::Great Sites::
Subscribe through Feedburner
Archives
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
Categories
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
Apparently not…as I discovered upon reading on IMDB about “Saw VII” being in production. Shame on me for thinking that the franchise would cease at the 6th installment (do filmmakers really do what they say they will?); particularly with the bucketsful of blood, er money the films have made. Anyway, suffice it to say that I — a huge fan of the “Saw” franchise (it’s a guilty pleasure) — had oodles o’fun at the theatre. Many questions from the previous films were answered; however, several more were raised. And the traps were, as Movie_Maven_Jr would say, “like, totally freakin’ awesome!” Very cringeworthy, particularly the opener. Now, if one peruses the 18,000 pages of discussion boards at IMDB.com, one might get the picture (ha, pun intended) that these films are a complete waste of time. Also erroneous are the myriad comparisons to “Paranormal Activity.” For the umpteenth time, “Paranormal Activity” is SUPPOSED to be scary - that’s the entire premise. “Saw VI” isn’t. So let’s stop comparing apples to asparagus, shall we?!? As a budding horror flick screenwriter, I am consistently amazed at the intricacies of the double trilogies (sixology?) of the series and still befuddled over the complete and accurate timeline of events. Nevertheless, movies are primarily entertaining and I was entertained. Therefore, the filmmakers did their jobs quite well. On a more analytical note, Kevin Greutert’s direction was a pleasant change of pace from earlier installments. This is not to say I was unhappy with James Wan’s or Darren Lynn Bousman’s directorial styles (David Hackl’s would have to be my least favorite.) Nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, Greutert seemed to offer a fresh take on what many believe to be a stale topic. While I still have a few character-related questions, to iterate them here would give critical plot development away. So I shan’t.
Let’s see, what films have I seen since my last blog? There have been several; however, with football season and work I’ve been really busy. So I apologize to you, my dear readers. “Paranormal Activity” - was entertaining. Creepy if one believes all the hype about it being comprised of “found footage.” One needs to have patience through the film to appreciate the ending. “Law Abiding Citizen” - was a fun flick except for the last minute. What a horrendous ending. Gerard Butler has a nice backside, by the way. Oh, and it should be “Law-Abiding Citizen.” It amazes me how a screenwriter can write an entire film and have the title be grammatically incorrect. Drives me crazy. Speaking of Gerard Butler, I was pleasantly surprised by “Gamer.” Good premise, decent action, and Gerard’s arms. Not quite Vin Diesel-like but very nice nonetheless. “Surrogates” was another pleasant surprise. Having low expectations, I’ve found, increases the likeability factor of a movie. Again, interesting premise, decent action, and if one doesn’t try to inject too much rationality into the plot then it is enjoyable. In other words, ignore the huge plot holes and take the movie for what it is. “28 Days Later” - we rented from Netflix. I vaguely remember seeing it before but apparently it didn’t make enough of an impression for me to remember it. I suppose I liked it better this time because I actually remember what happened. And Cillian Murphy has nice eyes. I am going to see “Saw VI” tomorrow….can’t wait!!
Swayze, 57, lost his 20-month battle with pancreatic cancer today. Reports are that he died peacefully with his family around. He will most certainly be missed. There is a nice in-depth article about his career here.
…on Rob Zombie’s “Halloween II” - one of the absolute WORST movies I have seen in my life. Now I am a Zombie fan and did enjoy his remake of “Halloween” as well as the disturbing “Devils Rejects”; however, this film is way too existential for the genre. The beginning of the film did pay homage to the original “Halloween II” but then it seemed as if Zombie tried to take the story down too many roads. The acting was atrocious, especially Zombie’s wife, Sheri Moon Zombie (the Myers matriarch who died in the first one), who delivered each of her lines as if she was one of those talking dolls I had as a child. No voice inflection, no emotion, nothing. There was even no reason for her presence in the movie (except, of course, that she was his wife.) The rest of the cast was equally annoying. Laurie Strode (Taylor Scout-Compton) looked completely different and, granted she did likely have PTSD, resorted to a whiny, annoying, nightmare-plagued punk. Even Malcolm McDowell’s character was reduced to a self-aggrandizing moron with no redeeming value whatsoever. Michael Myers was, perhaps, the most “interesting” character and this was with a complete lack of dialogue on his part. Zombie seems to love the F-bomb. I actually was so bored during the film I started counting them and got to 174 before almost falling asleep. The murder scenes were typical murder scenes and many of them were too dark to even get a good view. Therefore, I was forced to rely upon the very loud sound effects and use my own imagination to envision the bloody entrails littering the town of Haddonfield. I understand the premise of this film was for Michael to find his sister Laurie/Angel and then the family would, once again, be whole, but why were those who didn’t stand in his way of finding her killed? Random murder and mayhem is nice at times but completely inappropriate for the presumption of this film. As a result, “Halloween II” is a bloody, brutal, poorly acted, poorly written mess. Oh, and left wide open at the end for a potential sequel (I think that is mandatory now.) I do have to say that the cinematography, in parts, was quite good and John Carpenter’s creepy score is the epitome of horror genre music. I did hear that the original cut was close to four hours…normally I enjoy seeing films’ deleted scenes and it might (I stress might) be interesting to see these because some of the ones he left in were so completely irrelevant. But then again it might just put me to sleep. Or make me homicidal. I was so disappointed that I don’t even want to waste the time uploading the movie poster.
Being a fan of the first three films in the franchise (one of my guilty pleasures), I actually endeavored to the movies on a Saturday night (GASP) to see this installment. And it was my birthday so I got free popcorn too. Aside from the requisite weekend-opener-annoyances and crowds (like the jerks behind me who wouldn’t stop talking and the moronic parents who brought a young child) to a horror flick, I walked away from the movie with some mixed feelings. First of all, it seemed to me that the filmmakers were trying too hard. After all, there are 11 deaths in this movie - more than any of its predecessors - and all jam-packed into a mere 82 minutes. Unfortunately, this left little room for any significant (or even superficial) character development. Yeah, yeah, I know that the series is not known for identifying the underlying motivations for the characters; however, this movie had none. Zero. Zilch. I also wanted to know how a group of 20-somethings who didn’t appear to work for a living were able to live in such nice places, wear nice clothes, plan trips to Europe, and drive nice vehicles…trust fund, perhaps. Final Destination, 90210 perhaps? At any rate, I would have liked to have seen this film in 3-D. Then the special effects would have, undoubtedly, been better. The overtness of the intention of this film as a 3-D vehicle was very apparent. In 2-D; however, some of the CGI effects, particularly at the beginning during the race, were grainy and poorly edited. Another problem was the poor acting. I was especially disappointed to see Mykelti Williamson and wondered what propelled him to take this role (he’ll always be Bubba in ‘Forrest Gump’ to me!!) I was equally disappointed to see him die as well. Come on people, you KNOW what’s going to happen so that statement is hardly a spoiler. He did have one particularly funny scene and some of the dialogue was pretty funny (I laughed especially hard at the tampon reference.) There was also no lack of cliches, puns or innuendos and many references to the earlier films. Oh, and of course, the potential for yet another sequel. At any rate, while I was a little disappointed, the film was entertaining and, after all, isn’t that why we go to the movies?  Gotta love the tag line!!
I FINALLY got to see “Inglorious Basterds” yesterday (grrrr, as an OCD, anal-retentive grammarian it is quite difficult for me to spell “bastards” incorrectly; however, out of respect for Quentin the Great I shall oblige. Suffice it to say I have seen all of his movies and own several (love “Reservoir Dogs”), as well as all of Eli Roth’s and am a HUGE fan of them both (can’t wait, by the way, for “Hostel III”.) This film did not disappoint (and now that I just read on imdb.com that the subtitling ”problems” which concerned me were intentional, perhaps I can sleep tonight.) Not normally a Brad Pitt fan (sorry Brad), I can honestly say I cannot think of another actor who would have brought the same “oomph” (or shall we stay true to the film and say ”joie de vivre”) to the role. In fact, all of the casting was just perfect. In true Tarantino fashion, “Basterds” (aarrggghhhhh) tells the tale of the aforementioned group who, “once upon a time in Nazi-occupied France”, takes to “killin’ Nazis.” And not only killing. Tarantino-esque killing and scalping and various other forms of “glorious” mayhem. Add the requisite plot twists, plans diabolique, a Hitler who really needs a prescription for Valium, and some hilarious dialogue and I loved all 153 minutes of it. So much, in fact, that I braved an entire 32-oz drink without my requisite bathroom break because I didn’t want to miss a single second. Besides, with all of the subtitles, I wasn’t sure Mr_Movie_Maven would have been able to catch me up on what I missed. Thank goodness for 5 years of jr. high and high school French and a semester of college German!! At the Cannes Film Festival “Basterds” (argh) received a Best Actor win for Christof Waltz (Colonel Landa) and a nomination for Tarantino for the Palm d’Or award (nomination, pffftt…should have won!!) I chose this poster because I LOVE Eli Roth!!
Since it is Movie_Maven_Jr_Jr’s birthday tomorrow, she wanted to go to the movies today and see “G-Force” but, thankfully, she had already seen it and I was able to talk her into seeing the third installment of “Ice Age” which she also had already seen. Going in with low expectations, I was pleasantly surprised. I particularly loved Simon Pegg as Buck the Weasel (he makes a great Scotty in the new “Star Trek” as well) and the multitude of movie references and hilarious dialogue that made me laugh out loud on several occasions. While not a huge fan of the franchise, I actually liked this one more than the first two, although I wanted (SPOILER) Diego to hold Peaches up at the end like in “The Lion King” for all to see.
Particularly after one of my recent posts regarding the lack of originality in Hollywood, it was nice seeing a resurgence of said originality in “Orphan.” Despite the numerous complaints on imdb about how overworked the creepy-kid horror genre has become, I agree to a point; however, I (being one who rarely catches twists before they are revealed) was completely surprised at the spoiler - probably because I was so caught up in the terrific acting of Isabelle Fuhrman (Esther) and the utter adorableness of Aryana Engineer (Max). Also, is it me or does anyone else wonder why has Peter Saarsgard been cast as a jerk in several of his (fairly) recent films (”Flightplan”, “Skeleton Key”, ‘Boys Don’t Cry”, for example)?? Sure, this movie utilizes virtually every horror cliche (hence the 123 minute run time…quite long for this genre) and there are ample jump scenes (I LOVE those!!) which is why I think so many people were disappointed; however, the originality of what is really wrong with Esther was, to me, great and I hope to see more of Fuhrman in the near future.
After hearing good review after good review of this film I was extremely disappointed. Johnny Depp and Christian Bale were both fabulous, as was Marion Cotillard; however, I have to say Michael Mann’s direction was extremely heavy-handed and tried to make more of an action film from what was really a quasi-biopic. Toss into the mix the VERY long 140-minute run time. This film could have been more effective had some of the longer, drawn-out scenes been eliminated and more of a focus established on the motivations of the main characters. One big example, at least for me, was the lack of character motivation by Billie (Cotillard) for getting involved with Dillinger (Depp). Sure, he’s a hunk and charming, but still. As for FBI Agent Purvis (Bale), I kept hoping he would utter something like, “Let’s get the Batmobile” or (from my favorite television show “The Big Bang Theory” a Sheldon-like utterance of “I’m Batman, SHHHHH!”). I love Bale and would personally watch him watch paint dry; however, this entire film equated with watching paint dry. The final half hour was considerably better but did not make up for the first 2 hours. Suffice it to say there were several historical inaccuracies which are detailed well on imdb.com. I really wanted to like it but even with free passes I regretted going (except for Christian Bale).
I had thought I wanted to see 2008’s “Quarantine” but after reading terrible review after terrible review I sought the original on which it is based - Spain’s “REC” (2007). The premise of the film is a television crew that accompanies a local fire station for the evening as they respond to a call of an elderly woman who was screaming from an apartment building. However, once everyone is inside, the story becomes even all the more strange. Apparently, some unknown virus has infected several of the tenants (the origin, turning them into overly-aggressive, violent folk and the origin of said virus remains virtually unknown until well into the story (I am trying not to give too much away.) While I am a huge fan of foreign language films and do not mind subtitles, I know Mr_Movie_Maven was a bit put off. The film was shot entirely from the point of view of Pablo, the cameraman, and, as such, had that shaky, hand-held effect first popularized by “The Blair Witch Project” and “Cloverfield” - both horrible, in my opinion; however, this film was significantly better despite the seemingly haphazard final amalgamation of plot points. The acting was adequate and was enjoyable. Running a short 75 minutes (more like a documentary), I honestly cannot provide enough accolades to the filmmakers. Far too often, movies of this genre, particularly those shot in this style, are laden with beautiful, perfect actors where “Rec” utilized real people and created a creepy air of which I am a fan. Despite the bad reviews, I now wish to see “Quarantine” (2008) and compare the two.
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2007 the Movie Maven • Powered by WordPress • Driven by the internet domain registration services of Loud Sign. Google Shadow
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
