Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1
2010
Directed by: David Yates
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson
Let me begin by saying that if you are not a Potter fan, then you will not like the movie. It's that simple. Even if you have not read the books, the movies are great. They are entertaining and suck the audience into a world that we have come to love and respect. Potter fans are a special breed. I do not expect everyone to be a fan. This is why I feel it is unfair to judge such a movie based on regular critics. I am a Potter fan, so perhaps it is unfair to listen to this review.
I liked it. The first part of the two part seventh chapter in an epic tale came through with shimmering light. David Yates basically took the book, split it into 5 hours of movie then cut that in half. And you know what, it works. This is nothing like the horrendous sequels to the Matrix, because there is actually a story. The books of the Harry Potter series bring people to a different place. In order to correctly tell the final part (and of course to make money along the way), the studio and director decided to split it up.
The movie begins like the book, the middle is like the book, the end (of the first part is like the book). Time seemed to fly by as I was once again sucked into a world of broomsticks, witches, and every British actor known to man. The characters are brought to light and become so life like that I actually feel as if they are a part of the real world. Hell, I've never been to London, so I guess it's possible. The movie brings back every character and facet of the phenomenon that has been happening for nearly 10 years.
Harry Potter and his friends set off on a mission to destroy Horcruxes (objects that contain parts of Voldemort's soul) so they can finally begin to try to defeat him. These objects are scattered throughout the land in various places. It can be a ring, a necklace, or any other mundane object. The other side of the story has Voldemort planning his defeat of Harry Potter.
The cast of characters brings forth the final chapter in such a convincing way. The 2 1/2 hours seemed to fly by as death eaters and the like continued their pursuit of their endeavors. Of course, the absence of Michael Gambon as Dumbledore did not bother me (Richard Harris was so great, it was impossible to replace him). Potter deals with Dumbledore's death like he has any other, with strict vengeance on his mind.
Mild humor and tacky animated sequences were the low points of the movie, but nothing that would completely spoil the experience. I look forward to the second part of the seventh chapter and the conclusion of the series. The experience has been a great ride, but will hopefully come to a great end just like in the books. Yates has done a great job taking over the franchise from the other directors and I look forward to seeing the final chapter of the Deathly Hallows.
Stars (out of 10): 7
Friday, November 19, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Due Date
Due Date
2010
Directed By: Todd Phillips
Starring: Robert Downey, Jr., Zack Galifianakis
Crazy thought. Is this a comedy? Probably. But not because of Zack. Sorry, I don't like your last name, so I'm not going to use it. But the movie was kind of funny. Key word being "of". What does that even mean? I don't know, I'm going out on a limb here. In a string of unfortunate events, two men road trip from Atlanta to Los Angeles together. This "what's-gonna-go-wrong-next?" event consists of debauchery involving masturbation, weed, and Jamie Foxx in a quasi-cameo.
Zack portrays a struggling, down-to-earth actor traveling to Hollywood from Atlanta. How is that different from his actual personality? For some reason, he somewhat gets on my nerves. I feel that his quirky, eccentric nature will eventually become old. I mean, how many movies can he actually be in? Eventually, the character-actor in him will wear off and he will find himself in a pit of despair involving a toothbrush and a candle. He will never succeed late in his career, which is sad. He seems like he has talent, but if he is going to rely on his regular acting status, he's not going to make it.
Anyway, Robert Downey, Jr. did a great job playing an asshole. Well why wouldn't he? He seems like he's a pretty straight shooter in real life. His acting ability amazes me. He has bounced back more than any other famous person I have ever seen. He knows how to take a role, any role, and play it with such conviction that it makes the audience hang on his every syllable.
The movie overall was fine. Like I said. However, the concept of the movie was a little lost to me. Why couldn't Downey have taken a train? It seemed like the logical choice, but who knows. This Rain Man-esque feature focuses on a road trip. But the real story is the idiosyncratic romance between two strangers. It grows over a course of three days. And no matter how ridiculous and illegal a stunt is that they embark upon, they seem to survive and manage to make jokes along the way.
Stars (out of 10): 5
2010
Directed By: Todd Phillips
Starring: Robert Downey, Jr., Zack Galifianakis
Crazy thought. Is this a comedy? Probably. But not because of Zack. Sorry, I don't like your last name, so I'm not going to use it. But the movie was kind of funny. Key word being "of". What does that even mean? I don't know, I'm going out on a limb here. In a string of unfortunate events, two men road trip from Atlanta to Los Angeles together. This "what's-gonna-go-wrong-next?" event consists of debauchery involving masturbation, weed, and Jamie Foxx in a quasi-cameo.
Zack portrays a struggling, down-to-earth actor traveling to Hollywood from Atlanta. How is that different from his actual personality? For some reason, he somewhat gets on my nerves. I feel that his quirky, eccentric nature will eventually become old. I mean, how many movies can he actually be in? Eventually, the character-actor in him will wear off and he will find himself in a pit of despair involving a toothbrush and a candle. He will never succeed late in his career, which is sad. He seems like he has talent, but if he is going to rely on his regular acting status, he's not going to make it.
Anyway, Robert Downey, Jr. did a great job playing an asshole. Well why wouldn't he? He seems like he's a pretty straight shooter in real life. His acting ability amazes me. He has bounced back more than any other famous person I have ever seen. He knows how to take a role, any role, and play it with such conviction that it makes the audience hang on his every syllable.
The movie overall was fine. Like I said. However, the concept of the movie was a little lost to me. Why couldn't Downey have taken a train? It seemed like the logical choice, but who knows. This Rain Man-esque feature focuses on a road trip. But the real story is the idiosyncratic romance between two strangers. It grows over a course of three days. And no matter how ridiculous and illegal a stunt is that they embark upon, they seem to survive and manage to make jokes along the way.
Stars (out of 10): 5
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Saw 3D
Saw 3D
2010
Directed By: Kevin Greutert
Starring: Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor
And the (hopefully) final chapter has been written. This ghastly series of movies has finally come to an end, or so we think. Was it worth making seven different movies showing people relentlessly murdered for wrongs they have done in their lives? Yeah, probably. There's something appealing to us about seeing repugnant episodes of human brutality that brings us closer to something. I don't know what that something is, but I don't know if I want to.
The Saw series began in 2004 with a well-constructed idea of a man who wants people to appreciate life. In 2005, the series was brought up again with a fun (and I think better) sequel. After that, the downhill slope of cinema began. After the first two movies, it has become more of a chore to drag myself to the theater, or even add a title to my Netflix queue. Nevertheless, I find myself intrigued by these (as a friend would say, "Sawesome") flicks. Watching make-up and so-called body parts fly around in 3D is definitely something new.
Bringing about different story lines, all the Saw movies are supposed to be connected. Yet, each new one feels like a stretch from the actual story. Hope was regained for a little bit during Saw IV, but was destroyed again by the unimaginably terrible Saw V. The only thing that made that movie possibly good was Julie Benz. But even with Benz in a black-haired role, the series seemed to have lost whatever edge was left. The mindless story-telling and acting made for even more unwatchable scenes than the ones showing a man's leg get ripped apart.
This final chapter (or so they say) in the series brought in the newly found (and no where close to perfected) 3D technology. Adding a little touch here and there is not worth $3.50 extra at the ticket counter. Sorry James Cameron, but it seems like you're the only one who knows what you're doing. Just make Avatar 2 happen and we'll all be happy.
As for Saw 3D (or Saw 7), we need to look into the details. The fact that the story was almost to a T the same as from Saw 3. We need to see that no one cares about the rookie cop out for revenge. The only thing this audience member cares about is seeing how creative the Jigsaw character has become. This movie fell nothing short of substandard. The acting and story line created a creature of habit. Too bad this happened 3 movies ago. Bring together the stories. Stop making new ones. Involve the people who have been there from the start. Unfortunately, they did this, but I think a little too late.
I'm not going to spoil anything for anyone, but it seemed really stretched as far as they went to show what would happen next. Does every Saw movie end with someone saying "Game Over" and slamming a door? I have seen them all, yet they all seem to run together. I don't know what else to say about it. The movie was fine, I guess. I just really hope I can enjoy next Halloween without hearing "Game Over".
Stars (out of 10): 4 1/2
2010
Directed By: Kevin Greutert
Starring: Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor
And the (hopefully) final chapter has been written. This ghastly series of movies has finally come to an end, or so we think. Was it worth making seven different movies showing people relentlessly murdered for wrongs they have done in their lives? Yeah, probably. There's something appealing to us about seeing repugnant episodes of human brutality that brings us closer to something. I don't know what that something is, but I don't know if I want to.
The Saw series began in 2004 with a well-constructed idea of a man who wants people to appreciate life. In 2005, the series was brought up again with a fun (and I think better) sequel. After that, the downhill slope of cinema began. After the first two movies, it has become more of a chore to drag myself to the theater, or even add a title to my Netflix queue. Nevertheless, I find myself intrigued by these (as a friend would say, "Sawesome") flicks. Watching make-up and so-called body parts fly around in 3D is definitely something new.
Bringing about different story lines, all the Saw movies are supposed to be connected. Yet, each new one feels like a stretch from the actual story. Hope was regained for a little bit during Saw IV, but was destroyed again by the unimaginably terrible Saw V. The only thing that made that movie possibly good was Julie Benz. But even with Benz in a black-haired role, the series seemed to have lost whatever edge was left. The mindless story-telling and acting made for even more unwatchable scenes than the ones showing a man's leg get ripped apart.
This final chapter (or so they say) in the series brought in the newly found (and no where close to perfected) 3D technology. Adding a little touch here and there is not worth $3.50 extra at the ticket counter. Sorry James Cameron, but it seems like you're the only one who knows what you're doing. Just make Avatar 2 happen and we'll all be happy.
As for Saw 3D (or Saw 7), we need to look into the details. The fact that the story was almost to a T the same as from Saw 3. We need to see that no one cares about the rookie cop out for revenge. The only thing this audience member cares about is seeing how creative the Jigsaw character has become. This movie fell nothing short of substandard. The acting and story line created a creature of habit. Too bad this happened 3 movies ago. Bring together the stories. Stop making new ones. Involve the people who have been there from the start. Unfortunately, they did this, but I think a little too late.
I'm not going to spoil anything for anyone, but it seemed really stretched as far as they went to show what would happen next. Does every Saw movie end with someone saying "Game Over" and slamming a door? I have seen them all, yet they all seem to run together. I don't know what else to say about it. The movie was fine, I guess. I just really hope I can enjoy next Halloween without hearing "Game Over".
Stars (out of 10): 4 1/2
Friday, October 29, 2010
Paranormal Activity 2
Paranormal Activity 2
2010
Directed by: Tod Williams
Starring: Katie Featherston, Sprague Grayden
Let me begin by saying this is one of the most creative "sequel" concepts I have ever seen. Was it the best sequel ever? No. But the overall idea of creating a prequel then coming to the point where the original began, and finally ending after the original ended, it was just genius. The overall story line was mediocre. Just like the first one. The acting was mediocre, just like the first one.
However, the acting and the story line did not need to be above average. This movie is one of the first horror films in a long time to have a lasting impression on me. Because the acting and story line weren't that great, it felt more realistic. This house could very well have been any house we, as middle class citizens, live in. The hair-raising scenes make you tingle with fright. The suspense of a night-time terror make you cringe in your seat, anxious for the next horror.
The movie took about 45 minutes for anything to actually happen. This may seem like a lot of time, but after that 45 minutes, it is a pure adrenaline rush that terrified me to my very soul. This is not me being a wuss. It is not me being a baby. You can definitely tell that a movie is scary when people run out of the theater. At first I thought they were being stupidly funny, but when they didn't return, I assumed they were actually that scared.
Being inside a movie theater with people terrified at an invisible monster is quite an experience. The movie did have a lot more jumpy scenes. And it even had continuous horror scenes that made you want to put down the popcorn in order to make sure not to spill it. I was very afraid that the movie would be stolid. A senseless, boring sequel to a movie that I thought was very original. I feel the new Paranormal Activity served well to the first film.
The bringing back of the two characters in the first one made me curious throughout the film of how they would tie them together. I was not disappointed, and I cannot think of a better way to end the new film. Paranormal Activity 2 did some things great. Scaring me was one of them. Tying into the first story line was another. I commend them on having this opportunity to completely "Hollywood-ise" the sequel and them having the balls to keep a lot of original ideas.
Stars (out of 10): 7
2010
Directed by: Tod Williams
Starring: Katie Featherston, Sprague Grayden
Let me begin by saying this is one of the most creative "sequel" concepts I have ever seen. Was it the best sequel ever? No. But the overall idea of creating a prequel then coming to the point where the original began, and finally ending after the original ended, it was just genius. The overall story line was mediocre. Just like the first one. The acting was mediocre, just like the first one.
However, the acting and the story line did not need to be above average. This movie is one of the first horror films in a long time to have a lasting impression on me. Because the acting and story line weren't that great, it felt more realistic. This house could very well have been any house we, as middle class citizens, live in. The hair-raising scenes make you tingle with fright. The suspense of a night-time terror make you cringe in your seat, anxious for the next horror.
The movie took about 45 minutes for anything to actually happen. This may seem like a lot of time, but after that 45 minutes, it is a pure adrenaline rush that terrified me to my very soul. This is not me being a wuss. It is not me being a baby. You can definitely tell that a movie is scary when people run out of the theater. At first I thought they were being stupidly funny, but when they didn't return, I assumed they were actually that scared.
Being inside a movie theater with people terrified at an invisible monster is quite an experience. The movie did have a lot more jumpy scenes. And it even had continuous horror scenes that made you want to put down the popcorn in order to make sure not to spill it. I was very afraid that the movie would be stolid. A senseless, boring sequel to a movie that I thought was very original. I feel the new Paranormal Activity served well to the first film.
The bringing back of the two characters in the first one made me curious throughout the film of how they would tie them together. I was not disappointed, and I cannot think of a better way to end the new film. Paranormal Activity 2 did some things great. Scaring me was one of them. Tying into the first story line was another. I commend them on having this opportunity to completely "Hollywood-ise" the sequel and them having the balls to keep a lot of original ideas.
Stars (out of 10): 7
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Jackass 3D
Jackass 3D
2010
Directed by: Jeff Tremaine
Starring (Really? Starring?): Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O
And here it goes. How to write a review of a collection of idiotic stunts? Idiotic is not quite the word, though. Epic. Yes, epic. Who would have ever thought that a group of immature, bruise-seeking psychopaths could create not one, not two, but three huge hit movies. This all started with a small TV show on MTV (when I think MTV actually might have still shown some music). Finding a medium to display a combination of hilarity and vomit was a true find for these gentlemen.
So where do I begin? Is it the multiple water-to-the-face then punching from the other side? No. Is it the viewing of a gigantic man having an apple eaten out of his ass by a huge pig? No. Is it watching someone let scorpions chomp on his face? Maybe. How do people think of these things? The problem is not that these guys are immature. The problem is that they now have too much money. They are celebrities for doing all the things that 16 year old boys want to do but won't do because they will get yelled at by their mothers.
The freedom of speech quotient is thrown into a whole new blender with this cinematic experience. You thought Avatar was intense. Jesus. Watching a bubble get blown out of a guy's ass in 3D is something I truly never thought I'd see. The mere insolence of the mindsets of these men is incredible. But after all is said and done, these guys are just best friends.
Now, getting to the movie. This was an entertainment fest. Documentary-style movies are always (or mostly always) about some horrible situation happening in a country. Whether it's The Cove about dolphins in Japan, or Super Size Me about fat people in America, documentaries usually focus on the negative aspect of some subject. This movie kind of did, too. However, the negative aspect of the subject (being a man's brain) was altered and displayed for all the world to see. There was a 2 minute scene of Bam just peeing on people. Who wouldn't love to do that?
To take us out of the reality of our lives for just a small 90 minutes is truly unimaginable. But, for some reason, this movie brought out the happiness that everyone seems to forget. Forget about your job, or lack there of. Forget about your money, or lack there of. Watch stupid guys do stupid things for your benefit (and the benefit of their wallets of course). What kind of country are we that let these morons make $50 million in 3 days? I want that job. As long as I don't get kicked in the nuts, it'll be fine.
This is a truly entertainment-only movie. It brings us out of our real world and enters us into a world where it's okay to drive a scooter out the front window of a store. It's okay to use a Lamborghini and floss to pull out a man's tooth. I'm fine with that. Seeing this movie made me realize how dumb we really are. But the guys up on the screen are geniuses. "Hey, let's do stupid crap to ourselves and charge people $10 to see it". And you know what? It works.
Stars (out of 10): 7 (for merely entertainment value)
2010
Directed by: Jeff Tremaine
Starring (Really? Starring?): Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O
And here it goes. How to write a review of a collection of idiotic stunts? Idiotic is not quite the word, though. Epic. Yes, epic. Who would have ever thought that a group of immature, bruise-seeking psychopaths could create not one, not two, but three huge hit movies. This all started with a small TV show on MTV (when I think MTV actually might have still shown some music). Finding a medium to display a combination of hilarity and vomit was a true find for these gentlemen.
So where do I begin? Is it the multiple water-to-the-face then punching from the other side? No. Is it the viewing of a gigantic man having an apple eaten out of his ass by a huge pig? No. Is it watching someone let scorpions chomp on his face? Maybe. How do people think of these things? The problem is not that these guys are immature. The problem is that they now have too much money. They are celebrities for doing all the things that 16 year old boys want to do but won't do because they will get yelled at by their mothers.
The freedom of speech quotient is thrown into a whole new blender with this cinematic experience. You thought Avatar was intense. Jesus. Watching a bubble get blown out of a guy's ass in 3D is something I truly never thought I'd see. The mere insolence of the mindsets of these men is incredible. But after all is said and done, these guys are just best friends.
Now, getting to the movie. This was an entertainment fest. Documentary-style movies are always (or mostly always) about some horrible situation happening in a country. Whether it's The Cove about dolphins in Japan, or Super Size Me about fat people in America, documentaries usually focus on the negative aspect of some subject. This movie kind of did, too. However, the negative aspect of the subject (being a man's brain) was altered and displayed for all the world to see. There was a 2 minute scene of Bam just peeing on people. Who wouldn't love to do that?
To take us out of the reality of our lives for just a small 90 minutes is truly unimaginable. But, for some reason, this movie brought out the happiness that everyone seems to forget. Forget about your job, or lack there of. Forget about your money, or lack there of. Watch stupid guys do stupid things for your benefit (and the benefit of their wallets of course). What kind of country are we that let these morons make $50 million in 3 days? I want that job. As long as I don't get kicked in the nuts, it'll be fine.
This is a truly entertainment-only movie. It brings us out of our real world and enters us into a world where it's okay to drive a scooter out the front window of a store. It's okay to use a Lamborghini and floss to pull out a man's tooth. I'm fine with that. Seeing this movie made me realize how dumb we really are. But the guys up on the screen are geniuses. "Hey, let's do stupid crap to ourselves and charge people $10 to see it". And you know what? It works.
Stars (out of 10): 7 (for merely entertainment value)
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
It's Kind of a Funny Story
It's Kind of a Funny Story
2010
Directed by: Anna Boden
Starring: Keir Gilchrist, Zach Galifinakis
Watching this movie, a lot of thoughts ran through my head. Kind of how his head was. The main character's. Am I writing in fragmented sentences? Sorry, my thoughts are just kind of spilling out like a tipped over can of paint. You know, the kind that is impossible to clean up. When the can spills out, it seems that you are the only one that will ever have to deal with that paint spill. A movie about depression. No, a comedy. No, a dramedy that created a complete sense of unrealistic possibility that it actually made me upset.
Become depressed. Check yourself into a mental institution. Decide it's not for you. Get forced to stay for a week. Meet a beautiful girl. Fall in love. Have your life completely figured out in a matter of five days. Yeah, that's realistic. It sounds like a normal life flipped upside down by fantasy and wonder. Is this what we've come to? Fantasy, wonder. What are these words, and why do they sound so...stupid? No, redundant. We plague ourselves in this abstract society of falling in love and finding the true meaning in one hour and forty minutes. Is that all it really takes to find happiness?
Movies make us happy. Movies make us sad. They make us laugh. They make us cry. They make us scared, or angry, or anything from the above. What did this movie do? It lied. It created a sense of possibility that is nowhere near the realm of reality. Realm of reality. I like that. The possible exoneration of anything stressful. The main character had good points. After a certain age, life doesn't seem to matter anymore. It's all about the bills, the loans, the girls, the pressure of being successful.
Fine by me. True story actually. The antiquated realization of a depressed soul is divided in this movie. His character was not suicidal. He would not be in a mental hospital for any reason. Was he sad that his parents put too much pressure on him? Was he sad that his best friend was more smooth with ladies than he was? Sure. That's what made him depressed? No. The human brain gets depressed due to lack of stimulant. He was blaming his friends, his parents, his teachers, for his problems.
Grow up. Everyone has problems. And you know what? Those problems will never be solved in five days staying voluntarily in a mental hospital. The growing unrealistic possibilities of the movie are the flaw. The characters were fine. The outside stories were fine. Finding a happy medium between reality and fantasy seemed a little too difficult. Don't give people false hope. It'll probably just make them more depressed than your characters that get to run around the hospital like free birds.
Stars (out of 10): 6
2010
Directed by: Anna Boden
Starring: Keir Gilchrist, Zach Galifinakis
Watching this movie, a lot of thoughts ran through my head. Kind of how his head was. The main character's. Am I writing in fragmented sentences? Sorry, my thoughts are just kind of spilling out like a tipped over can of paint. You know, the kind that is impossible to clean up. When the can spills out, it seems that you are the only one that will ever have to deal with that paint spill. A movie about depression. No, a comedy. No, a dramedy that created a complete sense of unrealistic possibility that it actually made me upset.
Become depressed. Check yourself into a mental institution. Decide it's not for you. Get forced to stay for a week. Meet a beautiful girl. Fall in love. Have your life completely figured out in a matter of five days. Yeah, that's realistic. It sounds like a normal life flipped upside down by fantasy and wonder. Is this what we've come to? Fantasy, wonder. What are these words, and why do they sound so...stupid? No, redundant. We plague ourselves in this abstract society of falling in love and finding the true meaning in one hour and forty minutes. Is that all it really takes to find happiness?
Movies make us happy. Movies make us sad. They make us laugh. They make us cry. They make us scared, or angry, or anything from the above. What did this movie do? It lied. It created a sense of possibility that is nowhere near the realm of reality. Realm of reality. I like that. The possible exoneration of anything stressful. The main character had good points. After a certain age, life doesn't seem to matter anymore. It's all about the bills, the loans, the girls, the pressure of being successful.
Fine by me. True story actually. The antiquated realization of a depressed soul is divided in this movie. His character was not suicidal. He would not be in a mental hospital for any reason. Was he sad that his parents put too much pressure on him? Was he sad that his best friend was more smooth with ladies than he was? Sure. That's what made him depressed? No. The human brain gets depressed due to lack of stimulant. He was blaming his friends, his parents, his teachers, for his problems.
Grow up. Everyone has problems. And you know what? Those problems will never be solved in five days staying voluntarily in a mental hospital. The growing unrealistic possibilities of the movie are the flaw. The characters were fine. The outside stories were fine. Finding a happy medium between reality and fantasy seemed a little too difficult. Don't give people false hope. It'll probably just make them more depressed than your characters that get to run around the hospital like free birds.
Stars (out of 10): 6
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)