And I ask what the hell people were expecting from a movie that billed itself as a movie with "active duty Navy Seals"--because active duty troops always make movies better, right? It was an obvious cash in from the publicity of the Bin Laden raid, nothing more. The trailer didn't even give you any sense of just what the fuck the movie was about other than "EXPLOSIONS!! NAVY SEALS!!". I've seen ads for monster truck rallies with more subtlety and nuance. Apparently the marketing gimmick worked, it was number one at the box office. I saw Wanderlust a couple days ago and it was pretty damn good. If you like the David Wain brand of comedy, or even the Apatow stuff it's definitely worth watching.
Game Change Made-for-TV HBO film about an inside look John McCain's 2008 campaign is more entertaining and intelligent than most films you see in the theatre recently, thanks to fantastic casting and keeping a fast pace throughout. Three multi-Oscar nominees fill out the film's big three roles-- Woody Harrellson is excellent as stradegist Steve Schmidt, JUlianne Moore is absolutely uncanny as Sarah Palin portraying her as a super-confident but ignorant and sometimes nasty woman, and Ed Harris tones down his usually super-forceful performance to give John McCain a serene, profane and likable personality who realizes too late he made some seriously wrong decisions (mostly not his directly). As far as impersonating Sarah Palin, Moore buries Tina Fey (though they nod the famous caricature in the film). She plays her as a true believer that's in WAY over her head: a great actress and celebrity, but a an impulsive and egotistical personality that makes her a black sheep in the campaign. However, the film belings to Harrellson and his final scene with Moore is the best part of the film. This film itself is quite accurate if you bother to fact-check and very much a grabber, like it's companion piece Recount(made by the same team). Solid moviemaking. I could watch this more than once. 8/10
Anderson Silva: Like Water This is a documentary of the Brazilian MMA fighter. It's pretty flattering: it shows him as a humble family man, penitent and happy to have his job. The documentary takes you through the two months before his fight with Chael Sonnen, which was a controversial fight. It was very similar to a lot of the fighter profile documentaries, and it's heavily in Portuguese. Still, Silva is a legendary fighter, without all the testosterone rage and it makes him a bit more likable person on film. The film exaggerates several aspects of "selling the fight", but you still get a very real sense of the wear the charade has on Silva and how he's not good at the political side of fighting. His relationship with the other fighters, reporters, Dana White, and even his coach appears tenuous at times because of his struggle to communicate in English, his disinterest in hyping a fight and a few other reasons. During the time the film was shot, his grandmother passed away which was glossed over until the end. The good: nothing groundbreaking, but it painted a portrait of a legendary fighter, where he comes from, what his motivation is and the personality the guy has. To put it simply, I'm a much bigger fan of Silva after watching this. The bad: nothing groundbreaking, the filmmakers make the drama a bit more than it actually is, and Spoiler they really avoided a lot of subjects that were potentially interesting like his training, his coaches, his family history (they focused on his wife & kids, and a blurb by his late grandmother), his relationships with other Brazilian fighters and his legacy. It doesn't really show his competitive side, which was baffling. It showed him as a frustrated coach, which didn't make much sense either. . This wasn't another episode of The Ultimate Fighter, however, and they did a great job of showing this guy as an introverted, happy, religious man who is a uniquely talented individual. Good if you want to know a bit more about the top of the game fighters, but pass if you can't stand the subtitles, as Silva rarely speaks in English throughout the film.
The Hunter This is the first movie I've seen for some time that's really impressed me, it's a damn fine effort. Amazing cinematography, dialogue and pacing. William Dafoe shining in one of his best performances for years and an excellent supporting cast who just don't seem like they're acting. Will be buying the Bluray.
Game Change Saw this last night, but Crown gave a plot synopsis so Ill skip that part. To me, Sarah Palin seemed more like a tragic figure than the villain. Decent movie, but I'm willing to bet the portrayal of her is probably somewhat inaccurate as these kinds of movies usually are as well as the known bias of the director. Woody Harrelson and Julianne Moore give great performances and it's overall a pretty good story of how McCain lost the election. Not as good as Recount, but it holds it own. 6 / 10
The Hunger Games I'm not the best at reviewing movies, but I'll go ahead and start on this one. I went in with average expectations, because - seriously, it's teen fiction. The movie started out not hitting my expectations, due to the wonders of ShakyCam. There are some movies where the Shaking camera really puts you in the moment - this is not one of them. It made me have to look away from the screen, and I don't have any problems with motion sickness. The beginning of the movie felt extremely rushed. The books are all written in first person, and so you get a lot of the "world building" through the eyes of the narrator. You can't do that without a voiceover in a movie, and I'm glad they didn't have a narration - but at the same time, you have to give the audience a reason to root for the characters. This is a post-apocalyptic dystopian story, and there's no time to see that people are starving and opressed. Everything up until the actual Hunger Games just seemed to be sped up, as if the director was only interested in the Games themselves (when the whole trilogy relies upon the conditions in the society). There are a few things that were left out that weren't integral to the plot, and that's not a big deal to me - but also, there were a few things that were ASSUMED that were pretty important to the plot and were mentioned in passing without any explanation, and that's where the weaknesses lie. I give it a 7/10 - once the Hunger Games started, it had a good flow, and the ShakyCam fit the mood. And Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci, and Donald Sutherland were great. Donald Sutherland actually shows some promise for his badassery in the sequels. And for shits and giggles, here's what I would've done with the beginning: Spoiler We start with a young Katniss, old enough for her first Reaping. We get to see Elizabeth Banks announcing the selections (two random names, not important), we see the political newsreel explaining the games, and you see the fear that the kids deal with. Hell, maybe this is where we see Gale and her meet, whatever. As she's not selected, we see her go back to her family, where they show her mother being distant and fucked up from her husband's death in the mines (a plot point that was only touched on briefly). We see Katniss having to take care of her mom and sister, tracking and hunting, Gale helping her learn, her skills on the bow getting better, having to barter with people for food (actually show them being HUNGRY, you know?) and also showing her having to take out loans of food from the government in exchange for adding her name into the Reaping pool multiple times (again, glossed over quickly in the film). Show her family and herself starving - this is where we can see the scene with Peeta and the bread outside the bakery, and get more of a foundation for his feelings for her later. It requires the writer/author/director to kind of add to the source material a little bit, but I think it would make it a little more understandable. A film adaptation should stand on its own - the more I think about the film, the less I think I would've liked it if I hadn't read the book already.
(Haven't watched the movie, only read part of the book) I'm kind of annoyed that someone can release such a blatant plagiarism of Battle Royale, an internationally best-selling novel, manga, and extremely famous movie (Tarantino called it his favorite film of the last 20 years) that received an English translation just 9 years before "The Hunger Games" and get away with it. Can't imagine how its creators feel.
Basically same review for me, but I'll bump it up to an 8. The beginning wasn't rushed as it wasn't as descriptive, I went back looking over the book and there was a lot of world building that could have gotten cut out. They just definitely should have put more effort into showing how dreary life in District 12 was with more dialogue. Weird to say, but the movie went heavy on the visual side and short on dialogue which is odd coming from a book. Odds and ends: Also 2-3 more minutes about the other districts (especially Prim's little piece) would have been helpful to non-book readers. The bread flashback could have gone better. The riot scene was a great preview, well done. I think Malcom McDowell would have made a better President Snow, but Don Sutherland killed it The queer in me wishes The Girl on Fire dress was actually as it was described, and not the same thing as Peeta with flaming wings. You're already doing CGI effects, go a little further. Stanley Tucci nailed it, god that guy is a great fucking actor. Also, I'm not sure if I'm actually attracted to Jennifer Lawrence or not.
Welcome to the West where we are not original, numerous examples George Lucas taking elements of Kurosawa's work.
I'll pontificate further in my admitted ignorance. I am saying this: after reading a book and watching a movie where the main theme is an oppressive governement that forces its subjects to fight to the death in a circular arena for the entertainment of its more privileged citizens, learning that there is another book and movie where the main theme is an oppressive government that forces its subjects to fight to the death on a circular island, and after thinking of all the instances in literature, film, and actual human history where an oppressive governement forced its subjects to fight to the death in a circular arena - I accept the possibility that Suzanne Collins didn't write the Hunger Games in response to reading or watching Battle Royale. And that is all I have to say. Let's review some movies. I'll even read/watch Battle Royale when I have the time, and review that.
Because I also feel rather strongly about it, let me preface: I've read all of the Hunger Games, and have read and watched Battle Royale. If, as Collins claims, she hadn't heard of Battle Royale until she completed the Hunger Games, that is one gigantic coincidence. The sequels take it further, but the first is almost a pretty loose translation of the original Japanese with the setting changed. It's crazy that the storyline that already has been popular and known worldwide has become even more popular. I'm pretty sure it's because of the way the perspective shifted and became slightly more self indulgent and Twilight-y for girls, but neither here nor there. Anyway, if you enjoyed the Hunger Games, and especially if you're the "first half sucked, second half was great" kind of person, check out Battle Royale. They don't dick around with all that shit, it's OH SHIT GOTTA KILL MY FRIENDS pretty much right away, and it's much more brutal. Also, I've only seen the Japanese version, is the American version worth a watch? edit for Parker- Not to turn this into a stupid internet argument, but have you seen Battle Royale? If you haven't, well... you should, if only because it's good. But to respond to your post, you're not making quite a proper analogy. Die Hard and 24 both deal with defeating terrorists. But they aren't even close to the same plot, even though they are dealing with extremely similar subject manner. They are most certainly the same GENRE. Did Lord of the Rings use the same basic plot line as say, Hercules (or thousands of other stories?) Absolutely. But there's only one story about Hobbits climbing a volcano to kill a ring. Yes, the second and third books certainly depart from the first, but that's not what we're talking about (and honestly, they were nowhere near as good as the first). Give these two books to somebody completely removed from the culture, and they would be confused as to why the author wrote the same book twice.
Final thought to wrap this up since I've already received my red dot from the hypocrite of pontification without reading everything: Spoiler Not to mention the next two longer books go on to cover the rebellion Katniss becomes the inspiration for, a second Hunger Games where most of the team is working together, then an eventual war she becomes a part of with a lot of messaging surrounding propaganda and the corruption of power no matter the leader. NOT to mention the background love triangle that goes on during this whole thing. Also I received this in a rep.
Hey dipshits. Review recent fucking movies or shut the fuck up. Reviewing movies does NOT include slapfights, or babbling on about who stole what from who unless it's relevant to how watchable the movie is. A lack of originality is only relevant to this conversation if it impacts the viewing experience for a sane person. Which is to say Die Hard 7's lack of originality might be note worthy, because it's the same fucking movie for the seventh time. The fact that Die Hard 3 shares buddy cop and racial preconception themes with Lethal Weapon isn't something that anyone gives a fuck about, or that needs to be argued over. It's Hollywood. Nothing is original and everything is stolen. That's how the movie industry works. I've left the posts on this topic that actually have something to say instead of just furthering an argument because you hate each other. I really don't care enough to unfuck the thread multiple times, so lets act like we're talking about movies on a fucking internet forum, and remember that it's not worth getting your panties in a bunch over. For fuck sake.
The Grey I really wanted to like this, Liam Neeson is cool, wolves are cool, plane crashes are cool. It fucking sucked. The big problem was how downright stupid it was, in once scene a guy has to jump off a cliff onto a tree to secure a line, motherfucker cleared what looked like 25 meters! Horizontally. There is also a scene with shotgun shells which is too dumb to bear repeating, wolves behaving like 80’s horror movie monsters and the freezing cold being deadly one moment forgotten the next etc... This could have been excellent, all it had to do was respect the laws of physics, have the wolves acting wolfy and the humans acting humany then mix it all together and see what happens. I think this is what really pissed me off, all the pieces which shattered the suspension of disbelief didn’t add any strength to the story. It’s like a Hipster getting a tattoo of a butterfly on his neck. A lot of trouble to go to just to make yourself look retarded. 3/10
Casa de mi Padre I saw this with Li'l Bandit this weekend. It's supposed to be a spoof of poorly made Mexican movies (something I have some experience with). The story was boring and the jokes were forced. Watch it if you want to see some intentionally bad acting/editing/cinematography/special effects and continuity, and the stretch marks on Genesis Rodriguez's ass (I'd still hit it though). If you want to see a spoof of poorly made movies, go with "Planet Terror" or "Death Proof."
The Raid: Redemption What you simply have here is the most exciting, groundbreaking and entertaining pure action film since John Woo's The Killer (1989). YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF TO SEE THIS FILM. Watching this movie, your hands will sweat and twitch involuntarily. There's nothing like it. It's exhausting to watch what the characters put their bodies through for the sake of an entertaining show, which it delivers in spades and then some. It is 100 minutes of the throttle to the floor with no let-up whatsoever, filled with dazzingly innovative action and white-knuckle suspense and terror. The plot is simple: an elite Indonesian SWAT team storms a building housing a vile crime lord and his dozens of lackies, once inside, they are bolted in and must fight their way to the top of the claustrophic shit hole. The plot is NOT important. This film focuses on bone-crunching, blood spurting brutality with hyper-kentietic gunplay and the most incredible martial arts ever filmed. People get thrown from high windows and actors riccochet off brick walls and metal railings, fighting each other as they fall to their death. How nobody was killed in this mind assault of a film is staggering. Two sequels are already in the works, and an American remake (of course) which will ONLY be made if the director/writer gets to helm it. Do NOT miss this. Not for the world. Even with the upcoming heavyweight summer line-up for 2012, you will not see a more entertaining film this entire year. Bet on it. 9.5/10
Battle Royale All this talk in the thread about this movie made it sound great so I downloaded it and tried to watch it tonight. I made it an hour and fifteen minutes. It was an irredeemable piece of shit. Worse than a Japanese version of Starship Troopers- Campy in a not really all that entertaining kind of way, violent but not satisfyingly gory enough, and sorely missing the back-story and peanut gallery effect that make movies like this fun. Haven't seen Hunger Games and don't plan to, I'm going to just accept the best of the genre as The Running Man and call it a day. 2/10
American Reunion It is about what you would expect if you saw the other three films. Some of the one-liners fell flat but there were still plenty of the crude, hilarious gags that have been a hallmark of the American Pie series. Like the second and third films, this movie basically belonged to Stifler, and probably would have sucked without his inclusion. Actually, all of the actors and actresses who had major roles in the first film returned for this one (I am pretty sure). A few of them only had cameos, but it didn't feel forced and I didn't feel that the movie's running time was too long, but some might disagree with me there. If you liked the first 3 movies then I can't imagine that you will be disappointed with this one. 76/100
Lockout (It doesnt come out until Friday, but thanks to a buddy I got into a sneak preview late last night.) Ill preface my review by saying I made the mistake of reading critics' reviews ahead of time, which I usually try to avoid doing. Thankfully, I chose to ignore those reviews and Im glad I did. The film takes place 60 years from now and stars a guy named Snow (Guy Pearce) who is arrested for spying but can be freed if he rescues the presidents daughter from a space-station prison. She ends up there for some humanitarian mission and gets captured because the prisoners are released due to a retarded secret service agent. Some other stuff happens, and Earth is in jeopardy. If it sounds familiar, its because its reminsicent of Escape from New York. First off the plot of the is completely absurd (not in a bad way). I didnt give away too many details above because it would spoil the second half, but if you go in expecting something somewhat serious or realistic, youre not going to enjoy yourself. One big down side is Maggie Grace, who plays the Presidents daughter, Emilie. I dont know what it is, but I hate her in everything shes in from LOST to Taken, shes garbage. On the upside, Guy Pearce is really fantastic. He has to be one of the most underrated actors out there and he gets better with every film. This one shows he can definitely hold his own as an action star. Great physicality along with humorous one-liners makes for an enjoyable performance. The visuals and sound are also stunning and impressive. In a way its a lot like the 5th Element, another Luc Besson film. It treads the line of a comedy/parody but teaters back with great visuals and action sequences. Hes an interesting director and definitely has his own style in this way. Its also interesting to note that the 5th Element wasnt highly thought of aside from its visuals when it first came out either, but now has cult status as a great sci-fi flick. Overall, I enjoyed this movie. Im not sure what critics were expecting when they went in to it, but I went in expecting over-the-top ridiculous, and I wasnt disappointed. Pearce carries the film effortlessly and I hope hes in more movies in the future. Its definitely has its flaws, namely some casting and plot continuity issues, but its excusable. Its worth the price of a theater ticket (at a matinee price). 7 / 10
Co-signed. I saw it a couple of weeks ago when it premiered here, and my high expectations were exceeded. My two friends that came with knew nothing about the movie going in, and both agreed that The Raid was the best action film they had seen in a very long time. Simply put, The Raid is one of the most bad ass, hyper violent action movies I have ever seen. I will definitely be going back to see it again on the big screen.