The Hurt Locker review

And finally we have a true, solid Oscar contender. It took until July to get one, but now we have a live-action film that stands a chance at the major awards. A Best Picture nomination is probably ensured after the rules were changed to make room for 5 extra contenders.

Kathryn Bigelow is probably most know for her action/sci-fi films like Near Dark, Point Break, and Strange Days. She's a director that concentrates on thrills and certainly delivers here. She succeeds in making a war film set in Iraq that doesn't have the government corruption or atrocities in the area as its focus, but it doesn't feel like propoganda either. It is simply a story of sodliers, their viewpoints, and how they cope with an atmosphere and situations that for some are thrilling and addictive, but for others are a place to let corruption seep out.

People have said this film is without political bias, or apolitical, as Bigelow herself has declared. However, this film is not devoid of message and I'm not sure it's anti-political either. Some soldiers are bad, some are good. Some are emotionally unstable, some are reasonably well-adjusted. Some show kindness, others don't. I've heard various arguments from both sides- some saying it's too gun-ho and is essentially pro-American occupation, some saying it's obviously anti-occupation considering the downfalls and instabilities of the lead character. I think that is a testament to the striking amount of balance this film effortlessly shows, despite the writer having also penned Paul Haggis' heavy-handed "In the Valley of Elah."

Jeremy Renner puts forth certainly Best Actor caliber acting here. His performance is edgy, textured, and still kickass. This film, at its heart, IS an action film, so the protagonist has to be kickass in some way. This film delivers. I also love the supporting cast- Ralph Fiennes, Anthony Mackie, Guy Pearce, David Morse, and Evangeline Lilly all bring something to the table despite having little or diminished screentime. This is Renner's show for sure.

The film is never boring, frequently tense, heartfeltly hilarious at times but certainly disturbing as well. It touches on every range of emotion one can feel towards war while keeping it simple at the center. It just feels like everything clicked and worked exactly as it should have. I extend my congratulations Bigelow and crew and I hope come March next year you have a few statues on your mantles.

Moon review

After putting this on the lower end of my Top 10 of the year so far, I figured I'd put up an actual review.

Moon is the debut of director Duncan Jones, best known as being David Bowie's son. However, he has shown that he has a flair for good, creative ideas with this story he's concocted. It's a future where it's actually bright rather than distopian- a new energy source has been found in sunlight absorbed by the rocks on the moon's surface. One lone man is in charge of the station harvesting these rocks, and the loneliness becomes apparent.

At first this film seems to be about loneliness and isolation and how one person adapts to or fails to adapt to the adverse conditions. But about 30 minutes in it changes to a mystery with some cleevr sci-fi ideas being thrown around.

Unfortunately the execution of the story and the actual writing isn't as good as the ideas, the performance, or the atmosphere.

But I'll be honest, the visuals, atmosphere, and Sam Rockwell's performance are near golden. In fact, Rockwell is certainly good enough for academy awards recognition. The visuals are very uniwue and in no way overdone. The film builds some good tension, but the narrative is a bit confusing at times and a bit too simple at others.

I think Jones also shows his rookie status with some of the ways he chooses to reveal key plot points. I think a few scenes should have been rearranged, but it's still well done most of the time. I don't think it's a visionary masterpiece, but with shit like Transformers 2 and G-Force out, it's a welcome diversion to see something that makes you think.

Overall it's a definite recommendation, but a few kinks keep it from the highest marks in my book. It's only 97 minutes, and it's never boring despite accusations bu others that it moves slowly. i still think it's a smart, well-made sci-fi drama/thriller.

Top 10 of the Year...So Far

Yep, it's July. But l've seen roughly 40 films from this year so far, so let's go through the ten I think are most worthwhile.

10. Moon

Duncan Jones directs Sam Rockwell to one of the best performances of his career, and adds a good amount of intrigue into a visual feast of a film. I wish the screenplay were a bit stronger, but it's still a worthwhile film.

9. The Great Buck Howard

John Malkovich and Colin Hanks star in this wonderfuuly upbeat and quirky film about a grumpy has-been magician who finds friendship in a young writer. The two form a partnership and go through a lot of strife and heartbreak as well as triumph. It's a wonderfully writen film and has a great heart to it.

8. Coraline

This magical animated film really captures some true tension while weaving a hauntingly beautiful tale as well. Henry Selick is a definite stable in terms of animation quality. It also surprisingly uses 3D very well.

7. Observe and Report

Jody Hill is a hilarious writer, and he manages to make one of the most unfairly maligned films of the year. it's dark, unique, truly engaging, and Seth Rogen breaks out of his usual shell to give a performance that rocks the film. It's far more cerebral and sometimes downright creepy than Knocked Up or Superbad, but I like it that way.

6. Star Trek

One slam-bang action film with good writing and a great mind behind it. It's a true crowd pleaser that has some actual talent at the helm and it delivers far more than just loudness or masturbation jokes (looking at you, Michael Bay). Thank you J.J. Abrams, you are my summer movie hero.

5. Drag Me to Hell

Sam Raimi made a horrific film in Spider-Man 3, a film that he tried to insert his Raimi charm into, but it just doesn't work in a story like Spider-Man. He belongs in horror and really surprised me with this fantastic moral tale that grosses you out, makes you laugh, genuinely scares you, and all-around gives one hell of a ride.

4. Watchmen

Zack Snyder's film has been criticized by Moore's fans and shunned by Moore himself for simply attempting to do something most considered impossible- transferring the pages to the screen. I think it was done impressively with great visual flair and impressive storytelling. How much is due to faith to the source material? Does it matter? Good is good, and this film is nearly great.

3. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Check my review to see why I loved this film, but in short I found it amazingly real and the characters are so natural. the fantasy is still there, but it's becoming something so much more than just a kids' fantasy. It's a full-fledged epic.

2. Adventureland

Most people expected Superbad 2, but they got much, much more in my opinion. It's one of the best films about relationships between young people I've seen and I fully expect it to be on my final list as well. It's genuine and funny. I recommend it for anybody. Jesse Eisenberg in particular gives a very good performance.

1. Up

Probably the best Pixar film not involving talking toys, this film made me cry multiple times and took me on a huge emotional trip I never expected a cartoon to take me on. It's again another film that captures humanity in all its hardships and triumphs, which seems to be an obsession of mine right now. Great job, Pixar. I consistently look forward to all your projects.

The Chaser review

I'm having some trouble with Korean cinema at the moment, at least when it comes to modern crime thrillers from said country. It's a problem of believability, something i believe any crime drama attempting realism or hard-nosedness MUST have in order to properly work.

The Chaser is a highly acclaimed film I had heard about from the Indie movie scene and it had been making its way across film festivals and such, and most of the geek and horror blogs (there's a bunch of them) fell in love with the film because of its gritty realism and unflinching violence.

Fuckballs, I say. I say fuckballs.

Not often do I actually get angry at a film, but I was so excited when the film finally made its DVD release that I snapped up the only copy and eagerly watched immediately. What follows is the most boneheadedly obvious "critique" on police ineptitude and some of the phoniest "grit" I've come across in a crime thriller.

We have a thoroughly unlikable p[rotagonist- he's an ex-cop, now a pimp with a problem. His girls seem to be going missing. He takes probably 40 minutes into the movie to do what should have taken 10 to track down who he suspects sold his girls, but when the cops get involved it turns out it may have been bloodier than that. However, there isn't enough evidence. It's now a race to find at least one mising girl before his 24-hour holding period is over and he is set free.

This setup is used to literally make the police look as stupid as possible as NOBODY makes a sane decision in the entire film. You know in horror films when the protagonist continues to make bone-headed decisions like splitting up in the dark woods or having sex in a tent next to the haunted lake? Yeah, imagine that, but in cop drama form. People fail to make basic arrests, interrogate properly, miss key clues, and generally run around with their heads in their ass. This can be used properly if you do it without being ham-fisted or put us in the same shoes as the police, but we as an audience have all the answers from the get-go. We see all the crimes and know all the clues. The film is literally designed to make me feel angry at the police force. Everybody is loud, corrupt, obnoxious, and possibly brain-damaged. The film is hectic, and not in a good way.

I dug the performance of the main villain, but it got one-note after the first half of the film. The film is also purposefully "dark," but it does this by using contrived coincidence after coincidence. I can't but for one second all the coincidences that drive this plot forward. It reminds me of Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, Chan-Wook Park's first film is his Revenge Trilogy, in that as an audience we are asked to believe a string of unbelievable circumstances to keep the plot moving. I thought it was generally accepted that this is bad storytelling, but apparently I've been told that it's something Korean thrillers often do, and you have to either accept it or stop watching them. Well, it appears I just don't have the taste for these types of films.

I did like Oldboy, however, which has some storytelling flaws, but the acting, atmosphere, and downright engaging plot structure keep it as one of the most brilliant films I've seen. Chaser just falls flat at every chance it gets to make it right. Apparently this is getting an American remake, as is Oldboy. I'm oddly looking forward to both, because in this case perhaps an American touch is what is needed for such a boneheaded Westerner like me.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Having watched the previous five films all within a span of two weeks, I must say that I love this series with a passion. i was ecstatic to see the new film in theaters with a massive crowd and I fully enjoyed myself for probably only the third time this summer (Up and Star Trek being the others).

Harry is in his sixth year at hogwarts and is still shocked about the events that transpired following the Death Eaters attack on the Ministry of Magic. Hogwarts is still a dangerous place, although Dumbledore stands firm in his belief that they will be prepared for the coming war. He enlists harry to find out from an old colleague exactly how they can kill the Dark Lord Voldemort.

I can safely say this film successfully completes the maturation of the characters and serves as a great bridge to the final battle that awaits in the next two films (considering that deathly Hallows will be TWO films, not one). The first two films were definitely children's tales, closer to Scooby Doo than Lord of the Rings. Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban started to darken the films and both Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix were sort of trials for Potter and friends. Now these young wizards are ready to continue on as they approach adult years, and the maturation process is done so well here.

This film is first and foremost a character study, and a fantasy film second. Compared to the previous two films, there is little action or spectacle in terms of immediately "WOW" material, but the film is still strikingly beautiful to look at and the screenplay is still as humorous as ever. It's a great balance that most of the previous films had as well.

I'd say that I do miss the mystery of some of the older films. That's not to say that this film doesn't have any mystique about it. It's just that I sometimes miss the boyish adventurism of the first two films, and to a slightly lesser extent Azkaban. i still think this film is extremely magical and fun to watch, but it's because of the characters and not exactly the visual effects extravaganzas the last two were. Those expecting dragon duells and great one-on-one battles will be disappointed.

The acting is very good from the cast and the films continue to add on them without seeming forced. I'd say this Potter film is just behind Goblet of Fire as my favorite of the series, and it's certainly one of the best films I've seen this year so far.

Sacha Baron Cohen's new movies claims "Borat" was SO 2006. Well, Cohen, I have to ask why then it took you and three other men to come up with a story that is almost completely identical in plot structure and exactly identical in purpose to Borat?

I, for one, LOVE Borat. It's a hilarious character and the movie, while hit-and-miss for many people, was almost entirely "hit" for me. I won't deny that Bruno is funny, but it comes in spurts and feels like a cheap knockoff rather than something fresh. in fact, it got pretty stale after the first 30 minutes.

Bruno is a gay fashion espert ousted from his hit Austrian TV program, so he travels to Los Angeles to get famous. The satire here is at its best when Cohen is acting as gay as possible and we just watch what people do and say. It's sad, however, that much of what transpires feels much, much more scripted than Borat. While most of this film and some of Borat was indeed scripted, Bruno just feels it much more. Maybe that's because the situations and people involved are far too similar.

Case in point- Bruno has a partner/friend who ends up getting naked with him (just like in Borat), there's a scene where he purposely goes to a redneck-centric event (MMA fighting in this case, it was bullriding in Borat), and most of the underlying themes are strikingly similar to Borat. I suppose the purpose is to show how insensitive and spiteful Americans can be, or perhaps it's simply to just sit and laugh at middle America for it's "backwards" views. This only works if you have a very left-leaning bias or perhaps come from a foreign country.

However, the genius scenes are when Cohen stops leading people on with obviously suggestive questions and simply acts overtly gay. seeing people's reactions are seriously demented and hilarious. I couldn't stop laughing at these scenes. I especially enjoyed Westborough Baptist Church get its comeuppance. It's just not fresh or new enough and it doesn't have enough material. In fact, it's short enough and a good enough carbon copy that i almost feel like this could have been written and filmed in a month and added as a special feature on a deluxe edition of Borat.

It's a dirty shame, because some of the bits really are classic. it's just that most of it is forgettable or have lost any satirical sting its predecessor had.

Public Enemies review

Guns, girls, and gangsters come together in Michael Mann's latest film Public Enemies, a film that uses digital photography unfortunately less well than Collateral, the last film Mann implemented this technique on.

Now, I'm not here to give a plot synopsis- you can get that pretty much anywhere on the net. I am here to give my thoughts and feelings on it. As such, it should suffice for me to tell you that the film chronicles the life of John Dillinger and explores how the media and America reacted. sadly, it doesn't have the emotional punch I was hoping for, and it really seems the film needed it.

The acting is quite good and the story itself is mostly well-done, but it's a by-the-numbers gangster movie with some really ugly cinematography. That said, the sound in this film is phenominal. if only the visual aspect matched up with the audio.

The film is too long as well. It's mostly entertaining, but near the halfway mark it begins to get repetitive and tedious. it all leads up to an ending that not only is predictable by any film standards, let alone if you know your history. A film should still be able to give a good journey no matter if it's a historical film.

Now I'm not going to say this film isn't worthy. It's a competent film narratively speaking, and it doesn't totally overdo the shaky-cam, but i have to admit I was straining my eyes to make sure that david Wenham was indeed in the film. If the camera is too spastic for me to be able to tell who one of its stars is, then there is something wrong.

Marion Cotillard, however, really steals the show here. She's such a beautiful actress and gives probably the best performance of the film. She continues to show her range and any scene with her really picks up the film. I tyhink Depp, Crudup, Bale, and the rest of the cast range from serviceable to damn god,m but none hold a candle to Cotillard. I think that this film, when it comes down to it, is an average movie with some good performances, but the flaws are evident and keep me from giving it a high recommendation.

A matinee or possibly rental would be best, if you ask me.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen review

I just can't comprehend the magnitude of epicness this movie contains. It has dogs humping each other! It has robots humping humans! It has Meagan Fox looking like a prostitute! It has epic scenes of romantic dialogue accompanied by 360 degree camera pans! It has piss jokes! It has testicle jokes! It looks and sounds like a mildly retarded, roid-raged high schooler's idea for "teh coolest video game evurr."

This atrocity is Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Why isn't it just Transformers 2? Why this recent spate of sequels with subtitles? Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian, Terminator: Salvation, Aliens vs Predator: Requiem. I'm getting tired of typing colons. But I digress.

Michael Bay has given us his magnum opus. This film has grossed over 700 million dollars worldwide in less than a month on a 200 million dollar budget and who knows how much he's pulling in on merchandising. Never mind that Bay is a corporate whore and has the maturity of a 13-year-old brat for a moment- I've dedicated three paragraphs and still haven't gotten to the crux of this entry- what the film does wrong. Well, I explained in hyperbole, if hyperbole is using exclaimation marks when not needed. I guarantee that all of the first paragraph is 100 percent accurate.

This film is first and foremost a plotless affair that is literally the world's biggest excuse to use as much money to blow shit up as possible, and likewise it feels like you're doing a disservice to the world by dedicating 10 dollars to Bay and Paramount for it. I would rather people risk bodily harm by blowing up their own shit and give that 10 dollars to charity than sit safely in a theater for this artistically challenged motion picture. Shia Labeouf is off to college now, and apparently a piece of the allspark is left and embeds in his mind some sort of blueprint to something that can, in the wrong hands, destroy the world. Cue the 20+ robots, who have somehow managed to team up with the US government in a hidden program designed to track renegade robots. Yeah, I know it's a movie, but this just goes far enough beyond reality that it starts to feel like you're in another dimension where things, no matter how hard you try, don't make sense.

The cinematography is loathesome. It's like watching an epilleptic dance in a laser show while sitting in a washer on full tumble with one eye on a kaleidescope. Either everything is too close, the camera won't stop spinning around in 360 degrees, or things don't stop shaking. The film is co-scored by once-faux metal, now-U2 ripoffs Linkin Park (if by "co-score" you mean insert three riffs from their new single "New Divide"), so be ready to have a song forcefully stuck in your head for a day.

of everything this films does wrong, it's chief crime is the atrocious writing, which takes every ounce of charisma or charm from it and reduces any character interactions down to "You're hot" or "Insert product namebrand here." The people are dimwitted and the robots witless.

Finally, it's just boring. It's long and loud and obnoxious and I don't ever want to be seen near a theater playing it again. the problem is it's a hit on par with The Dark Knight in the eyes of so many people. Why? Escapism. More power to ya, really. I'll admit there is one particular scene that wowed me- the battle in the forest and subsequent emotional scene that follows it. but aside from that, this film is useless to my sensibilities and i wish it was useless to everybody else.

Introduction

Oh, yes, welcome to my blog.

This a sad third attempt of mine to have a blogspot blog. Like people really read these. it's a free account, of course they won't actually pay attention to it!

But alas, I still feel I must write down my thoughts. Don't expect much innovation, though!