like him, Stories sees him in pretty typical form.

The story begins much like all Disney stories: with our hero facing seemingly overwhelming odds against transparent protagonist. In time, the hero learns that what he really wanted was in front of him the whole time, etc. This is pretty much the same with Stories, so where’s the value?

Well, the eye-candy isn’t half bad as Sandler is magically transported to everywhere from Ancient Rome to a Galactic Tribunal. Amazingly, the acting is pretty good, too, and there are a few good laughs to be had. Fortunately, the jokes aren’t too slap-stick – apparently the new default for low-brow Superbowl commercials.

There’s a little less moralizing than usual, though it’s always funny to see Disney consistently push family values, small business, and an anti-capitalism agenda when they are a paragon of big media.

The most important question remains: is Stories good for the kids, and to that I would say Yes – they will probably like it. Nothing inappropriate or too violent; again, rather safe and comfortable.
So check out Bedtime Stories on DVD. Even if you don’t have kids, you’ll probably enjoy it anyway. Don’t know that I’d buy it, but certainly worth a pick at the RedBox when nothing else jumps out at you.

In theaters: “Up in the Air” a sure catch

January 27, 2010

Let’s make your choice or rejection of in-theaters Up in the Air a simple one: if you’re expecting belly-roll laughter or Fight Club nihilism, you’re probably better off with another movie. However, if you like Clooney – who is in full force, albeit in type-cast fashion – and you are the kind of moviegoer who likes to sit back and enjoy the journey, then Air is right for you.

There’s nothing terribly funny about it, though there are a few really good laughs. It’s somewhat predictable, evidenced by my theater’s Nancy Drew wannabe who guessed the result of every scene mere seconds before it played out (much to the annoyance of, well, everyone but him). And yet, Air just works. It’s entertaining, true to life, with solid acting and fun, relatable characters (particularly young Anna Kendrick, who hasn’t exactly been allowed to shine in the Twilight series as Bella’s annoying friend Jessica).

The plot is one I think we’ll see more and more if fans show an interest, and that’s the middle class guy who fears there’s nothing much to him other than his job. Since Clooney’s character fires people for a living, the contemporary element of a fickle and heartless workplace permeates the film, though your heart is with Clooney – safe in work so long as there are others who aren’t safe.

If you hadn’t guessed it already, though, this isn’t a film for people under, say, 25 years old. Call me an agist, but I doubt that viewers younger than that can appreciate the film’s subtlety and message, even if they get a chuckle or two from some crafty cameos.

So, while you could save a few bucks and wait ’til Up in the Air comes on DVD, you’d do well to see it on the big screen if you’ve already seen Avatar. Regardless, check it out at some point down the road; you won’t be disappointed.

“Last House on the Left” remake well done

December 19, 2009

last-house-on-the-left-poster2Having recently seen the original Last House on the Left, I thought it right to check out the new version that’s just come out on DVD. With a strong cast, I thought it likely that at least the acting would prove solid, and the new Last House doesn’t disappoint. But what about the horror? Is it as disturbing as the original? In two words: Not really. But the new Last House has its own virtues that are worth noting.

First, the camerawork is excellent, reminding me of the two recent Texas Chainsaw Massacre remakes that stand on the virtue of camerawork alone. Particularly, there’s good use of reaction shots and off-camera action that carry the viewer along nicely.

Second, while not raw enough to solicit feelings of discomfort, the mayhem is unnerving enough to keep your blood moving while watching. This would have been nice to see in the theater, honestly, and warrants rental or purchase for those home theater aficionados out there that want real immersion.

There are enough changes to the storyline to interest those who saw the original and wonder if the remake is worth watching. There are a couple of things that might have worked a little better than how they played out, but by and large this new version has enough of its own merits to stand apart from the original. While absent the typical “jump scares” of modern horror, well-wrought tension and in-your-face conflict bring Last House above most contemporary remakes.

New-to-DVD “The International” a pleasant surprise

November 18, 2009

the-internationalThis week’s new-to-DVD review received a tepid reception in theaters, which was largely why I waited for The International with Clive Owen and Naomi Watts to hit DVD. The gist is that Interpol and the New York City DA’s office seek to bring down an international bank involved in small-arms deals in the middle east.

Sure, it’s somewhat typical “rich white guys secretly rule the world” stuff, but the real draw of International is the action.

The camerawork is noticeably unique, with top-down shots and other odd angles done just enough to add to the film without losing viewers in the artistic. The coregraphy for the action, however, is quite well done. The shootout at the Guggenheim is spectacular, and there’s just enough build-up to the action sequences to add to tension without becoming frustrating (a slippery slope sometimes. Remember Executive Decision where – despite perfect tension-building – the film becomes exhausting and kills the potential for subsequent views).

Owen and Watts both do a good job in this, notably because the film foregoes any love interest or super, slo-mo moments to make either protaganist seem meta-human or uber-cool. Thus, their characters are quite believable.

At heart, International is not a deep film, but a good action/intrigue flick that’s certainly worth a rental or buy. It has definite re-playability, and makes a good film for escapism.

In-theaters “Law-Abiding Citizen” good fun, not too deep

November 15, 2009

law_abiding_citizenWho wouldn’t want to see Gerard Butler getting really pissed and wreaking havoc like Leonidas in 300? So I felt a little predisposed to enjoy in-theaters Law Abiding Citizen, and a solid 7.3 out of 10 stars on IMDb didn’t hurt, either.
And – for the most part – I am not disappointed. Citizen is smart, original, and full of emotion. Directory F. Gary Gray of The Italian Job and A Man Apart knows a bit about shooting payback, fusing enough emotion and heart into it to get the audience buy-in.

But there are a couple of drawbacks in case anyone was hoping for the perfect “falling down” flick. Foremost, it’s a little predictable. For some reason, directors tend to use sound (or the absence of it) to cue in viewers when something’s about to happen. The result is that you know what’s going to blow up before it does, who’s about to die, and often how. I think it would have proved far more potent to leave the surprises as surprises instead of preceding them with wide-angle shots and pregnant pauses (a dead giveaway – pun intended).

Too, I felt like this shaped up to be another Seven, where intricate plans wove together in such a macabre fashion that there was no way to guess the ending, and it would keep you up that night still putting the pieces together. In this respect, however, Citizen falls a little short.

All told, though, Citizen is worth watching in theaters and definitely worth a rental if you’d rather wait. There’s really nothing eye-popping, so waiting for it to hit DVD might be a good call if you’re not crazy excited to see it.

In Theaters: “Paranormal Activity” little spooky, little fun

October 25, 2009

paranormal-activity-posterI went into in-theaters Paranormal Activity with pretty high expectations. I’d heard “it’s the scariest movie ever” and the 7.6 rating (which was 8.2 a couple of days ago) didn’t hurt matters, either.

I wouldn’t say I was disappointed; this “found footage” style film in the vein of The Blair Witch Project and Quarantine is definitely spooky. I would just say that it will be very scary for some, and just so-so for others. Perhaps needing to sleep tonight, it’s a good thing I’m among the latter, but that certainly doesn’t invalidate the very many people in the theater who were scared out of their wits.

As odd as it might sound, I think Paranormal will scare women much more than men. The protagonist is the female, for one, and many of the scarier scenes revolve around her and her being vulnerable during sleep, having a lack of brute strength, etc. These unseen, psychological fears just aren’t as prevalent with guys.

The film does require a good deal of imagination, which – more often than not – is right up my alley. In this case, however, despite solid acting and directing, most of the scenes are nothing I haven’t seen on YouTube a hundred times. After all, when unseen forces are the culprit, it invites amateur filmmakers and requires no high-dollar actors, effects, or make-up.

So let’s put it this way: if you go see Paranormal in theaters and it scares the hell out of you: that’s great. It’s supposed to. If you go and feel like there’s something missing, but you like the concept, check out Home Movie instead. It’s much higher on the disturbing scale, and has more visual stimuli. It’s arguable that Quarantine – to the right person – is just as scary as Paranormal; it just depends on how your imagination operates.

In Theaters: “Paranormal Activity” little spooky, little funI will say that – if you have any interest – it’s worth seeing in theaters just in case you’ll really like it. That kind of immersion of sight and sound is often vital for “found footage” films.

Thowback Thursday: “The Hidden”

October 22, 2009

362850.1020.AThis throwback flick hits all of the staples of great ’80s action cinema. There’s the salty cop who treats gunshot wounds as a minor annoyance when “bagging his man” instead of as a medical emergency. There’s fast cars driven by coked-out yuppies with the sleeves of their jackets pushed to the elbow. There’s a strip club scene, with background hoot and hollers from nowhere (seemingly the equivalent to the laugh track in strip club scenes).

For The Hidden – an action/sci-fi about a body-snatcher-type villain going Grand Theft Auto – there are a few factors upping its ranking amid other ’80s classics. For one, the effects are quite good, with more squibs going off than a Rambo flick, and plenty of blood to boot. The plot twists, in ’80s fashion, are more like moseys, and fairly transparent, but the acting from this fairly star-studded cast holds strong.

Of course, it’s as cheesy as most everything from that time period, but a fast pace and likable characters drives it along better than most.

There are some surprise appearances, as well, like seeing Danny Trejo with about a 5-second cameo before getting blown away. There’s also Lin Shaye, still notorious as the landlady from the Farelly Brothers’ Kingpin.

So if you like ’80s films and are in the mood for some good shoot ‘em up action, check out The Hidden.

Book/Movie Showdown: “Starship Troopers”

October 20, 2009

starship_troopersWhen Robert Heinlein wrote Starship Troopers, critics went so far as to call him a fascist for his societal representations in the book. There were no prisons: administrative punishment was whipping in the public square. Heinlein conveyed the ideology behind this by comparing punishing people to training a dog. Not something most people react well to when the idea is presented.

And yet, there is a brilliance in Starship Troopers and its commentary on personal accountability, civil responsibility, and the progress of our species. While the first film conveys some of these ideas, it could also be taken as subtle criticism of the book. The society in the film operates the same, but then portrays some citizens as fanatical or the consequence of such social structures as problematic.

Still, forward-thinking ideas such as a society both race and gender neutral to the point of co-ed showers for military cadets. Of course, look no further than Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress to see how he often portrayed women as equals long before the idea took root in reality.

Director Paul Verhoeven, perhaps better known for Robocop and Total Recall, put more than its share of violence and graphic images in Troopers, but – for me – this only further made statements about how novel the whole concept was: edge not only in social commentary, but in gore and chaos.

The book is well-worth the read whether you enjoyed the film or not. However, my take on the film is that you can get the idea of what Heinlein is writing about by watching the movie quite well. So if you like one, you’ll likley enjoy the other.
But then there’s a caveat. The horrid sequels actually undermine the message of the original film. The aforementioned elements of eccentricity (which certainly came through in Verheoven’s other work) are made into comical, eye-rolling idiocy in the sequels.

In essence, the sequels break the frame of the original, and make the edgy parts of the film seem entirely tongue-in-cheek. I don’t portend to know what Verhoeven means to portray in the original, but I’m quite certain it isn’t the groan-worthy silliness of the sequels.

Before Starship Troopers 2 and 3, I would have put the movie on par with the book. But with the subsequent films having dragged down their predessesor, I’m saying read the book if you really want to appreciate the story.