Viewed in
2010
Premise
A movie adaptation of the popular 1980's American television show.
Loved
The ridiculous tank scene, how it was in the spirit of the show.
Liked
Sharlto Copley as Howlin' Mad Murdock.
Disliked
Action cliches, visual style.
Thoughts
Pretty entertaining action comedy that was pretty faithful to the original source.
Like the show, you had the four beloved characters, cool Hannibal, womanizing Face, crazy Murdoch, and loud B.A, surviving improbable situations through improvisation and resourcefulness in usually outrageous style. There were a lot of shout outs to my favorite moments from the show, from the familiar van, to comedic back-and-forth banter between Murdoch and B.A., to the flipping vehicle. It even had a lame "let's fit in a girl" from season 1 into the story.
Were the action sequences ridiculous and unrealistic? Very much so, but so was the television show, only difference was the budget. I giggled when they dodged heat-seeking missiles by cutting off their helicopter engine in mid-flight, and laughed out loud during the stupendously ludicrous (yet somewhat true to Newton's laws) falling tank scene. I know Mr. T complained the violence was unlike the show. While there were deaths, they were inconsequential and clean, and PG-13 these days are equivalent to TV action from back in the 1980's.
Comparing the cast of then and now, it was a wash. Liam Neeson surprisingly lacked the presence of the unflappable leader, Bradley Cooper was stronger version, Sharlto Copley was hilarious, and Quinton Jackson was solid when channeling Mr. T but stiff otherwise.
As much as I enjoyed the film, it had plenty of flaws. Since it was an origins story, they were only saving themselves, instead of citizens who had no one to turn to. Also, I wished there were more MacGyver-like scenes of making a battering ram out of a lawnmower.
I could care less about the obligatory double-crossing politics between bad guys who I could not tell apart. Though kudos to the (ghost)writer for writing that witty exchange between Lynch and Pike in the SUV.
Probably because of the show's charm, I wished some of the special effects were less CGI-oriented. Lastly, it suffered from the obligatory one-too-many-action scenes and rapid-editing, hand-held dizziness epidemic in current action flicks.
Even if you were not a fan of the show, I would still recommend this entertaining action flick for its funny moments and memorable physics-be-damned action scenes. A pretty strong summer movie in a so far lackluster season in 2010.
What I would change
More MacGyver scenes.
Personal
I'm extremely embarrassed that I completely missed the Dwight Schultz and Dirk Benedict cameos.
Showing posts with label 2010. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010. Show all posts
Alice in Wonderland
Viewed in
2010 (2)
Premise
The Unholy Trinity (Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Danny Elfman) reunite to make a live-action adaption of Lewis Carroll's books, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.
Loved
Anne Hathaway's performance. The visual feast.
Liked
The very cool cast.
Thoughts
A fun and luscious film.
Like most Burton films, there were tons of weird, exciting, and darkly humorous scenes for the eyes to behold, usually at the cost of a good plot. Thanks to some fascinating special effects, the film makers created a wonderful, bizarre, and diverse world. All of it looked even cooler in 3D IMAX. I loved that for most of the film, Alice was, to quote the Mad Hatter, "always too big or too small". This added to the off-beat style of the film.
The awesome cast was full of Burton favorites, wonderful British actors, and unexpected actors. Words cannot describe how excited I was to see the immortal Crispin Glover as the awkwardly tall Prince of Knaves. Helena Bonham Carter was great, despite the visual bastardization of her figure, as the evil Queen of Hearts. I definitely dug all the Brits doing fine voice acting, especially Stephen Fry as the Cheshire Cat. Sadly, Alan Rickman and Christopher Lee were underused. Amusing that there were four Harry Potter alumni in the cast.
Obviously, the headliner was Johnny Depp as Mad Hatter. While he did exude the oddball performance that was expected for such a film, I do not know if it was truly noteworthy. This is probably a good thing, as he could have been so noticeably weird that it would have diminished the ensemble performance. Instead, the scene-stealer was the delightful Anne Hathaway as the White Queen. Her ditsy, hyper-posturing performance was extremely funny and nearly made me laugh out loud whenever she appeared on screen.
While the story was predictable, it at least had a semblance of a plot, and had a clear narrative. It felt like a genuine story, not an excuse to string together a bunch of trippy scenes.
This was superior to the 1951 "classic" in every way, except for the song (sadly no "Merry Unbirthday" here). The main difference was that the 2010 version had a plot, and the characters were fleshed out. In the 1951 version, it was a parade of bizarre, inconsequential creatures, and Alice's character was borderline hate-able. I'll bet the hardest part for Burton and company was how to make the iconic Cheshire Cat better than the original. And they pulled it off by going the subtle route.
Having bashed the 1951 version, I will admit that watching that movie beforehand greatly enhanced my experience in the current film. There were some wonderful shoutouts and twisting of famous lines that made me giggle. Granted, maybe these lines existed in the books. I have not read them.
Most called Burton's version a sequel. Based on the stand-alone plot, I disagree, and felt a little misled by the media on that aspect. This Alice is much older, but the film is easily standalone.
When I heard about this project at its inception that it would be Tim Burton doing live action 3D, I was ecstatic. After many months of self-hype, this film delivered. Like the title character, I was whisked away into a wonderfully weird world, thanks to Tim Burton's eye candy, and the cornucopia of cool characters.
What I would change
No talking doorknob?!
2010 (2)
Premise
The Unholy Trinity (Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Danny Elfman) reunite to make a live-action adaption of Lewis Carroll's books, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.
Loved
Anne Hathaway's performance. The visual feast.
Liked
The very cool cast.
Thoughts
A fun and luscious film.
Like most Burton films, there were tons of weird, exciting, and darkly humorous scenes for the eyes to behold, usually at the cost of a good plot. Thanks to some fascinating special effects, the film makers created a wonderful, bizarre, and diverse world. All of it looked even cooler in 3D IMAX. I loved that for most of the film, Alice was, to quote the Mad Hatter, "always too big or too small". This added to the off-beat style of the film.
The awesome cast was full of Burton favorites, wonderful British actors, and unexpected actors. Words cannot describe how excited I was to see the immortal Crispin Glover as the awkwardly tall Prince of Knaves. Helena Bonham Carter was great, despite the visual bastardization of her figure, as the evil Queen of Hearts. I definitely dug all the Brits doing fine voice acting, especially Stephen Fry as the Cheshire Cat. Sadly, Alan Rickman and Christopher Lee were underused. Amusing that there were four Harry Potter alumni in the cast.
Obviously, the headliner was Johnny Depp as Mad Hatter. While he did exude the oddball performance that was expected for such a film, I do not know if it was truly noteworthy. This is probably a good thing, as he could have been so noticeably weird that it would have diminished the ensemble performance. Instead, the scene-stealer was the delightful Anne Hathaway as the White Queen. Her ditsy, hyper-posturing performance was extremely funny and nearly made me laugh out loud whenever she appeared on screen.
While the story was predictable, it at least had a semblance of a plot, and had a clear narrative. It felt like a genuine story, not an excuse to string together a bunch of trippy scenes.
This was superior to the 1951 "classic" in every way, except for the song (sadly no "Merry Unbirthday" here). The main difference was that the 2010 version had a plot, and the characters were fleshed out. In the 1951 version, it was a parade of bizarre, inconsequential creatures, and Alice's character was borderline hate-able. I'll bet the hardest part for Burton and company was how to make the iconic Cheshire Cat better than the original. And they pulled it off by going the subtle route.
Having bashed the 1951 version, I will admit that watching that movie beforehand greatly enhanced my experience in the current film. There were some wonderful shoutouts and twisting of famous lines that made me giggle. Granted, maybe these lines existed in the books. I have not read them.
Most called Burton's version a sequel. Based on the stand-alone plot, I disagree, and felt a little misled by the media on that aspect. This Alice is much older, but the film is easily standalone.
When I heard about this project at its inception that it would be Tim Burton doing live action 3D, I was ecstatic. After many months of self-hype, this film delivered. Like the title character, I was whisked away into a wonderfully weird world, thanks to Tim Burton's eye candy, and the cornucopia of cool characters.
What I would change
No talking doorknob?!
The American
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
George Clooney stars as a hitman in hiding in a small Italian village.
Loved
George Clooney's performance.
Liked
The character study.
Thoughts
If I had to use one word to describe this excellent piece of work, it would be "subtle".
Everything about it was subtle, none more exemplified than Clooney's performance. He was mesmerizing, as he was able to express his characters emotions, introversion, and paranoia with minimal dialog. In fact, the directing and acting were good at putting this internal stuff onscreen that the story would have been just as clear had I watched on mute. All of those quiet moments truly built up for a wonderful, emotional payoff in the climax.
The only non-subtle aspect was the cinematography. Throughout the film, my eyes were treated to beautiful shots of unique Italian villas and vast natural landscapes. Just gorgeous eye candy.
As a pure character study, it clearly cared more about the people in the story than the story itself; I assume if I thought twice about the plot, there might be some unanswered loose ends. Also, I am certain that its pace and silence would likely bore the typical moviegoer.
This was truly an elegant, underrated film. While he was not nominated, Clooney's performance should not be overlooked.
What I would change
Nothing.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
George Clooney stars as a hitman in hiding in a small Italian village.
Loved
George Clooney's performance.
Liked
The character study.
Thoughts
If I had to use one word to describe this excellent piece of work, it would be "subtle".
Everything about it was subtle, none more exemplified than Clooney's performance. He was mesmerizing, as he was able to express his characters emotions, introversion, and paranoia with minimal dialog. In fact, the directing and acting were good at putting this internal stuff onscreen that the story would have been just as clear had I watched on mute. All of those quiet moments truly built up for a wonderful, emotional payoff in the climax.
The only non-subtle aspect was the cinematography. Throughout the film, my eyes were treated to beautiful shots of unique Italian villas and vast natural landscapes. Just gorgeous eye candy.
As a pure character study, it clearly cared more about the people in the story than the story itself; I assume if I thought twice about the plot, there might be some unanswered loose ends. Also, I am certain that its pace and silence would likely bore the typical moviegoer.
This was truly an elegant, underrated film. While he was not nominated, Clooney's performance should not be overlooked.
What I would change
Nothing.
Batman: Under the Red Hood
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Netflix HD streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
In this animated, stand-alone tale, a mysterious red-hooded figure begins to take control of Gotham City's organized crime.
Liked
The dark style, slick action.
Thoughts
I enjoyed the fun hybrid animation between the original goth version and the later anime-style version. It felt dark and gritty, but at the same time it had visual style and flair. And a much better production value. It definitely deserved the PG-13 rating with its violence. Which was fine by my, as it fit the tone of the story.
Like many animated works these days, the film makers hired a lot of known actors instead of voice over actors. To my surprise, their performances were genuine and fit within the film. Though I still miss the original voices of Mark Hamill and Kevin Conroy.
Knowing only Batman from the movies and 1990's cartoons, I was unsure if the plot and characters were derived from original source or completely original. I have a feeling they were derived from somewhere, because there were times when the film did not bother introducing characters or their relationships. In terms of the big picture, that was fine, since it was consistent with the wealth of complex characters that the Christopher Nolan had, as well as Batman Gotham Knight.
For me, the flaws were the dialogue was sometimes uncreative, the identity of Red Hood was pretty obvious, and some of the computer generated animation was too obvious. It is up to you if I should expect higher standards from a 80-minute animated tale that went straight to DVD.
Clearly meant for older kids and adults who wanted something edgier than Saturday cartoons, it succeeded in tone, action, and production. As a big fan of Batman: The Animated Series, it brought me back to those days without totally insulting my intelligence.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
Netflix HD streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
In this animated, stand-alone tale, a mysterious red-hooded figure begins to take control of Gotham City's organized crime.
Liked
The dark style, slick action.
Thoughts
I enjoyed the fun hybrid animation between the original goth version and the later anime-style version. It felt dark and gritty, but at the same time it had visual style and flair. And a much better production value. It definitely deserved the PG-13 rating with its violence. Which was fine by my, as it fit the tone of the story.
Like many animated works these days, the film makers hired a lot of known actors instead of voice over actors. To my surprise, their performances were genuine and fit within the film. Though I still miss the original voices of Mark Hamill and Kevin Conroy.
Knowing only Batman from the movies and 1990's cartoons, I was unsure if the plot and characters were derived from original source or completely original. I have a feeling they were derived from somewhere, because there were times when the film did not bother introducing characters or their relationships. In terms of the big picture, that was fine, since it was consistent with the wealth of complex characters that the Christopher Nolan had, as well as Batman Gotham Knight.
For me, the flaws were the dialogue was sometimes uncreative, the identity of Red Hood was pretty obvious, and some of the computer generated animation was too obvious. It is up to you if I should expect higher standards from a 80-minute animated tale that went straight to DVD.
Clearly meant for older kids and adults who wanted something edgier than Saturday cartoons, it succeeded in tone, action, and production. As a big fan of Batman: The Animated Series, it brought me back to those days without totally insulting my intelligence.
What I would change
Nothing.
Beginners
Viewed in
2013
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Ewan McGregor stars as single man who meets an actress (Melanie Laurent), while reminiscing about the passing of his recently out-of-the-closet father, played by Christopher Plummer.
Liked
Cast, human dynamics, use of quirkiness to serve the story.
Thoughts
The gay father hook could've been a cheap gimmick, but thanks to strong writing, the movie was really sweet.
As the leads, McGregor and Laurent were absolutely lovable and deserved to be/stay together. McGregor's always been really good at playing charming and vulnerable. Laurent, on the other hand, was a surprise. In Inglorious Basterds, she was stoic and dignified. Here she was exotic yet subtly quirky. Their meet cute was quite creative and tender.
I also really liked McGregor's character's family relationships. His parents' subplot/backstory was genuine and heart-breaking. The movie did an excellent job of portraying an unhappy marriage in a realistic and understated manner that's rarely seen in cinema these days. Plummer's gay adventures served as poignant parallels to McGregor's own love troubles, treating the character's homosexuality as a reset button instead of cheap melodrama.
An underrated aspect of this film was how quirkiness was utilized to give us more information about these characters, instead of just being there for the sake of it. For example, the incredibly cute Jack Russell terrier. Each time they reused the running gag of it "talking back" it served as a cool sounding board for McGregor's inner thoughts, and for each iteration there was an extra layer/twist that kept it fresh. In fact, there's quite a few repeating devices that always added something funny/insightful/emotional. Normally, I'm not a fan of voice-over narration, but by accompanying charming/contrasting visuals instead of straight flashbacks, it also further illustrated meaningful backstories.
I wouldn't call it a big flaw, but the stakes in the movie were kind of small. From the outset you knew Plummer's character had died, so there wasn't much mystery or resistance between the characters. They were all nice, complex characters without potentially-catastrophic flaws. But sometimes you're in the mood for something that isn't going to bash your heart into a pulp of tears.
Also, while there was constant handheld cameras, it was surprisingly minimal in its swaying, creating that feeling of intimacy without the need for dimenhydrinate.
While Beginners did have an element of sadness, overall I found it to be a very sweet little gem of a movie. By channelling bits of Annie Hall, Before Sunrise, and Big Fish (which also included McGregor), it sported lovable human characters finding their way to love/happiness in sincere and amusing babysteps.
2013
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Ewan McGregor stars as single man who meets an actress (Melanie Laurent), while reminiscing about the passing of his recently out-of-the-closet father, played by Christopher Plummer.
Liked
Cast, human dynamics, use of quirkiness to serve the story.
Thoughts
The gay father hook could've been a cheap gimmick, but thanks to strong writing, the movie was really sweet.
As the leads, McGregor and Laurent were absolutely lovable and deserved to be/stay together. McGregor's always been really good at playing charming and vulnerable. Laurent, on the other hand, was a surprise. In Inglorious Basterds, she was stoic and dignified. Here she was exotic yet subtly quirky. Their meet cute was quite creative and tender.
I also really liked McGregor's character's family relationships. His parents' subplot/backstory was genuine and heart-breaking. The movie did an excellent job of portraying an unhappy marriage in a realistic and understated manner that's rarely seen in cinema these days. Plummer's gay adventures served as poignant parallels to McGregor's own love troubles, treating the character's homosexuality as a reset button instead of cheap melodrama.
An underrated aspect of this film was how quirkiness was utilized to give us more information about these characters, instead of just being there for the sake of it. For example, the incredibly cute Jack Russell terrier. Each time they reused the running gag of it "talking back" it served as a cool sounding board for McGregor's inner thoughts, and for each iteration there was an extra layer/twist that kept it fresh. In fact, there's quite a few repeating devices that always added something funny/insightful/emotional. Normally, I'm not a fan of voice-over narration, but by accompanying charming/contrasting visuals instead of straight flashbacks, it also further illustrated meaningful backstories.
I wouldn't call it a big flaw, but the stakes in the movie were kind of small. From the outset you knew Plummer's character had died, so there wasn't much mystery or resistance between the characters. They were all nice, complex characters without potentially-catastrophic flaws. But sometimes you're in the mood for something that isn't going to bash your heart into a pulp of tears.
Also, while there was constant handheld cameras, it was surprisingly minimal in its swaying, creating that feeling of intimacy without the need for dimenhydrinate.
While Beginners did have an element of sadness, overall I found it to be a very sweet little gem of a movie. By channelling bits of Annie Hall, Before Sunrise, and Big Fish (which also included McGregor), it sported lovable human characters finding their way to love/happiness in sincere and amusing babysteps.
Best That Never Was, The
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Part of ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary about highly recruited college football player Marcus Dupree.
Loved
The footage, the wealth of interviews.
Thoughts
What was so fascinating to me was all the themes his journey encapsulated. It was like watching Ricky Williams's eccentricity, LeBron James's high school fame, Josh Luchs damning portrayal of collegiate sports, and sports media frenzy, all rolled into one. If that was not interesting enough, director Jonathan Hock fit in the racial tensions/history/connections of Dupree's home town as nice bookends to the story.
To help tell this compelling story, Hock got tons of amazing footage of Dupree's high school and college days, detailed interviews from friends and family, and of course, direct conversations with the subject himself. Dupree came off as a fascinating kid, now a wise man who was open and at peace with all the positive/negative events that transpired earlier in life. Personally, I found his love for his brother to be the most touching part.
I also enjoyed the interviews with his "adversaries", coach Barry Switzer and agent Ken Fairley. It was good to hear their sides of the story. Their conversations added depth and complexity in Dupree's journey.
Lastly, I wanted to touch on the vintage footage. Watching him obliterate opponents All-Madden style truly justified the hyperbole that was given to his skills and talents. Equally fascinating (in a sad way) was watching his abilities diminish as his lack of conditioning and injuries took a toll.
As someone completely unaware of Marcus Dupree, this was a complete package that told an interesting story about an interesting athlete, while sadly reminding us that sometimes sports and life are not independent of each other.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Part of ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary about highly recruited college football player Marcus Dupree.
Loved
The footage, the wealth of interviews.
Thoughts
What was so fascinating to me was all the themes his journey encapsulated. It was like watching Ricky Williams's eccentricity, LeBron James's high school fame, Josh Luchs damning portrayal of collegiate sports, and sports media frenzy, all rolled into one. If that was not interesting enough, director Jonathan Hock fit in the racial tensions/history/connections of Dupree's home town as nice bookends to the story.
To help tell this compelling story, Hock got tons of amazing footage of Dupree's high school and college days, detailed interviews from friends and family, and of course, direct conversations with the subject himself. Dupree came off as a fascinating kid, now a wise man who was open and at peace with all the positive/negative events that transpired earlier in life. Personally, I found his love for his brother to be the most touching part.
I also enjoyed the interviews with his "adversaries", coach Barry Switzer and agent Ken Fairley. It was good to hear their sides of the story. Their conversations added depth and complexity in Dupree's journey.
Lastly, I wanted to touch on the vintage footage. Watching him obliterate opponents All-Madden style truly justified the hyperbole that was given to his skills and talents. Equally fascinating (in a sad way) was watching his abilities diminish as his lack of conditioning and injuries took a toll.
As someone completely unaware of Marcus Dupree, this was a complete package that told an interesting story about an interesting athlete, while sadly reminding us that sometimes sports and life are not independent of each other.
What I would change
Nothing.
Birth of Big Air
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Part of ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary about extreme sports star Mat Hoffman's Big Air ramp.
Loved
Brutal honesty of the injuries, vintage footage.
Thoughts
As a casual X Games viewer, this film was very engrossing.
First off, this was a great historic piece for me. The information was in depth and well-explained thanks to testimonies from Hoffman, his family and friends and peers. In addition, there was tons of cool video of Hoffman on his bicycle doing tricks and attempting giant ramps. I got to learn about the evolution of this sport.
The other great thing was that this was not a simple puff piece. There were countless shots of Hoffman getting seriously injured. Some were a bit queasy. He, his family, and his doctors pulled no punches on how dangerously close he was to death and the uncertainty of his future health. Things climax as his injuries clash against his desire to conquer the 20 foot ramp.
Thanks to the honesty and wealth of info, this was very educational and entertaining. It made me really appreciate the origins one of my favorite X Games events.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Part of ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary about extreme sports star Mat Hoffman's Big Air ramp.
Loved
Brutal honesty of the injuries, vintage footage.
Thoughts
As a casual X Games viewer, this film was very engrossing.
First off, this was a great historic piece for me. The information was in depth and well-explained thanks to testimonies from Hoffman, his family and friends and peers. In addition, there was tons of cool video of Hoffman on his bicycle doing tricks and attempting giant ramps. I got to learn about the evolution of this sport.
The other great thing was that this was not a simple puff piece. There were countless shots of Hoffman getting seriously injured. Some were a bit queasy. He, his family, and his doctors pulled no punches on how dangerously close he was to death and the uncertainty of his future health. Things climax as his injuries clash against his desire to conquer the 20 foot ramp.
Thanks to the honesty and wealth of info, this was very educational and entertaining. It made me really appreciate the origins one of my favorite X Games events.
What I would change
Nothing.
Black Swan
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Natalie Portman stars as a sheltered ballerina given the pressure-filled lead role in "Swan Lake".
Loved
The acting, the sound effects.
Thoughts
Another strong entry by director Darren Aronofsky, and arguably Natalie Portman's best performance to date.
The main reason why this film succeeded was because Portman. She delivered memorably in creating a naive, oppressed kid put into the pressure cooker of being in the spotlight, gradually unraveling. Newly-appointed, her character needed to tap into her dark side to truly become a ballet star. Portman masterfully recreated the innocence of a young lady, at the same time subtly allow her character to seep into uncontrollable danger.
She was helped by some great supporting performances. Mila Kunas and Winona Ryder were excellent, but Barbara Hershey was mesmerizing as Portman's obsessive, iron-fisted, complex mother.
Aronofsky immersed the audience into Portman's head with mood, performance, subtle use of special effects, and wizardry with sound. He created a psychologically haunting style, in which fantasy blended into reality, and each scene kept me on my toes regarding which realm I was in. I loved how sound was used. With Aronofsky's deft manipulation of voices and effects from unnatural angles, I highly recommend watching this with a good surround system, whether it be at home or theater.
Overall, the story was pretty strong, especially the tug-of-war between Portman and her mother, and the subplot of the ousted ballet ex-star. Though if you have seen enough of these kind of psychological thrillers, there was a slight aura of predictability. But the film makers executed it very well. Another minor beef was that I did not appreciate the "cheap" horror techniques to make me jump.
For some reason, people compared Black Swan to Aronofsky's The Wrestler, but I thought it more closely resembled Pi. Both were visually/psychologically dark/haunting, with themes of obsession and treading the dangerous unknowns of the mind. I would not consider this one of this year's best films, but still highly recommendable, thanks to Aronofsky's execution and memorable performances by Portman and Hershey.
What I would change
Less of the horror shock tactics.
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Natalie Portman stars as a sheltered ballerina given the pressure-filled lead role in "Swan Lake".
Loved
The acting, the sound effects.
Thoughts
Another strong entry by director Darren Aronofsky, and arguably Natalie Portman's best performance to date.
The main reason why this film succeeded was because Portman. She delivered memorably in creating a naive, oppressed kid put into the pressure cooker of being in the spotlight, gradually unraveling. Newly-appointed, her character needed to tap into her dark side to truly become a ballet star. Portman masterfully recreated the innocence of a young lady, at the same time subtly allow her character to seep into uncontrollable danger.
She was helped by some great supporting performances. Mila Kunas and Winona Ryder were excellent, but Barbara Hershey was mesmerizing as Portman's obsessive, iron-fisted, complex mother.
Aronofsky immersed the audience into Portman's head with mood, performance, subtle use of special effects, and wizardry with sound. He created a psychologically haunting style, in which fantasy blended into reality, and each scene kept me on my toes regarding which realm I was in. I loved how sound was used. With Aronofsky's deft manipulation of voices and effects from unnatural angles, I highly recommend watching this with a good surround system, whether it be at home or theater.
Overall, the story was pretty strong, especially the tug-of-war between Portman and her mother, and the subplot of the ousted ballet ex-star. Though if you have seen enough of these kind of psychological thrillers, there was a slight aura of predictability. But the film makers executed it very well. Another minor beef was that I did not appreciate the "cheap" horror techniques to make me jump.
For some reason, people compared Black Swan to Aronofsky's The Wrestler, but I thought it more closely resembled Pi. Both were visually/psychologically dark/haunting, with themes of obsession and treading the dangerous unknowns of the mind. I would not consider this one of this year's best films, but still highly recommendable, thanks to Aronofsky's execution and memorable performances by Portman and Hershey.
What I would change
Less of the horror shock tactics.
The Book of Eli
Viewed in
2011
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Denzel Washington stars as a lone wanderer in charge of protecting a book in a post-apocalyptic America.
Liked
Interesting visuals.
Thoughts
Similar to The Road, the directors did a fine job of creating a bleak and desperate world. You can see the craftsmanship from cinematography, wardrobe, production design, visual effects and color to make an immersive vision and mood. Composer Aticuss Ross' unique sound definitely made more sense here than in The Social Network.
After that, the similarities with the introspective The Road ceased. The rest of The Book of Eli was more Mad Max, with gangsters, wild wild west mentality, and nothing of note in terms of story or characters. Acting-wise, it was fine: Denzel was bad ass, Mila Kunis was hot, Gary Oldman was menacing, with Michael Gambon and Tom Waits in small, insignificant roles. Meanwhile, the Hughes brothers got their Michael Bay on with well-executed, seemingly-uninterrupted shootouts.
If there were any Christian allegories, I was definitely unaware of it.
It was very cool to look at, and there's nothing wrong with watching Denzel kicking butt or walking in slow motion. But as a film buff, this post-apocalyptic flick felt vastly inferior compared to the post-apocalyptic tour-de-force that came out two months earlier.
What I would change
No idea.
2011
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Denzel Washington stars as a lone wanderer in charge of protecting a book in a post-apocalyptic America.
Liked
Interesting visuals.
Thoughts
Similar to The Road, the directors did a fine job of creating a bleak and desperate world. You can see the craftsmanship from cinematography, wardrobe, production design, visual effects and color to make an immersive vision and mood. Composer Aticuss Ross' unique sound definitely made more sense here than in The Social Network.
After that, the similarities with the introspective The Road ceased. The rest of The Book of Eli was more Mad Max, with gangsters, wild wild west mentality, and nothing of note in terms of story or characters. Acting-wise, it was fine: Denzel was bad ass, Mila Kunis was hot, Gary Oldman was menacing, with Michael Gambon and Tom Waits in small, insignificant roles. Meanwhile, the Hughes brothers got their Michael Bay on with well-executed, seemingly-uninterrupted shootouts.
If there were any Christian allegories, I was definitely unaware of it.
It was very cool to look at, and there's nothing wrong with watching Denzel kicking butt or walking in slow motion. But as a film buff, this post-apocalyptic flick felt vastly inferior compared to the post-apocalyptic tour-de-force that came out two months earlier.
What I would change
No idea.
Buried
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Ryan Reynolds stars as an American contractor during the U.S. occupation of Iraq who finds himself buried in a coffin in the desert.
Loved
The premise.
Liked
The visual creativity.
Thoughts
Definitely one of the most interesting films of 2010.
Obviously, I was very intrigued by the premise, and the film makers were able to create some fascinating moments via performance, cinematography, and sound. Aside from the uniqueness of this film, I was also drawn in by its challenges.
I got to say, Ryan Reynolds has impressed me in the past couple of years with his film choices and performances. Being the only character onscreen, he carried the story with natural ease. And much like his contemporary, James Franco in 127 Hours, he also had to figure out how to create his character with minimal space and movement.
The behind-the-scenes for Buried would probably be fun, just to see how many coffin sets they created, and the preparation required to get the shots they wanted while still maintaining the claustrophobia that Rodrigo Cortes envisioned. I also imagine the degree of difficulty for lighting must have been enormous, yet they pulled it off very well, everything was lit believably physically and emotionally. I really dug the use of colors within the confined space.
For me, the writing was the weakest link. It was solid, after all, it kept me invested in the story, the climax was very effective, and the plot was mostly plausible. However, at times it got a little preachy about the business of nation occupation/rebuilding, and Reynolds' character does do a few illogical things. Also, having watched the MythBusters episodes about coffins, I had a hard time believing he had enough oxygen while exerting so much energy and using his lighter within the time frame of the plot.
This film really stood out for its unique story and look. I thought it did a pretty good job of making an interesting film for the whole 90 minutes. Too bad the moments kept vacillating between haunting and implausible.
What I would change
Taken out the snake scene, since it felt inconsequential, and silly. Also, replaced the ending credits song with a more heavier, befitting choice.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Ryan Reynolds stars as an American contractor during the U.S. occupation of Iraq who finds himself buried in a coffin in the desert.
Loved
The premise.
Liked
The visual creativity.
Thoughts
Definitely one of the most interesting films of 2010.
Obviously, I was very intrigued by the premise, and the film makers were able to create some fascinating moments via performance, cinematography, and sound. Aside from the uniqueness of this film, I was also drawn in by its challenges.
I got to say, Ryan Reynolds has impressed me in the past couple of years with his film choices and performances. Being the only character onscreen, he carried the story with natural ease. And much like his contemporary, James Franco in 127 Hours, he also had to figure out how to create his character with minimal space and movement.
The behind-the-scenes for Buried would probably be fun, just to see how many coffin sets they created, and the preparation required to get the shots they wanted while still maintaining the claustrophobia that Rodrigo Cortes envisioned. I also imagine the degree of difficulty for lighting must have been enormous, yet they pulled it off very well, everything was lit believably physically and emotionally. I really dug the use of colors within the confined space.
For me, the writing was the weakest link. It was solid, after all, it kept me invested in the story, the climax was very effective, and the plot was mostly plausible. However, at times it got a little preachy about the business of nation occupation/rebuilding, and Reynolds' character does do a few illogical things. Also, having watched the MythBusters episodes about coffins, I had a hard time believing he had enough oxygen while exerting so much energy and using his lighter within the time frame of the plot.
This film really stood out for its unique story and look. I thought it did a pretty good job of making an interesting film for the whole 90 minutes. Too bad the moments kept vacillating between haunting and implausible.
What I would change
Taken out the snake scene, since it felt inconsequential, and silly. Also, replaced the ending credits song with a more heavier, befitting choice.
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Based on C.S. Lewis's book, Lucy, Edmund and their unwilling cousin return to Narnia on King Caspian's ship.
Liked
The attention to character.
Thoughts
Like the other two, it was good, but not great.
I liked it better than Prince Caspian because it had more character development. Edmund dealt with a familiar ghost, and newcomer Eustace transformed from annoying non-believer to unlikely hero. For me, Lucy's story most interesting and sympathetic, as she was tempted by her jealousy of her older, prettier, and more accomplished sister.
Speaking of, it was good to see William Moseley and curvaceous Anna Popplewell onscreen again, even if it was for a fleeting moment. In fact, their appearance as well as other specters of the previous movies added depth and nostalgia to the experience.
The ending was interesting and surprising at the same time. For one thing, the Christian allegory was laid on so thick that even an uneducated agnostic (yours truly) could easily understand. What I did not expect was bittersweet emotion as familiar faces from these movies bid farewell to each other and to the audience.
It did not really have any flaws, although Eustace was far too annoying. While the visual effects, quirky creatures, and fight scenes were fine, it still gave this forgettable aura of "Lord of the Rings Lite".
Based on what I saw, the dearth of shots ripe for 3D made me glad I did not go for the more expensive version. You won't miss much if you save money by going regular 2D.
While superior to the second movie in character, the lack of memorable action made it far from must-see. But it should suffice for special effects driven family entertainment this holiday season.
What I would change
No idea.
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Based on C.S. Lewis's book, Lucy, Edmund and their unwilling cousin return to Narnia on King Caspian's ship.
Liked
The attention to character.
Thoughts
Like the other two, it was good, but not great.
I liked it better than Prince Caspian because it had more character development. Edmund dealt with a familiar ghost, and newcomer Eustace transformed from annoying non-believer to unlikely hero. For me, Lucy's story most interesting and sympathetic, as she was tempted by her jealousy of her older, prettier, and more accomplished sister.
Speaking of, it was good to see William Moseley and curvaceous Anna Popplewell onscreen again, even if it was for a fleeting moment. In fact, their appearance as well as other specters of the previous movies added depth and nostalgia to the experience.
The ending was interesting and surprising at the same time. For one thing, the Christian allegory was laid on so thick that even an uneducated agnostic (yours truly) could easily understand. What I did not expect was bittersweet emotion as familiar faces from these movies bid farewell to each other and to the audience.
It did not really have any flaws, although Eustace was far too annoying. While the visual effects, quirky creatures, and fight scenes were fine, it still gave this forgettable aura of "Lord of the Rings Lite".
Based on what I saw, the dearth of shots ripe for 3D made me glad I did not go for the more expensive version. You won't miss much if you save money by going regular 2D.
While superior to the second movie in character, the lack of memorable action made it far from must-see. But it should suffice for special effects driven family entertainment this holiday season.
What I would change
No idea.
Clash of the Titans (2010)
Viewed in
2010
Premise
Remake of the 1981 Harryhausen movie.
Liked
The slightly improved storyline.
Hated
Crappy 3D.
Thoughts
I liked it over the original, but not significant improvement.
Storyline-wise, it was an improvement. Perseus had a mind of his own, instead of just being led around by gods. Hades made a more formidable antagonist than that jealous freak. The climactic battle between Perseus and the Kraken was actually climactic. Lastly, the mechanical owl was replaced with a babe, which improved two things: it got rid of that cursed annoyance, and broke up the monotony of the sausage-fest. Despite my hatred for that bird, I loved the shoutout to it.
In terms of special effects, they were "better", but it kind of lacked a charm of the Harryhausen stop-motion critters. In fact the whole movie lacked any pop. The dialogue was boring and stiff, very much like all the actors' performances. Not even Qui-Gon Jin (as Zeus) nor Voldemort (as Hades) could ham it up enough to make their power struggle interesting.
I intentionally watched it in 3D, just to see what bad 3D looks like. It was a waste of money. The whole movie was noticeably dimmer and duller, and there were many disorienting scenes. Sometimes further objects bulged ahead of closer ones, other times, the head would have definition but their bodies would be flat. This is what happens when you convert at the last minute, and poorly.
Thus, my 3D lessons are learned. One, do not watch haphazardly converted movies. Two, pay for high-end-high-quality ones only. The only theater I can trust is The Bridge in Los Angeles, and only the 3D IMAX or digital projectors. I like Real 3D technology, but it's got to be digital, which the Torrance AMC did not for Clash of the Titans.
Anyways, back to the movie. I think fans will enjoy the updated version, just keep it in 2D.
What I would change
Not bother with the shoddy 3D conversion.
Random
Do you really need a Dialogue Coach for a movie like this?
2010
Premise
Remake of the 1981 Harryhausen movie.
Liked
The slightly improved storyline.
Hated
Crappy 3D.
Thoughts
I liked it over the original, but not significant improvement.
Storyline-wise, it was an improvement. Perseus had a mind of his own, instead of just being led around by gods. Hades made a more formidable antagonist than that jealous freak. The climactic battle between Perseus and the Kraken was actually climactic. Lastly, the mechanical owl was replaced with a babe, which improved two things: it got rid of that cursed annoyance, and broke up the monotony of the sausage-fest. Despite my hatred for that bird, I loved the shoutout to it.
In terms of special effects, they were "better", but it kind of lacked a charm of the Harryhausen stop-motion critters. In fact the whole movie lacked any pop. The dialogue was boring and stiff, very much like all the actors' performances. Not even Qui-Gon Jin (as Zeus) nor Voldemort (as Hades) could ham it up enough to make their power struggle interesting.
I intentionally watched it in 3D, just to see what bad 3D looks like. It was a waste of money. The whole movie was noticeably dimmer and duller, and there were many disorienting scenes. Sometimes further objects bulged ahead of closer ones, other times, the head would have definition but their bodies would be flat. This is what happens when you convert at the last minute, and poorly.
Thus, my 3D lessons are learned. One, do not watch haphazardly converted movies. Two, pay for high-end-high-quality ones only. The only theater I can trust is The Bridge in Los Angeles, and only the 3D IMAX or digital projectors. I like Real 3D technology, but it's got to be digital, which the Torrance AMC did not for Clash of the Titans.
Anyways, back to the movie. I think fans will enjoy the updated version, just keep it in 2D.
What I would change
Not bother with the shoddy 3D conversion.
Random
Do you really need a Dialogue Coach for a movie like this?
Cyrus
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
John C. Reilly stars as a man who falls in love with a woman (Marisa Tomei) whose adult son (Jonah Hill) still lives with her.
Liked
The charming leads.
Disliked
The mind games.
Thoughts
A pretty good film thanks to a likable cast and interesting writing.
Reilly and Tomei were irresistibly huggable here. Despite their characters deep flaws and loser mentality, they created some absolutely sweet and tender moments together that became the heart of the film.
Jonah Hill's performance was way darker, and better, than I had expected. Good to see him expanding his acting repertoire. The other cougar indie darling, Catherine Keener, put in some good scenes as Reilly's ex-wife.
This film delved a lot into uncommon relationships, most of it was interesting or entertaining. In addition to the love story, there were quirky scenes of Reilly still hanging out with his remarried ex-wife, and the creepy, Oedipus-like, mother-son combo. The centerpiece of tension was the unsettling moments between Reilly and Hill, as the son deals with having to share his mother with another man. The explorations into relationships worked because of believable, interesting dialog.
While the scenes with the two leads were pitch-perfect, those between Reilly and Hill was at times uneven, especially when it devolved into mind games. I appreciated the film makers' ambition of creating something edgy with Hill's character, but it got mean-spirited, making itdifficult to accept that aspect in context of the entire film.
Lastly, there were a couple of parts when characters say/do the dumb thing to serve the plot.
I enjoyed this quirky, interesting, risk-taking love story rooted in believable characters and motivations. Too bad the mind games fell flat for me.
What I would change
Not sure.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
John C. Reilly stars as a man who falls in love with a woman (Marisa Tomei) whose adult son (Jonah Hill) still lives with her.
Liked
The charming leads.
Disliked
The mind games.
Thoughts
A pretty good film thanks to a likable cast and interesting writing.
Reilly and Tomei were irresistibly huggable here. Despite their characters deep flaws and loser mentality, they created some absolutely sweet and tender moments together that became the heart of the film.
Jonah Hill's performance was way darker, and better, than I had expected. Good to see him expanding his acting repertoire. The other cougar indie darling, Catherine Keener, put in some good scenes as Reilly's ex-wife.
This film delved a lot into uncommon relationships, most of it was interesting or entertaining. In addition to the love story, there were quirky scenes of Reilly still hanging out with his remarried ex-wife, and the creepy, Oedipus-like, mother-son combo. The centerpiece of tension was the unsettling moments between Reilly and Hill, as the son deals with having to share his mother with another man. The explorations into relationships worked because of believable, interesting dialog.
While the scenes with the two leads were pitch-perfect, those between Reilly and Hill was at times uneven, especially when it devolved into mind games. I appreciated the film makers' ambition of creating something edgy with Hill's character, but it got mean-spirited, making itdifficult to accept that aspect in context of the entire film.
Lastly, there were a couple of parts when characters say/do the dumb thing to serve the plot.
I enjoyed this quirky, interesting, risk-taking love story rooted in believable characters and motivations. Too bad the mind games fell flat for me.
What I would change
Not sure.
Date Night
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Steve Carell and Tina Fey star as a boring couple who stumble into a crime conspiracy.
Liked
The charming leads.
Disliked
The silly story.
Thoughts
The best part was Carell and Fey. Not only did they pull off some funny performances in action sequences, but they were even funnier in the married couple entrenched in routine stuff. Apparently, they did some improvisation, and you can see some of their outtakes during the credits.
While the rest of the cast was full of recognizable people, most of their appearances were forgettable or talents wasted. Best of the rest went to Mark Wahlberg, James Franco and Milas Kunas. Watching William Fichtner doing comedy was a little jarring.
As expected, the action scenes were forgettable (except the bizarre car-sandwich), the characters acted illogically, and the storylines were silly and unoriginal. At least the movie makers knew how to get out in 90 minutes before boring the audience.
It was a decent action-comedy, thanks to some funny moments and two very charming leads. The premise was promising, but in the end all that talent felt wasted.
What I would change
Less subplots, more Carell and Fey.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Steve Carell and Tina Fey star as a boring couple who stumble into a crime conspiracy.
Liked
The charming leads.
Disliked
The silly story.
Thoughts
The best part was Carell and Fey. Not only did they pull off some funny performances in action sequences, but they were even funnier in the married couple entrenched in routine stuff. Apparently, they did some improvisation, and you can see some of their outtakes during the credits.
While the rest of the cast was full of recognizable people, most of their appearances were forgettable or talents wasted. Best of the rest went to Mark Wahlberg, James Franco and Milas Kunas. Watching William Fichtner doing comedy was a little jarring.
As expected, the action scenes were forgettable (except the bizarre car-sandwich), the characters acted illogically, and the storylines were silly and unoriginal. At least the movie makers knew how to get out in 90 minutes before boring the audience.
It was a decent action-comedy, thanks to some funny moments and two very charming leads. The premise was promising, but in the end all that talent felt wasted.
What I would change
Less subplots, more Carell and Fey.
Despicable Me
Viewed in
2010, 2011
Formats watched
Movie theater, DVD
Premise
An evil spy, Gru, adopts three lovable girl orphans as part of his master plan to steal the Moon.
Loved
The Minions.
Liked
The grade A cartoon violence, the adorable cuteness.
Disliked
The slow first act.
Thoughts
Very funny and cute.
Once again, a film like this proved that creativity instead of pop culture jokes tends to make better comedy. A lot of the laughs came from slapstick cartoony violence. The stars of those moments were those awesome Minions, a cross between Raving Rabids and Tuck and Roll from A Bug's Life. I adored those delightful henchmen as they committed Three Stooges antics on each other. The violence hearkened back to old school Looney Tunes days.
To counter the cartoony comedy and violence was an incredible level of non-mushy cuteness. Part of the Minions appeal was how cute they were as they committed juvenile acts. Notice how each was animated differently to promote individuality. The charm kicked up a notch when the orphans appeared in Gru's life. Agnes' exuberant love for unicorns captured that child-like innocence that we all love.
This combination of comedy and cuteness made these characters endearing. Even though the plot was predictable, you wanted to see it end with one big happy family. Even when you know the kids will touch Gru's evil heart, you can't help but say "Awww". The most creative writing was the subplot involving shrinking the Moon.
The voice talent was excellent. Even though they were recognizable names (mostly from the Apatow stable), their voices were not. Steve Carrell could have easily just add a Russian voice and called it a day. Instead, he and the rest of the crew added creativity and soul to their performances that made me forget I was hearing the voices of Julie Andrews and Russell Brand.
For me, the first third was the weakest. It was slowed down by unnecessarily long scenes at the bank and the orphanage. The story, motivations, and characters would have been the same had they been trimmed.
I watched it in 2D, and it felt like the right choice. There was some gratuitous 3D scenes, like the airship fight, the roller coaster, and the credits in which the Minions attempt to outdo each other in reaching the audience. However, Ebert warned that the dimming effect was still present.
It was a very enjoyable film, thanks to the charming characters, old school slapstick, and voice acting.
What I would change
Got rid of the Lehman Brothers joke. It was a little too obvious and topical. Ten years from now, will anyone get it?
2010, 2011
Formats watched
Movie theater, DVD
Premise
An evil spy, Gru, adopts three lovable girl orphans as part of his master plan to steal the Moon.
Loved
The Minions.
Liked
The grade A cartoon violence, the adorable cuteness.
Disliked
The slow first act.
Thoughts
Very funny and cute.
Once again, a film like this proved that creativity instead of pop culture jokes tends to make better comedy. A lot of the laughs came from slapstick cartoony violence. The stars of those moments were those awesome Minions, a cross between Raving Rabids and Tuck and Roll from A Bug's Life. I adored those delightful henchmen as they committed Three Stooges antics on each other. The violence hearkened back to old school Looney Tunes days.
To counter the cartoony comedy and violence was an incredible level of non-mushy cuteness. Part of the Minions appeal was how cute they were as they committed juvenile acts. Notice how each was animated differently to promote individuality. The charm kicked up a notch when the orphans appeared in Gru's life. Agnes' exuberant love for unicorns captured that child-like innocence that we all love.
This combination of comedy and cuteness made these characters endearing. Even though the plot was predictable, you wanted to see it end with one big happy family. Even when you know the kids will touch Gru's evil heart, you can't help but say "Awww". The most creative writing was the subplot involving shrinking the Moon.
The voice talent was excellent. Even though they were recognizable names (mostly from the Apatow stable), their voices were not. Steve Carrell could have easily just add a Russian voice and called it a day. Instead, he and the rest of the crew added creativity and soul to their performances that made me forget I was hearing the voices of Julie Andrews and Russell Brand.
For me, the first third was the weakest. It was slowed down by unnecessarily long scenes at the bank and the orphanage. The story, motivations, and characters would have been the same had they been trimmed.
I watched it in 2D, and it felt like the right choice. There was some gratuitous 3D scenes, like the airship fight, the roller coaster, and the credits in which the Minions attempt to outdo each other in reaching the audience. However, Ebert warned that the dimming effect was still present.
It was a very enjoyable film, thanks to the charming characters, old school slapstick, and voice acting.
What I would change
Got rid of the Lehman Brothers joke. It was a little too obvious and topical. Ten years from now, will anyone get it?
Dive!
Viewed in
2010
Formats
DVD
Premise
A documentary about dumpster-diving, and America's food waste dilemma.
Liked
The direct, fair approach to the subject.
Thoughts
It did a good job of passing on valuable information without preaching down to me, boring me with numbers, or manipulating my emotions.
Director Jeremy Seifert had a clear narrative, as he introduced us to the dumpster-diving subculture (one participant listed the rules), then tried to get answers from local grocery stores about waste, and finally channeled it into an exploration current solutions. My favorite part was when he interviewed his professional chef friend, who had no problem cooking with recovered food for his friends.
As a diver himself, Seifert was obviously passionate about the subject, but he did a great job of being fair, especially towards grocery stores. He repeated mentioned that Trader Joe's was the prime example only because its dumpster was most accessible, and that all stores were equally part of the problem. At the same time, he also credited those same stores for their attempts to reduce lost resources.
One aspect I wished he explored was whether it was truly safe to obtain sustenance this way. Considering none of them got sick is not as convincing as asking a health expert about the perceived/true risks about consuming such edibles. Also, he mainly focused on his neighborhood in Los Angeles, so this subculture might be different in the rest of the country.
In just forty minutes, I was fed some valuable, interesting information about dumpster-diving and reducing food waste in America. It did not make me want to become one, but I appreciated the thoughtfulness by Seifert and his ilk to show that we can do more to ensure our precious food does not get lost.
To date, this documentary had not been picked up by a distributor, so if you are interested in watching this, you can reach the film makers at www.divethefilm.com. Or I can loan you my evaluation copy =P.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
DVD
Premise
A documentary about dumpster-diving, and America's food waste dilemma.
Liked
The direct, fair approach to the subject.
Thoughts
It did a good job of passing on valuable information without preaching down to me, boring me with numbers, or manipulating my emotions.
Director Jeremy Seifert had a clear narrative, as he introduced us to the dumpster-diving subculture (one participant listed the rules), then tried to get answers from local grocery stores about waste, and finally channeled it into an exploration current solutions. My favorite part was when he interviewed his professional chef friend, who had no problem cooking with recovered food for his friends.
As a diver himself, Seifert was obviously passionate about the subject, but he did a great job of being fair, especially towards grocery stores. He repeated mentioned that Trader Joe's was the prime example only because its dumpster was most accessible, and that all stores were equally part of the problem. At the same time, he also credited those same stores for their attempts to reduce lost resources.
One aspect I wished he explored was whether it was truly safe to obtain sustenance this way. Considering none of them got sick is not as convincing as asking a health expert about the perceived/true risks about consuming such edibles. Also, he mainly focused on his neighborhood in Los Angeles, so this subculture might be different in the rest of the country.
In just forty minutes, I was fed some valuable, interesting information about dumpster-diving and reducing food waste in America. It did not make me want to become one, but I appreciated the thoughtfulness by Seifert and his ilk to show that we can do more to ensure our precious food does not get lost.
To date, this documentary had not been picked up by a distributor, so if you are interested in watching this, you can reach the film makers at www.divethefilm.com. Or I can loan you my evaluation copy =P.
What I would change
Nothing.
Easy A
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Emma Stone stars as a high school girl whose life snowballs out of control after she lies about having sex with a guy.
Loved
The charming cast, funny dialog.
Disliked
The messy subplots.
Thoughts
A mostly smart and funny teenage film.
I really enjoyed the dialog and themes in writing. For the majority of the time, I was laughing out loud at the quirky, irreverent zingers from teens, teachers, and parents alike. The writers got a lot of mileage out of the humorous, introspective monologues, such as the essay on 1980's teen flicks, and universal teenage angst. Having adult characters who were just as witty as the youngsters still felt fresh and different.
Overall, the cast was extremely likable. Emma Stone definitely proved her worth as the charming, insightful high schooler lead with natural ease. Plus, she finally filled my void of sexy redhead celebrity gal long-vacated by Lindsay Lohan. Amanda Bynes and unknown Alyson Michalka both put in hilarious supporting performances. As for the adults, Stanley Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, and Thomas Haden Church also hit home runs with their charm and delivery.
The story aspect of the writing had some room for improvement. I found the subplots, especially Lisa Kudrow's, to be rather messy. Granted they're teens, but based on how smart they think and talk, I was occasionally annoyed at characters' habit of not saying the most logical thing just to keep the story going.
While I enjoyed the dialog, they were one shade too sharp to be plausible. It seemed like writer Bert V. Royal loved his one-liners just a bit more than his characters. For example, I adored Tucci and Clarkson as Stone's parents, but as a liberal Californian, even I found their uber-lenient views on sex, teenage autonomy to be incredible, and frankly, a little insulting.
I recommend this teenage comedy for its brains, themes, and charm. It was very much in the same vein (and quality) as contemporaries, Saved! and Mean Girls, though not as biting. Also, it had a little bit too much of a Juno dialogue complex. I would totally watch this with my teenage kids, if I had any.
What I would change
Taken out the Lisa Kudrow subplot, and devoted more of that time to Stone's relationships with the male love interest or her best friend.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Emma Stone stars as a high school girl whose life snowballs out of control after she lies about having sex with a guy.
Loved
The charming cast, funny dialog.
Disliked
The messy subplots.
Thoughts
A mostly smart and funny teenage film.
I really enjoyed the dialog and themes in writing. For the majority of the time, I was laughing out loud at the quirky, irreverent zingers from teens, teachers, and parents alike. The writers got a lot of mileage out of the humorous, introspective monologues, such as the essay on 1980's teen flicks, and universal teenage angst. Having adult characters who were just as witty as the youngsters still felt fresh and different.
Overall, the cast was extremely likable. Emma Stone definitely proved her worth as the charming, insightful high schooler lead with natural ease. Plus, she finally filled my void of sexy redhead celebrity gal long-vacated by Lindsay Lohan. Amanda Bynes and unknown Alyson Michalka both put in hilarious supporting performances. As for the adults, Stanley Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, and Thomas Haden Church also hit home runs with their charm and delivery.
The story aspect of the writing had some room for improvement. I found the subplots, especially Lisa Kudrow's, to be rather messy. Granted they're teens, but based on how smart they think and talk, I was occasionally annoyed at characters' habit of not saying the most logical thing just to keep the story going.
While I enjoyed the dialog, they were one shade too sharp to be plausible. It seemed like writer Bert V. Royal loved his one-liners just a bit more than his characters. For example, I adored Tucci and Clarkson as Stone's parents, but as a liberal Californian, even I found their uber-lenient views on sex, teenage autonomy to be incredible, and frankly, a little insulting.
I recommend this teenage comedy for its brains, themes, and charm. It was very much in the same vein (and quality) as contemporaries, Saved! and Mean Girls, though not as biting. Also, it had a little bit too much of a Juno dialogue complex. I would totally watch this with my teenage kids, if I had any.
What I would change
Taken out the Lisa Kudrow subplot, and devoted more of that time to Stone's relationships with the male love interest or her best friend.
Exit Through the Gift Shop
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Netflix HD streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
Street art legend Banksy directs this documentary about how a street art documentary went wrong.
Loved
The characters and the immortalized art.
Thoughts
A fascinating film with a wicked last act. Even if you think what Banksy, Shepard Fairey, and others do is vandalism, illegal, or simply not art, I dare you to not like this documentary.
Like any great movie, it had compelling characters and a compelling story. It celebrated street art, and my eyes were glued to the screen as the film dived into wonderful footage of the subculture. I was thrilled to watch these people endanger themselves for the sake of expression, share their creative thoughts and technique, and even letting the world see their studios.
Given its fleeting nature, the videos of their works definitely captured a moment in history for this controversial movement. In some ways, this was a continuation of where 1983's Style Wars left off. It would be fun to watch these two documentaries back-to-back, to watch street art evolve from graffiti at its infancy to the diverse artistry in the early 2000's.
The people were simply fascinating. There were some cool interviews with many major contributors of street art, most I have never heard of, like Space Invader, some whose works I have seen, like Shepard Fairey, to the mythical, elusive figure known as Banksy. It was very educational in meeting these people. But the star of the show was Thierry Guetta. His eccentricities, flaws and lack of restraint truly made him a memorable character as the man documenting these cool artists.
What happened during the finale I will not spoil. The interesting first two-thirds turned out to be a set up for an engrossing and unforgettable last third in which characters and art collide like oncoming trains. The end result was spectacular and hilarious.
Easily a must-see documentary of 2010 that might crack my favorite films list.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
Netflix HD streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
Street art legend Banksy directs this documentary about how a street art documentary went wrong.
Loved
The characters and the immortalized art.
Thoughts
A fascinating film with a wicked last act. Even if you think what Banksy, Shepard Fairey, and others do is vandalism, illegal, or simply not art, I dare you to not like this documentary.
Like any great movie, it had compelling characters and a compelling story. It celebrated street art, and my eyes were glued to the screen as the film dived into wonderful footage of the subculture. I was thrilled to watch these people endanger themselves for the sake of expression, share their creative thoughts and technique, and even letting the world see their studios.
Given its fleeting nature, the videos of their works definitely captured a moment in history for this controversial movement. In some ways, this was a continuation of where 1983's Style Wars left off. It would be fun to watch these two documentaries back-to-back, to watch street art evolve from graffiti at its infancy to the diverse artistry in the early 2000's.
The people were simply fascinating. There were some cool interviews with many major contributors of street art, most I have never heard of, like Space Invader, some whose works I have seen, like Shepard Fairey, to the mythical, elusive figure known as Banksy. It was very educational in meeting these people. But the star of the show was Thierry Guetta. His eccentricities, flaws and lack of restraint truly made him a memorable character as the man documenting these cool artists.
What happened during the finale I will not spoil. The interesting first two-thirds turned out to be a set up for an engrossing and unforgettable last third in which characters and art collide like oncoming trains. The end result was spectacular and hilarious.
Easily a must-see documentary of 2010 that might crack my favorite films list.
What I would change
Nothing.
Expendables, The
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Movie theater, digital projector.
Premise
Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Dolph Lundgren, Jet Li, Steve Austin, Randy Couture, Mickey Rourke, a bunch of other manly men get involved with explosions and violence.
Loved
The cast.
Liked
The explosive second half.
Disliked
The boring first half.
Thoughts
I definitely got my testosterone fix taken care of.
Loved the ridiculous cast, at times I was giddy just watching certain personae onscreen at the same time. Pretty much every "star" got their chance to flex they muscles. There were some fun "removing the fourth wall" moments, such as lines that jab at each others careers, and a WWE/UFC fight. Very much enjoyed 65 year-old Stallone's line: "getting my ass kicked". Probably the only plausible moment in the flick.
Last act was full of manly goodness, with guns ablaze, explosions galore, blood and guts all over the place. It did not bring anything new to the plate, but the action and fights were very well executed, especially when the heroes take on a palace full of fodder, I mean, soldiers.
There were many expected flaws, such as lame storylines and wooden acting. But the biggest flaw was that the first half was boring. You got so many dudes, just throw in some more fighting at the beginning or something!
At times, it seemed like it wanted to be a shout-out to the 1980's American action flick. But that also came up short. Where were the overuse of f-bombs and gratuitous frontal nudity?
For fans of muscles, explosive violence, high body counts, and the action genre, its a fun time. You just have a wait a while before it gets the ball rolling.
Random
It's apropos that an Old Spice "Swagger" commercial before the movie.
2010
Formats
Movie theater, digital projector.
Premise
Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Dolph Lundgren, Jet Li, Steve Austin, Randy Couture, Mickey Rourke, a bunch of other manly men get involved with explosions and violence.
Loved
The cast.
Liked
The explosive second half.
Disliked
The boring first half.
Thoughts
I definitely got my testosterone fix taken care of.
Loved the ridiculous cast, at times I was giddy just watching certain personae onscreen at the same time. Pretty much every "star" got their chance to flex they muscles. There were some fun "removing the fourth wall" moments, such as lines that jab at each others careers, and a WWE/UFC fight. Very much enjoyed 65 year-old Stallone's line: "getting my ass kicked". Probably the only plausible moment in the flick.
Last act was full of manly goodness, with guns ablaze, explosions galore, blood and guts all over the place. It did not bring anything new to the plate, but the action and fights were very well executed, especially when the heroes take on a palace full of fodder, I mean, soldiers.
There were many expected flaws, such as lame storylines and wooden acting. But the biggest flaw was that the first half was boring. You got so many dudes, just throw in some more fighting at the beginning or something!
At times, it seemed like it wanted to be a shout-out to the 1980's American action flick. But that also came up short. Where were the overuse of f-bombs and gratuitous frontal nudity?
For fans of muscles, explosive violence, high body counts, and the action genre, its a fun time. You just have a wait a while before it gets the ball rolling.
Random
It's apropos that an Old Spice "Swagger" commercial before the movie.
Fernando Nation
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Based on ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary on pitcher Fernando Valenzuela's influence on the Los Angeles Dodgers fanbase.
Liked
The history lesson.
Thoughts
I was late to the Fernando party, so this film definitely taught me some good stuff.
Excellent choice by the documentarians to give a history background about the city of L.A. I was fascinated by the controversial conversion of Chavez Ravine into Dodgers stadium, Chicano-related racial tensions in Southern California, and why Mexican-Americans and baseball did not mix before Valenzuela.
This helped set up the rest of the story. The wealth of footage, pictures, and interviews chronicled how he took baseball by storm and re-created interest from Americans post-strike and Mexican-Americans. One thing I felt they glossed over was if he truly healed wounds.
Living in L.A. right now, Dodgers and Latino culture feel like one. But what about those who still remember Chavez Ravine?
What I would change
See above.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Based on ESPN's 30 for 30 series, a documentary on pitcher Fernando Valenzuela's influence on the Los Angeles Dodgers fanbase.
Liked
The history lesson.
Thoughts
I was late to the Fernando party, so this film definitely taught me some good stuff.
Excellent choice by the documentarians to give a history background about the city of L.A. I was fascinated by the controversial conversion of Chavez Ravine into Dodgers stadium, Chicano-related racial tensions in Southern California, and why Mexican-Americans and baseball did not mix before Valenzuela.
This helped set up the rest of the story. The wealth of footage, pictures, and interviews chronicled how he took baseball by storm and re-created interest from Americans post-strike and Mexican-Americans. One thing I felt they glossed over was if he truly healed wounds.
Living in L.A. right now, Dodgers and Latino culture feel like one. But what about those who still remember Chavez Ravine?
What I would change
See above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)