The Town
2010
Directed by: Ben Affleck
Starring: Ben Affleck, Jeremy Renner
I'm going to say it right now. Anyone can fight me on this, but I have to say it. I know specific people that will fight me on it. But I'm still going to say it. Ben Affleck is a great actor. Better than Matt Damon. Strictly opinion of course. I just can't possibly think of a "phenomenal" role that Damon has played. Granted, I have never seen The Informant, but I don't think that should matter. Affleck is fantastic. He is so solid with certain performances, it makes me wonder why people give him so much crap.
This all began when I saw Armageddon for the first time. He does such a great job. No, I'm not saying that Affleck should have won an award. To be honest, I don't think any awards should be given out to anyone for a movie directed by Michael Bay. Those movies are purely for entertainment, and not film savvy folk. Getting back on track, this movie was great.
It wasn't phenomenal, it wasn't horrendous, it wasn't good. It was great. There's as much as an honest opinion as I can throw out there. The movie was very predictable. And yes, it did have many cliches that bank robber movies always do. But the spin that this movie took was very well thought out and executed. I actually cared about the characters. It wasn't like some lunch box robbery movie where everything is in one package but nothing really goes together.
Takers is a perfect example of a robbery movie gone wrong. It all started with their casting. The Town was cast perfectly (all except Jon Hamm, who I actually can't stand). His Boston accent flitted in and out of reality, and his overbearing nature made him seem like the bad guy even though he was playing an FBI agent. The truth is, we were all rooting for the robbers. Affleck and Renner played well off each other, and found a ground that made them seem like they had been robbing banks years before Good Will Hunting.
Affleck's tantric acting makes this movie one of my favorite cops-n-robbers flicks. The desire to hate the FBI agent and even the girl that makes everything blow up was nostalgic and meditating to my soul. The thought of watching another robbery movie won't allow me to have imagination and creativity due to the thoughts I have on this movie. Maybe Matt Damon will make an awesome movie like this one.
Stars (out of 10): 7 1/2
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
Get Low
Get Low
2010
Directed by: Aaron Schneider
Starring: Robert Duvall, Bill Murray
From sea to shining sea, the movie industry has done it again, folks. Another film has been released to prod at the Oscar buzz. It seems this has happened a lot lately. And yes, the film's can be pretty good. The Wrestler, for instance. But certain films in this category (The Last Station, The Visitor, A Single Man) really fail at what they are trying to accomplish. These films seem to be made only to get a good actor an award he deserves but has not yet gotten. Like Scorcese with The Departed, he should have won for other movies, but this was the last time for him to take it. The awards can never truly make up their mind on what is the best, and they realize that these older actors (mainly men) are getting really old.
Robert Duvall is a legend. There's no doubt. Everything from The Godfather to The Apostle to Gone in Sixty Seconds, he shines straight through. But, he has never won an Academy Award. So what happens? The studio creates a film for him to be the star in. A simple role with not too much going on. An independent, so as to not make the Academy voters stray from blockbusters. He was great in it. I'm not down-playing that. I'm down-playing the overall emotion of the film itself. It was eh at best.
Duvall plays an old hermit who is estranged from his small 1930's town. He decides to stage his own funeral party for he feels the end is near. He says he wants all people who have a story to tell about him to come to the funeral. Bill Murray plays the out-of-luck funeral home owner. He has a wicked sense of humor and jumps on the chance to do something that no one has ever done. The morbid humor of the plain slice of pizza that is this movie is the only saving point.
Murray spits out a few quips in an attempt to lighten up an otherwise weary and dull film. The simple storyline allows for Duvall to be the great actor he is. In the end, no one tells a story about Duvall. Only Duvall does. The emotion of the characters is misplaced through an episode of dialogue and curiosity of when the final credits will finally roll. Murray and Duvall are legendary figures. Both in their own right. I feel this film was rushed with the wrong intentions.
Stars (out of 10): 4
2010
Directed by: Aaron Schneider
Starring: Robert Duvall, Bill Murray
From sea to shining sea, the movie industry has done it again, folks. Another film has been released to prod at the Oscar buzz. It seems this has happened a lot lately. And yes, the film's can be pretty good. The Wrestler, for instance. But certain films in this category (The Last Station, The Visitor, A Single Man) really fail at what they are trying to accomplish. These films seem to be made only to get a good actor an award he deserves but has not yet gotten. Like Scorcese with The Departed, he should have won for other movies, but this was the last time for him to take it. The awards can never truly make up their mind on what is the best, and they realize that these older actors (mainly men) are getting really old.
Robert Duvall is a legend. There's no doubt. Everything from The Godfather to The Apostle to Gone in Sixty Seconds, he shines straight through. But, he has never won an Academy Award. So what happens? The studio creates a film for him to be the star in. A simple role with not too much going on. An independent, so as to not make the Academy voters stray from blockbusters. He was great in it. I'm not down-playing that. I'm down-playing the overall emotion of the film itself. It was eh at best.
Duvall plays an old hermit who is estranged from his small 1930's town. He decides to stage his own funeral party for he feels the end is near. He says he wants all people who have a story to tell about him to come to the funeral. Bill Murray plays the out-of-luck funeral home owner. He has a wicked sense of humor and jumps on the chance to do something that no one has ever done. The morbid humor of the plain slice of pizza that is this movie is the only saving point.
Murray spits out a few quips in an attempt to lighten up an otherwise weary and dull film. The simple storyline allows for Duvall to be the great actor he is. In the end, no one tells a story about Duvall. Only Duvall does. The emotion of the characters is misplaced through an episode of dialogue and curiosity of when the final credits will finally roll. Murray and Duvall are legendary figures. Both in their own right. I feel this film was rushed with the wrong intentions.
Stars (out of 10): 4
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Going the Distance
Going the Distance
2010
Directed by: Nanette Burstein
Starring: Justin Long, Drew Barrymore
This was not your every day romantic comedy. It, of course, was cheesy like a typical rom-com. But the humor factor of the dialogue broke into something new for me. I found myself laughing out loud quite a bit (and not just because I was looking at Drew Barrymore's unflattering figure). I realized that Justin Long is one of the greatest actors of our generation. This was not for his acting ability. But his ability to make him irresistible to women, yet awesomely dude-like to men.
Every time I see a Justin Long movie I think of Accepted. What a fantastic movie. He brings out this charisma in every character he plays (probably because he plays the same character repeatedly), but it works. He is like the cheeseburger of actors. He's the same thing every time, but something we crave after. The unsightly coupling of Long and Barrymore did not make much sense, however. First of all, she looks like a cut down tree, all slumpy and hunched like the top of her is missing. And he looks like a greased up recent college graduate. Why is it that Drew Barrymore always plays a newspaper reporter? I liked her better in Scream when she died in the first 3 minutes.
Anyway, the guy from It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia (of which I still have yet to see one full episode) was hilarious. He and this other guy play Long's two loser friends. They grow mustaches to try to take down "post-cougars", and take poops with the door open while trying to give love advice. But the two of them played perfectly into what the filmmakers were trying to do. They played the two guy-friends of the somewhat sensitive guy. They offer him beer and advice like it's popping two Tylenol. What boggles my mind is why this movie didn't revolve around them.
Now, the funniest line in the movie (which I won't spoil) is said by Barrymore, but only because she was drunk in the movie. Drunk Drew Barrymore should always be around. It was like watching an episode of Jersey Shore, except without the melodramatic "do you love me?" bullshit. I feel bad for ripping on her, I just don't understand her sometimes. Like why was she wearing a bow-tie on a first date? She is no where near as good looking as Tom Selleck (who I think is the only man ever to pull off a bow-tie).
Getting back to the movie. There were a lot of characters that I liked in the movie. They all seemed to somewhat have their place, whether it be the funny friends or the quirky over protective sister. The emotions of the movie did not sink in to my soul as much as the filmmakers would have liked. I feel that the ending was a little cheesy and drawn out. There were 2 or 3 other scenes (right near the end) that would have been a perfect fade out spot.
However, the overall presentation of the trials and tribulations of a long distance relationship really came through as very sweet, emotional, and dramatic at times. The jealousy factor played a role, but not too big a role. And overall, I enjoyed the light-hearted look at a real relationship struggling due to circumstances beyond any one's control. The storyline was engaging, and the relationship factor was a bit daft. But the movie drew my attention, which is pretty much all I ask of these people. But Drew Barrymore? Tsk Tsk.
Stars (out of 10): 6
2010
Directed by: Nanette Burstein
Starring: Justin Long, Drew Barrymore
This was not your every day romantic comedy. It, of course, was cheesy like a typical rom-com. But the humor factor of the dialogue broke into something new for me. I found myself laughing out loud quite a bit (and not just because I was looking at Drew Barrymore's unflattering figure). I realized that Justin Long is one of the greatest actors of our generation. This was not for his acting ability. But his ability to make him irresistible to women, yet awesomely dude-like to men.
Every time I see a Justin Long movie I think of Accepted. What a fantastic movie. He brings out this charisma in every character he plays (probably because he plays the same character repeatedly), but it works. He is like the cheeseburger of actors. He's the same thing every time, but something we crave after. The unsightly coupling of Long and Barrymore did not make much sense, however. First of all, she looks like a cut down tree, all slumpy and hunched like the top of her is missing. And he looks like a greased up recent college graduate. Why is it that Drew Barrymore always plays a newspaper reporter? I liked her better in Scream when she died in the first 3 minutes.
Anyway, the guy from It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia (of which I still have yet to see one full episode) was hilarious. He and this other guy play Long's two loser friends. They grow mustaches to try to take down "post-cougars", and take poops with the door open while trying to give love advice. But the two of them played perfectly into what the filmmakers were trying to do. They played the two guy-friends of the somewhat sensitive guy. They offer him beer and advice like it's popping two Tylenol. What boggles my mind is why this movie didn't revolve around them.
Now, the funniest line in the movie (which I won't spoil) is said by Barrymore, but only because she was drunk in the movie. Drunk Drew Barrymore should always be around. It was like watching an episode of Jersey Shore, except without the melodramatic "do you love me?" bullshit. I feel bad for ripping on her, I just don't understand her sometimes. Like why was she wearing a bow-tie on a first date? She is no where near as good looking as Tom Selleck (who I think is the only man ever to pull off a bow-tie).
Getting back to the movie. There were a lot of characters that I liked in the movie. They all seemed to somewhat have their place, whether it be the funny friends or the quirky over protective sister. The emotions of the movie did not sink in to my soul as much as the filmmakers would have liked. I feel that the ending was a little cheesy and drawn out. There were 2 or 3 other scenes (right near the end) that would have been a perfect fade out spot.
However, the overall presentation of the trials and tribulations of a long distance relationship really came through as very sweet, emotional, and dramatic at times. The jealousy factor played a role, but not too big a role. And overall, I enjoyed the light-hearted look at a real relationship struggling due to circumstances beyond any one's control. The storyline was engaging, and the relationship factor was a bit daft. But the movie drew my attention, which is pretty much all I ask of these people. But Drew Barrymore? Tsk Tsk.
Stars (out of 10): 6
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Takers
Takers
2010
Directed by: John Luessenhop
Starring: Idris Elba, Matt Dillon
So here it goes. Another story about another team of robbers. And the crazy thing is that Vinnie James was no where in sight! For all of these heist movies, the plot is pretty vanilla. Show one heist going well. Check. Show the relationship between the team of bad guys. Check. Show the cop with an all-too-familiar history on the force who is on the tail of the bad guys. Check. Any way you all get the point.
The problem with the movie was not the story, however. It was the acting. If you want to call it acting. Watching Paul Walker stumble over words and Chris Brown sit there and pretend to be an actor makes me frustrated. Are you ever driving down the road and see a car and say to yourself, "damn that car is a piece of garbage"? Well this movie was like that. It got the actors to where they were headed, but barely. They made a movie, but the acting caliber in Takers is less than sub par. It actually bothers me to use the word "acting" when referring to this movie.
The movie's only saving grace was Zoe Saldana. Yeah, the blue chick from Avatar. Anyway, she was in the movie for maybe five minutes. Five minutes! What the hell are these people thinking? She's gorgeous and a decent actress. You would think the filmmakers would have said, "hey maybe she should be in the movie more". Well another fail on their part.
The worst actor though had to be Matt Dillon. His vanilla and overbearing acting "ability" brought him over the edge to completely ridiculous. I felt that I was watching a bad episode of Entourage and he was Johnny Drama fighting for a role. Maybe the Dillon brothers should switch careers. Matt Dillon has the same personality and mannerisms in any movie. It seems like he is being shot out of a cannon, but they can only figure out one way to shoot him out of the cannon.
There is so much in this movie that made me not like it. I don't know how to talk about it all. It was a train wreck. The story has very possible potential, but the acting just brought it down. It's like what Saladworks does to salads. Making subpar items and making me spend $11 to realize how terrible it really was. If all heist movies were ingredients in a salad, Takers would be the very optional capers. No pun intended. I mean, what do you expect from a cast consisting of Chris Brown, TI, Paul Walker, and Hayden Christensen?
The very forgettable and sometimes laughable movie also had one of the worst chase sequences I have ever seen. I had heard rumors about a shaky camera, which I have to to admit was not that bad throughout the whole movie. However, in one scene where Chris Brown is being chased on foot by Dillon, the camera is shaking so much that it's hard to tell what's even going on. It didn't make me nauseous (except for the vomit called a story line). The chase scene showed Chris Brown jumping roofs, hopping fire escapes, and running faster that Usain Bolt. Maybe with his history of domestic violence, Brown needs to know how to run really, really fast. It was like watching parkour while sniffing Adderall. This was definitely the Chevy Geo of the film world.
Stars (out of 10): 3
2010
Directed by: John Luessenhop
Starring: Idris Elba, Matt Dillon
So here it goes. Another story about another team of robbers. And the crazy thing is that Vinnie James was no where in sight! For all of these heist movies, the plot is pretty vanilla. Show one heist going well. Check. Show the relationship between the team of bad guys. Check. Show the cop with an all-too-familiar history on the force who is on the tail of the bad guys. Check. Any way you all get the point.
The problem with the movie was not the story, however. It was the acting. If you want to call it acting. Watching Paul Walker stumble over words and Chris Brown sit there and pretend to be an actor makes me frustrated. Are you ever driving down the road and see a car and say to yourself, "damn that car is a piece of garbage"? Well this movie was like that. It got the actors to where they were headed, but barely. They made a movie, but the acting caliber in Takers is less than sub par. It actually bothers me to use the word "acting" when referring to this movie.
The movie's only saving grace was Zoe Saldana. Yeah, the blue chick from Avatar. Anyway, she was in the movie for maybe five minutes. Five minutes! What the hell are these people thinking? She's gorgeous and a decent actress. You would think the filmmakers would have said, "hey maybe she should be in the movie more". Well another fail on their part.
The worst actor though had to be Matt Dillon. His vanilla and overbearing acting "ability" brought him over the edge to completely ridiculous. I felt that I was watching a bad episode of Entourage and he was Johnny Drama fighting for a role. Maybe the Dillon brothers should switch careers. Matt Dillon has the same personality and mannerisms in any movie. It seems like he is being shot out of a cannon, but they can only figure out one way to shoot him out of the cannon.
There is so much in this movie that made me not like it. I don't know how to talk about it all. It was a train wreck. The story has very possible potential, but the acting just brought it down. It's like what Saladworks does to salads. Making subpar items and making me spend $11 to realize how terrible it really was. If all heist movies were ingredients in a salad, Takers would be the very optional capers. No pun intended. I mean, what do you expect from a cast consisting of Chris Brown, TI, Paul Walker, and Hayden Christensen?
The very forgettable and sometimes laughable movie also had one of the worst chase sequences I have ever seen. I had heard rumors about a shaky camera, which I have to to admit was not that bad throughout the whole movie. However, in one scene where Chris Brown is being chased on foot by Dillon, the camera is shaking so much that it's hard to tell what's even going on. It didn't make me nauseous (except for the vomit called a story line). The chase scene showed Chris Brown jumping roofs, hopping fire escapes, and running faster that Usain Bolt. Maybe with his history of domestic violence, Brown needs to know how to run really, really fast. It was like watching parkour while sniffing Adderall. This was definitely the Chevy Geo of the film world.
Stars (out of 10): 3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)