Speaking of timeless classics, I recently watched Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo (1984)- A lot of people watch really bad movies for the humor. No bad movie ever made, be it Deadly Prey, Dolomite, or The Room has even a quarter of the unintentional comedy that Breakin' 2 does.The movie features an assortment of young, smiling blacks, whites, and Hispanics living in perfect harmony, all while donning colorful green, purple, and pink attire that would make a homosexual blush. They also break out dancing all the time. The three main characters are Kelly, a white girl with rich parents that was 24 at the time, Ozone, a Hispanic dude who was pushing 30, and a tiny black dude called Turbo, who was 16, and has the most painfully retarded facial expression I have ever seen, which is present at all times. I can't choose a favorite part; Ice T playing a gay S&M rapper, a crippled man in a wheelchair promptly getting up to begin breakdancing, the black guy wearing a bald old wounded white guy mask, or is it Turbo Retardo's attempts to rape a mannequin? What about the breakdancing whore nurses, the back-flipping mailman, Turbo Retardo humping his bed, A MAN RISING UP FROM THE DEAD IN THE HOSPITAL TO GYRATE TO THE MUSIC, or the barely repressed homosexual tension between Ozone and Turbo? There are five hysterical things happening every frame here! Objectively, it's a bad movie, but damn if it isn't one of the most entertaining ever. 73/100 Full movie on Youtube
You didn't mention the best thing about the FIRST Breakin'.... Van Damme. In his film debut. Gettin' down in a wrestling singlette. Die happy, kids. Oh, and Dolomite? MEANT to be a comedy-spoof of blaxploitation, the problem is it's just awful. The star is a stand-up comedian, and much of it was shot at his comedy club.
Since I seem to stir up hornets' nests in this thread, maybe I can get some TiBettes to attack me with tooth and nail here: William Shakepeare's Romeo + Juliet (1996) ...or as I like to call it "A great soundtrack in search of a film that doesn't suck ass completely" . What an utterly APPALLING waste of talent and money. To this day, my mind explodes whenever the thought crosses my mind that THIS octuplet-abortion of a film was such a huge hit back in tha day. A nauseating, headache-inducing clusterfuck that royaly cornholes The Bard like no film in cinematic history, and that includes the Ethan Hawke Hamlet debacle. "Modern dress" is something not new or unfamiliar, The Stratford Festival around these parts often does the same thing, but this....this is just CRAP. Directed by Baz "Moulin Rouge" Luhrmann (another horribly queazy film), no shot in this film lasts longer than 10 seconds, no performance isn't bad, and no acclaim is deserved. Replacing swords with firearms and having every character carry guns (called "swords") aroundlike they're car keys is peculiar, but not interesting. The roles of Mercutio and Thibault are always delicious, scene-stealing roles that have been used so well in the past by great actors like Alan Rickman and Michael York, here Harold Parrineau and John Leguizamo play them so broad and obnoxious I was simply PRAYING for their death scenes to come. What's worse: DiCaprio and Claire Dane's chemistry in the title roles is put-upon and just plain meh. Luhrmann's "more is better" treament of the entire production makes Joel Schumacher look like John Cassavetes. Watching this movie is like trying to play patty-cake with somebody having a grand mal seizure. Awful, just plain fucking awful and nothing but. I love The Bard, and I HATED this movie. Don't try and change my mind. Many have tried and failed miserably. I would rather listen to Porky Pig sing "Hey Jude" than endure this again. 1.5/10
The Hammer- The story of Matt Hamill the deaf ncaa wrestling champion turned MMA fighter (not to be confused with Adam Carollas movie of the same name about boxing). The movie focuses on his life pre MMA. I'll start off and say I was biased watching the film. Matt is from my hometown which is frequently referenced through out. The town is not as rural as the film would have you believe but that works a lot better on film than average suburbia. Over all I was quite surprised as to how good it was for what I heard was a tiny, read indie film, budget. It was shot beautifully and the story does admirably for what the budget allowed. Most of the plot points are pretty standard but they do a good job incorporating his deafness into them which is what makes it stand out. The biggest weakness, out side of one Ill get to*, is that you could tell they didn't have the money to fill out some aspects of the film. This hurts the most during the wrestling/sports side of the movie. I could feel like they wanted the wrestling to play a bigger part than it did but they had to focus almost entirely on plot lines off the mat. The few major wrestling scenes are done as well as they could but feel very hollow compared to the other areas. I also think sporadically some of the films dialogue borders on campy as well. It's on Netflix now. 7-7.5/10 Also, I think the deaf dude that plays matt is a dead ringer for Tucker Max: Spoiler Spoiler * The films biggest tragedy is they casted his stepdad absolutely terribly. In real life the dude rocks an 80's mullet with aviators and jorts year round. The throw away actor they cast did a huge injustice. If you watch the movie they have a real picture of the man in the end credits under Coach Rich.
Saw some garbage movies while on vacation, such as One for the Money on the flight. But everyone knows that is a piece of shit, right? I did see one incredible film, though; The Valachi Papers (1972)- Joseph Valachi was a mid-level enforcer and driver for the Italian mafia in New York. Now in his early sixties, he finds himself in a jail in 1965 with a price on his head by his former boss, the legendary Don Vito Genovese. To save his own neck and that of his family, he agrees to talk with the Feds, and begins talking about his incredible life in the Mafia, starting with a stint in Sing-Sing in 1930. This is a rare film that is not only overlooked but also underrated. I consider it superb; one of the best Mafia films ever. It came out the same year as The Godfather, and honestly? I would put it on the same level. In some ways it's worse, in other ways better. I especially love the understated calm and matter-of-fact portrayals of legendary Mafiosi like Genovese, Lucky Luciano, Albert Anastasia, Guiseppe Masseria, Salvatore Maranzano, and Mad Dog Coll. The great Charlie Bronson is awesome as the title character. While Valachi is smart and tough, he can do nothing to combat his life's circumstances. By the end, he is an old, broken man rotting in jail, forced to betray a code of conduct that is the core of his being. I especially love the exceptional historical accuracy; the dates and facts all check out. A truly outstanding gem. 78/100
Red State (2011) First off: the next person on this board that refers to this as a "horror movie" I'm mailing anthrax to. Second, is Kevin Smith eleven fucking years old? I say this because this, his first "serious" movie, a "horror" movie, he takes pot shots at the two most low-hanging fruits in America: the Westboro Baptist Church (even their picket signs are ripped off completely) and heavy-handed government tactical fuck-ups a la Waco and Elian. Is this satire? Suspense? Or just another filmization of Kevin Smith's tired leftist rants on how everything that doesn't agree to him is stupid? The film is plenty violent and it's nasty, nihlistic and nightmarish but....WHAT?!?!? Crime doesn't pay? Homophobia is wrong? The Man are a bunch of trigger-happy bullies? Who the fuck is Smith's target audience for this film, exactly? Westboro doesn't NEED to be attacked. They're a tiny-ass cult and everybody in America hates them. Smith picks a new audience and throws utter contempt at them, tho far different from his usual juvenile humour this is still contrived and fairly pointless, with almost exclusively unpleasant characters (though the performances mostly cannot be faulted) and a film message that would have been strong say two and a half decades ago. You can almost hear the denouement crashing down and sure enough it does, with a concluding scene that just reeks of abrupt post-production tampering (and as it turns out, WAS post-production tampered, personally I like the crazy original ending idea better). In the end, you're going to get lots of people saying that this is his "most brilliant film" simply because it's not a cartoonish, vulgar comedy. It's still watchable simply as a movie, although no better than a potboiler. 5/10
I'm not sure if reply reviews are verboten but if they aren't, I just wanted to offer a different (though not diametrically opposite) opinion. For my money, Red State is definitely worth a watch. At no point did I take it to be a 'serious' film, nor did I see any 'message' in it, at no point did I feel educated in any way. That said, the performances were great and there was no point during the film where you could say "I know how this will end." It is and unpleasant film. It is very disjointed, jerking you around with left turns; its as if Smith is not giving enough clutch for each of the many gear shifts he throws in. I also have to disagree that this film isn't vulgar or cartoonish, it is both in spades, and after some awful, awful exposition, Smith takes Hollywood conventions (I'm referring mainly to the mechanics of storytelling) and repeatedly runs over them. It doesn't automatically make for great filmmaking, but I didn't feel it was out of incompetence. Kevin Smith himself said he didn't have any real agenda or message, and I think it comes from an attempt at style over substance, and what substance there was comes from the 'all hands on deck' low budget spirit the crew and cast were able to bring to it. And that's probably what clinches it for me. 7/10... well... at least 6.5/10 I'll spare you guys the rest of my sleep deprived ramble on Red State, and provide a review on Red Hill, a completely different film from 2010 that uses psuedo-political liberal guilt as a pretext for a violent low budget genre mashup. Ahem. I'm always keen to support a locally made film (Victoria, Australia), and this one I managed to catch at one of the few screenings it got on release. I wasn't disappointed. It's basically a 'nightmare first day on the job' story of a city cop (Ryan Kwanten, back when people still watched True Blood) who's transferred to a tiny country town, his boss from hell is Steve Bisley (Goose from Mad Max). The film turns into a revenge-horror-western with the appearance of a magical negro (Tom E Lewis, who is capable of more dimensions than he's given). He seems to be on an unstoppable killing rampage for some reason, but if you care why then you're watching the wrong film. Patrick Hughes, a commercials/music video director banged together a script in a couple months, then scraped what funds he could together and it shows, but that's all part of the fun. This movie wouldn't stand up if it wasn't so low budget. Which is not to say he's a bad director; he chose to use film instead digital, buying undeveloped reel offcuts from Entourage and one of the Fast and Furious films. As a consequence, most of the shots were done in one take. Taking that into consideration, Hughes is a great filmmaker. His writing is not so great. The plot runs pretty smoothly, but the dialogue does suffer an affliction common to modern Aussie genre flicks, in that it was written in an American style that our Aussie accents stumble over awkwardly. It proudly displays cliches like standard merit badges on a boy scout's sash, and adds in a local legend black panther that is superfluous to the plot. And when I say local legend, I mean in real life; this film doesn't bother to explain, but the rumours go that back in WWII the US army release black panthers in the Australian bush because why the hell not? That aside it proves very entertaining, especially when the townsfolk (mostly played by local townsolk) are being dispatched, and I think Kwanten is even more likable here than his dumb hick in TB. Even my film snob friend enjoyed it. 7.5/10 PS: If you get to see this, let me know, I'm keen to hear how it looks to Seppo viewers.
I wasnt sure whether to put this in the Recent, Old, or Netflix threads, but here it goes. Drive Its about an unnamed driver who performs courier or escort jobs (kind of like the Transporter) but he gets involved with some gangsters through his neighbors husband. Ryan Gosling barely talks through the movie, but honestly it didnt bother me with what they were trying to do with his character. Albert Brooks definitely had the best performance and I enjoy seeing him as a gangster. Bryan Cranston did a satisfactory job, Ron Perlman plays Ron Perlman, and Carey Mulligan sucks in everything shes in. The movie was a definite throwback to the 70s and 80s movies of the same type with the cinematography, costumes, and especially the soundtrack which was very good. Any Adam Carolla listener will know how much he shits all over this movie, but to tell you the truth I enjoyed it. It wasnt what I thought it was going to be and maybe I went in with the bar set very low, but I liked the movie as it was quite different than usual car-based fare thats released nowadays. Not a long of actual car scenes, but everything else curbed that. Could it have been better? Definitely. False advertising probably killed its success. Will you enjoy it? Probably. Its nuanced and artistic, so if you go in expecting an action movie youll be disappointed. Its worth a Netflix watch. 6.5 / 10
Drive (2011) I may stir up a bit of a bee's nest (yet again), but here goes: Drive is the best film of 2011, and I was really shaking my head at the fact it was snubbed for MANY nominations at the Oscars. For one: NOBODY deserved a best director award more this decade than Nicolas Winding Refn. He directed the unforgettable Tom Hardy vehicle Bronson that made him an instant superstar, here he creates a vivid art film that is pure, unabashed cinema that is as gorgeous to look at as it is disarmingly grisly. Two: Albert "Hank Scorpio" Brooks deserved a nomination, if not an Oscar for his absolutely chilling portrayal of the mobster (the most terrifying mobster ever. Yes, THAT Albert Brooks)that Ryan Gosling runs afoul of. Gosling is also great as the stoic anti-hero, and three: it deserved best picture. A silent film does not deserve to win best picture, EVER, no matter how many good vibes it gives off (it did). Opinions HEAVILY vary for this film, as my own best friend told me that it was "The worst goddamn motherfucking movie I have ever seen, and that includes Girls and Boys." I, on the other hand aboslutely loved it. Only complaint: Carey Mulligan sucks as an actress. I don't know what producer I have to hold a gun to the head of but stop. Hiring. Her. I don't know WHY she billboards movies and the only thing she impressed me in was Shame (another unforgettable film). 9.5/10
I came in with modest expectations for this classic, but was pleasantly surprised; Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939)- An naive, patriotic young Boy Scout leader, Jefferson Smith (Jimmy Stewart), is chosen to replace a deceased junior senator for 2 months. He is chosen by a corrupt political machine run by the senior senator of his state, Joseph Paine (Claude Rains), and the head boss, Jim Taylor (Edward Arnold). Once in Washington, Smith navigates Congress with the help of his initially reluctant, jaded secretary, Clarissa Sanders (Jean Arthur). The first thing you notice about the movie is its breakneck pace. Events that would take up 14 minutes in modern movies are covered in just 2 here. I love this. I frequently find movies far too slow for my tastes, and my attention wanders. Here, every second is chock full of meaningful action. Related to this, I love the hyper-fast dialogue. Instead of slowly speaking cliched plaudits, the characters here speak very quickly and articulately. Sadly, movie like this would never get produced today. At least half the potential audience wouldn't have the intellect to keep up. The film starts out being uproariously funny, but by the end, becomes poignant and gripping. Jimmy Stewart's famous filibuster on the Senate floor is genuinely tense and overwhelming. This transition is difficult to pull off, but comes across very organically here. The ensemble acting performance is also tremendous. Claude Rains and Edward Arnold make a very convincing duo of evil-doers, particularly Rains as the reluctant Paine, forced to betray what he once believed in. Jean Arthur as the savvy secretary is also outstanding, coming across as resourceful and witty in a way few actresses of any era do. However, the most amazing performance is of course by Jimmy Stewart as the title character. I don't know what it is about the guy, but you can't help but love and empathize with Stewart whenever he is on screen. The way he conveys all the earnestness, naivete, occasional nervousness, and unyielding spirit of the Boy Scout leader is dizzying. The message of this movie is strongly patriotic yet apolitical. We never find out what political party anyone belongs to. Rather, it's a story about being honest and eschewing corruption wherever it might be found. Yet, it's also far from idealistic; there is a very harsh tone of realism, especially with the way Taylor is able to control the news and what people think. It also doesn't take a very favorable view of the press and their role in the electoral process. Overall, this was a fantastic movie, way beyond my expectations. It's one of my three favorites of the 30s, along with "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Alexander Nevsky". Best of all, it's available in its entirety on Youtube. 83/100
The Raid: Redemption I finally got around to watching this and I was blown away. This movie exceeded my expectations at each stage, and after living in Indonesia, it really drove home some of the aspects of the movie. This was one of the best action movies I have seen in years, and I would happily watch any movie that's close to it. The key thing was speed: you didn't have any slow motion nonsense, it was all blindingly fast, so you couldn't really scrutinize the special effects. The drama was kept to a minimum, the plot was good and simple with a perfect twist at the end. The realism was good, there were no "Crouching Tiger" moments, and again: the fight scenes were simply outstanding. One in particular, with two on one was the best I can remember watching. The only bad thing is there's not a dozen sequels to this yet.
I'm stuck in Ohio with no car, no sun and nothing else to do but watch movies. So, here we go: The Warrior's Way-It's baffling how Geoffrey Rush became involved with such a disastrous project. Ninjas and cowboys and black midgets? Really? The only good part about this was contemplating how badass Rush's voice would be if they ever do another animated version of Wolverine. Coriolanus-Aside from the Shakespearean dialog, this movie was pretty enjoyable, if not intense. If you hated the 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet, this is not for you, because the dialog is a huge obstacle. Also, Ralph Fiennes does go a bit overboard. Aside from that, it's a great story and I think they adapted it well for modern times, especially considering the political climate when it was released. It could have easily been adapted to a sort of parable about John McCain. There is zero comic relief and every line of dialog is practically shouted: it's Shakespeare, for real, so it's incredibly intense. Lockout-this is a simple, silly, action flick. Save the president's daughter from a pair of Scottish rapists who take over a prison in outer space, go Guy Pearce. Don't expect anything beyond a straightforward sci-fi/adventure flick. Pearce is great, his one-liners range from decent to classic. This is a movie that doesn't take itself too seriously, and my only complaint is that in the initial chase scene, the CGI looked cartoonish.
In the wake of Andy Griffith's death, Turner Classic Movies pays homage to him this evening. At 7:00 pm CDT, you can see probably his best performance in Elia Kazan's "A Face in the Crowd."
I went and saw Shame at an arthouse type cinema when it was first released. I'm pretty sure it's now available on DVD. This film is well worth watching and certainly impressed me with the way it portayed a few weeks in the life of a sex addict.
Finally got around to watch Wanderlust last night. I hadn't been that interested in seeing it since all the previews I saw kind of made me think it was a rom-com movie, or something of the like, and those normally aren't my cup o' tea. Oh, how wrong I was. I should have known I'd like it since it was rated R and Judd Apatow was part of it, but I guess it just never clicked for me. I barely stopped laughing my ass off the whole movie, and the people I watched it with were the same way. Plus, I'm a big Paul Rudd fan, and he was just perfect in the role. My favourite part from the movie: Paul Rudd in front of a mirror trying to psych himself up to bang another woman while his wife is in the next room. 8/10. Would recommend.
I am yet to see the new one yet, but... Batman Begins(2005) Batman is re-invented for the Terrorism Era. At first I thought this was going to be a prequel to round out the alarmingly deteriorating Burton-Schumacher films (considering the ending) but was indeed a re-invention, hated by some and loved by every critic. I did like this film, but for specific reasons. I like how for the first time we get to see what makes Bruce Wayne tick. I think Christian Bale makes a great Bruce Wayne and an intimdating Batman (when he doesn't talk). Another thing I loved is the art direction. A post-modern combination of modern decor, futurism and steampunk. It gels well and give Gotham City the creepy, shadowy look not seen since the 1989 version, which is the best comic movie ever made. Of course, there's complaints. Of course you have Katie Holmes, but everybody else has already cut that horrid performance into ten million pieces. Also we have a story that seems to change gears almost a dozen times. It's hard to tell where they're going with the movie and they try to cram all the big-name stars in for their fair share of screen time almost to the point of suffocation. In the end, I score this film as a win. It looks great and is smarter than most comic movies, but a little low on action and could use some dressing-down in plot. 7/10 The Dark Knight (2008) The darkest, meanest and most contemptful Batman movie of the whole lot, a character study pretending it isn't a comic-book movie. Nice try. Ridiculousness of the plot aside, and the fatal mistake of turning the cool futuristic-looking city from Begins into a very obvious Chicago this is a four-barrelled experiment with excellent performances, quarterbacked by a vivid and truly sick characterization from Heath Ledger as The Joker. Despite the look and the fact this is one of the broadest comic characters of all, his performance is so good you believe he's real. Action scenes are decent, however hand-tohand fight scenes are the worst ever filmed in the history of the solar system. You see NOTHING. Batman puts his hands next to his head, bobs and weaves a little, throws punches a sloth could dodge and the next thing you know every bad guy is on the ground. "Ham-fisted" does not begin to describe it. Next to the 1989 version, this is the best of the bunch but don't take its side too much or you'll end up defending its so-called "philosophy of human condition". Fuck off, you fake. 7.5/10 Others: Batman- 9/10 Batman Begins- 6/10 Batman Forever- 2/10 Batman & Robin- 1.5/10
I know a lot of you, especially those older than me, are gonna think I'm stupid for this, but I only just now got around to seeing the original Planet of the Apes, circa 1968. Kids, if you haven't seen it, don't be an idiot like I was and ignore it out of laziness. I'd known the major story points for a long time, thanks especially to The Simpsons, and basically regarded it as a curio of the old guard of popular sci-fi, before the revolution that was Star Wars. I was robbing myself. Hell, thanks to tv I'd seen the Tim Burton version which had interesting make up, but was otherwise pretty lame, and I'd even seen Rise of the Planet of the Apes, which I very much enjoyed without any previous investment in the series. It'll have been said an innumerable amount of times already, but this film blazes. The transparent satire of science vs religion, and animal rights isn't subtle, but it's filled to the hilt with anger and wit. The plot just rockets along at a fantastic pace for a film in the late 60's, and it's a hell of a ride. While it's true that Lucas popularised the more modern editing style that is prevalent in Hollywood pics today, the older style employed here doesn't drag it's feet for a moment. The masks are obviously fake, but they still manage to convey a lot of character, and work for the movie. Sure, it's camp, but not in the ostentatious way most intentionally "camp" media is. It's hilarious, but there's never less than a tinge of venom to every scene. Charlton Heston's performance has been mocked over and over, but it's pitch perfect, you need that sense of unyielding righteous indignation to pull something like this off. I'm sure Rod Serling's polish contributed greatly to this, as well as the ending. And we all know that ending, but still I dreaded and relished it when it actualy happened. I really do love those downbeat twists that defeat the protagonist this way. There is something satisfying to punishing the audience's curiosity like this, you know it's one step too far, but it's a step you can't help but take. I wish more popular entertainment was this fun. And while we're on the subject 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a great modern companion. It mirrors the original in many details, without being slavish to it. It may run a tad too long for some, and I wouldn't call it more than popular entertainment, but as such I think it succeeds very well. Also, having seen someone close to me go through Alzheimer's, I found John Lithgow's performance to be well judged and tasteful, as opposed to the typical comical depiction of the disease.
Just finished Battle Royale Special Edition on Blu-Ray. I loved everything about the movie except for some of the Japanese specific elements that have been beat into the ground because I've seen a lot of anime. The "weak protagonist" and the constant mantra of "keep moving forward" which I was told is a result of the WWII bombings when the country basically gave up on hope for life. So if you watch more than one or two anime or play any Japanese video game, you'll get hit with the "keep moving forward" those three specific words. Anyway, I watched this for the sake of comparing it to The Hunger Games and everyone saying THG ripped off BR. Having read all three books of THG, I'm still a fan of the series. If someone came up to me and said "I have this idea for a book, its goes in this direction" right after I watched Battle Royale, I'd say "Yes, write it." The overall story is different enough for it to be entertaining and for me not to be able to take characters from one story and plug them directly into another. THG also expanded on some elements which I find make it different, and its own piece of work. If we went around not making art because it is as similar as BR to THG, we barely would have any art. 9/10 for Battle Royale.
Just a couple of weeks before real life begins again, so I decided to watch two Paul Rudd films back-to-back (I kind of dig the dude.) Wanderlust Macgruber above loved this film, but I have to say, I thought it was complete dogshit. Paul Rudd is always charming, but I really can`t fathom how movie producers consider Jennifer Aniston tolerable. Her style of acting is simply obtrusive white noise: she is neurotic, stressful and grating, without somehow having a personality. Her character is somewhat of a latent free spirit, with a continuous stream of varied and failed projects, and the script sets her up as a natural fit for a communal type of living. However, there is nothing charming about her because her completely stock personality is so pervasive. The woman cannot act. In addition, the humor is derived from the fact that the group the couple meets are bunch of hippies who abhor violence, smoke weed, practice free love and have truth circles, and the clash between these ideals and the rigid lifestyle of a Manhattan couple. However, this not nearly enough. It basically amounts to a bunch of hippies doing their thing and having a man and a woman acting bewildered. BORING. The exchanges are lame, and even some snappy one-liners from Paul Rudd can`t save them because the script is so poor. There is one scene in particular where Justin Theroux`s character (who is a kind of spiritual leader for the group) shouts out things he thinks are injust while gesticulating wildly, all the while inviting Paul Rudd to do the same. Predictably, Rudd involuntarily shouts incredibly banal things ("Mushrooms!"). Can you imagine how retarded and embarassing this scene is? 4/10. Which leads me to a kind of companion piece, or at least a refreshing contrast: Our Idiot Brother Here, Paul Rudd is playing Ned, a well-meaning and kind 30-something hippie of sorts, with an endearing naivete that sadly leads to very little practical intelligence. Circumstances lead him to having to live with each of his three urbane sisters (all of whom are quite hot), each with their own problems related to a modern city existence: work problems, a marriage in trouble, fear of settling down. His charming bluntness wreaks havoc on all of their relationships, and unintentionally forces them to face their problems. The script is solid, the acting is great, and Ned is absolutely hilarious. His intelligence is down-to-earth, and a particularly candid exchange with another woman midway through the film reveals the depths of his character, and belies much of his "simple" nature. In addition, Ned`s most prized companion in the whole world is a beautiful dog whom he named "Willie Nelson", which in my book almost boost the film an entire point. The movie does suffer from a somewhat sugarcoated ending, however, but I`ll be damned if I didn`t feel better after seeing this film. By the way, the cast is absolutely brilliant (albeit slightly typecasted here and there). Zooey Deschanel is the bisexual, explorative hipster (and Rashida Jones her hot lawyer girlfriend), Elizabeth Banks is the career-driven and strong one, while Emily Mortimer is the mousy, careful wife stuck in somewhat of rut with her asshole husband, played by Steve Coogan. 7/10. (And yeah, I am retarded and have NO idea how to-use hyphens)
Born on the 4th of July (1989) Second in the three Vietnam films for Oliver Stone is the best of the three. For people that believe that Tom Cruise and/or Oliver Stone are hacks, there is this. Relentlessly believable and harrowing account on the change America took during the Vietnam war years, with Cruise's character Ron Kovic as the hub of the story. Once a determined boy in virtually everything and now paralyzed from the chest down and given typical fuck you-treatment upon his return from 'Nam, getting shit on everywhere he turns and eventually becoming a famed anti-war protester. Cruise gives what is probably the best performance of his career, as Kovic he is excellent and plays a disturbed, embittered vet with brutal intensity. Willem Defoe also shows up to turn in a truly memorable charater role as a sicko fellow crippled Marine. For Stone, this in my opinion is his best film next to Natural Born Killers. He re-paints some of the hardest and most painful years of America with excrutiating detail and skill, and won the best director Oscar however Driving Miss Daisy beat this film for best picture. Fucking honestly. 9/10