Hot Tub Time Machine (2010)

Somewhere, deep in the bowels of the corporate offices at MGM Studios, there is a paralegal. That paralegal works in the Trademarks Dept. One day, a brief came across his or her desk, and the outer edge of the manila folder simply read: “Hot Tub Time Machine.” One can only envision the thoughts that must have run through their head: “I don’t get paid enough for this,” “Jesus, really, in this economy?”, or more likely, “I wonder if Rob Cordy’s going to be in it?”

Well apropos to this intern’s preponderance, he is! Coupled with John Cusak, Clark Duke, and an absolutely hilarious Craig Robinson, this “It’s a Wonderful Life” homage takes a tack through the old “What would you do if you were given a second chance” waters while still being the over-the-top R-rated comedy the classic 18-25 year old demographic is looking for.

Lou’s (Cordy) life is booze and banzai, a lost regard for anything sacred. His is a life of balding, sagging sadness. Adam (Cusak) has just been through a heavily contested divorce where she even took the TV. The TV! Even when it had a red dot on it! Nick (Robinson) has a love of animals, but is on the ass-end of a terrible job. And Jacob (Duke), Adam’s nephew, is living in Adam’s basement, living out a Second Life, because, let’s face it, his first life is fat and dorky.

The three former best friends' lives are all at crossroads. They intersect on the self-destructive shenanigans of one. Lou accidently tries to kill himself. This results in an ill-conceived idea to travel to Kodiak Valley. This also results in a scene with a catheter that won’t easily be forgotten. Kodiak Valley is a ski resort where the men had spent their drug-addled youth ripping the mountain and getting laid. Things, however, are not what they used to be.

Kodiak Valley appears to be on the verge of bankruptcy. The rooms are in disrepair. Their creepy bell hop Phil (played with running gag perfection by Crispin Glover) is hilariously disfigured. The mountain is as broken as the men who are on it.

Ah, but what will these men do to relieve the pressures of the real world? A dip in the hot tub sounds nice. Combine some booze, Chernobly (you’ll see), a montage of swirling water, Chevy Chase, a giant bear, and a squirrel, and our anti-heros end up in 1986.

First off, there’s way too much of Rob Cordry’s ass in this movie. That’s neither a positive or a negative attribute, it’s just a stated fact. The pop culture references are cliché, but fantastic: “I can’t wait to go to prison to tell everyone I came back from the future and killed my father!”

“Alright, Terminator!”

This movie also nods its head to the trailblazers before it. Just having Crispin Glover in a movie about time travel to the 1980’s is enough to bring up visions of the Back to The Future trilogy. And with one of the characters flickering in and out of existence, Marty McFly would be proud. The Butterfly Effect gets it’s due. Hell, even Red Dawn gets an honorary and necessary mention.

Let’s not pretend anything about plot holes in a movie like this. There’s nothing to be said for that, though there are some continuity issues that were missed in editing. I won’t break into them, because… well, I mean, seriously? Are we really going to dissect “Hot Tub Time Machine” for plot holes and story inconsistency? The story is solid; it missed a few small points, but in the greater scheme of things, it works for a movie like this.

B+. Grab a towel, drop your pants, crack open some beers (or your favorite illegally imported Russian Nitronium-laced energy drink), and crank up the bubbles. You’re in for a fantastic dip in the ‘Tub.

Batman in Cinema - An Observation

Preface - This was written for a college class in '09. A simple compare-and-contrast paper.Moving this here for posterity.

In 1988, Tim Burton released the movie 'Batman' onto an unsuspecting public, and forever changed the face of the Batman series. With the subsequent sequel 'Batman Returns'¸ his dark, harrowing shooting style brought us a revised vision of that world with lead director Burton at the camera and actor Michael Keaton behind it as the lead protagonist. These two movies set the stage for the campy, ridiculous, and generally over-the-top sequels that would follow. While, in comparison to today’s Batman, Burton’s vision was clearly modeled against his own vision of film making and not the Batman universe and lore, the Joel Schumacher-funded train wrecks of the 1990’s known as 'Batman Forever' and 'Batman and Robin' nearly destroyed the franchise’s relevance. It was not until twenty years after Burton’s interpretation of Batman did the Dark Crusader get properly reintroduced to the world with 'Batman Begins' and the subsequent 2009 comic-book masterpiece, 'The Dark Knight'. There are clearly some differences between the two sets of movies that set them apart and make director Christopher Nolan’s works the superior, relevant Batman lore.

First, Batman would not be who he is without the money, skills, and psychological damage that shaped and defined Bruce Wayne. The first four movies moved through this plot line as a side point, unnecessary to the action and plot progression. The Nolan films plumbed the depths of Bruce Wayne’s psyche, explained not just that he was Batman, but why he is Batman. The stability of actors also dimmed the effectiveness of the personal trauma Bruce experienced in the pre-2000 films. Shifting between Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, and lastly, George Clooney as Batman took away from the experience, and changed the element of delivery of emotion. With Christian Bale, current Batman, and director Nolan committed to take the series as far as DC Comics and Warner Brothers want to take the franchise, the consistency in vision and character presentation will make the gritty, realistic representation of Bruce Wayne and his broken alter ego a relevant portrayal for all time.

When Bruce Wayne slides into the Bat Cave and transforms into The Dark Knight, his defining characteristics are three things: His suit, his cowl, and his “wonderful toys,” as The Joker said in the very first movie. His best “toy” is his car, the ephemeral Batmobile, which every kid has ever wanted and can be identified on sight by hardcore and casual fans alike. In the 1988-1995 versions of the movie, the car is much like the other qualities of that generation’s Batman: over-the-top camp, and unexplained in feature or function. The 88-95 model Batmobile is a jet car, a rolling bullet-proof limousine with room for two and a plethora of tools and functions available at the press of a button. Compare this to the Tumbler, Nolan’s vision of a cast-aside Wayne Enterprises military project, stuck in a closet, until the heir to the company happens to find a surprisingly useful application of it in an urban environment. The Tumbler, this generation’s Batmobile, brings relevance and realism to an otherwise highly unexplainable vehicle used in the Batman Universe.

Batman’s suit was a point of contention when Batman and Robin came out. George Clooney is still embarrassed by that suit, which was less Bat-Suit and more stylized S&M gear. The suit was mostly leather, anatomically incorrect in all the wrong places, and had nipples. This was, and is, still a hilarious ode to just how ridiculous the costume design crew went with the outfits in the movie that nearly killed Batman forever. Contrast this against Batman Begins, where Bruce Wayne, digging through Wayne Enterprises’

Military Research facility, finds prototype body armor designed for use in military combat. The suit is designed for function and modified in the movie to support Batman in his urban endeavors. It has been argued in many tabloids, blogs, and other publications that this sequence was written into Batman Begins to help clear the palette of fans who were disturbed and saddened by the ridicule their beloved Dark Knight went through at the hands of Producer Schumacher and others.

In any story, there is no protagonist without an antagonist, seen or unseen. Jack Nicholson’s Joker was amazing for his time, a psychotic madman with a penchant for clown suits. His smile, presence, and sadistic goofiness made Burton’s presentation of Batman’s arch-enemy unlike any villain seen on film. Stealing another actor out of One Flew over the Cookoo’s Nest, Danny Devito scared and disturbed everyone who watched him as The Penguin. Noone can forget Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman, and the interplay between her and Keaton’s Batman. This is where Burton’s movies really outshine the Schumacher-produced films. Burton tookthe time to flesh out the characters, and really build the evil, nuanced, and crazy aspects of his villains. One low point for Burton was the poor decision to parade The Joker up and down Main Street to extremely bad ‘80’s music. Otherwise, Burton’s presentation of his antagonists was much more palatable than that of Jim Carrey’s spandex clad Riddler, Uma Thurman’s painfully over-the-top Poison Ivy, and Tommy Lee Jones’ ill-conceived Harvey “Two-Face” Dent.

All of these Batman villains pale to Nolan’s Rhaz Al-Gul and the unforgettable, tragic performance of Heath Ledger as a much darker, scarier, crazier and modestly hilarious revamp of The Joker. In the first of the reboot films, Batman Begins, a little known mentor-turned-villain from the Batman lore is introduced to audiences. Liam Neeson brought intensity to the role, giving Bale’s Batman a foil to operate against. The existence of Rhaz Al-Ghul explains the existence of Bruce Wayne’s abilities, and more so, the creation of Batman. Even more memorable than Neeson was The Scarecrow, a standard character in the Batman saga. With Nolan’s direction, CGI, and a well-written script, Scarecrow’s character was larger than life and exponentially darker and more disturbing than any of the villains before him.

Overshadowing all the villains in the Batman franchise that had come before him was Heath Ledger’s Joker. A character of limitless evil and sadism, it has been argued that Ledger’s Joker is the best villain of all times, not just the Batman series. Giving his last full measure to the art of acting, Ledger brought a squealing, variable tone to his voice and a haphazard lackadaisical mania to the Joker. His Joker was real, his Joker was insane, and his Joker had no campy misgivings to the matter. The Joker in The Dark Knight took a good Batman reboot, and made it amazing; magical even. Ledger posthumously won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in a genre that generally never wins Academy Awards for anything more than CGI or Audio work. This alone should be testament to amazing performance found in Ledger’s reinterpreted Joker.

From his original conception in 1939, Batman has been delivered in many forms: Comic books, television shows, movies, animated television shows, and video games. There have been many interpretations of Batman, his life, his world, and his enemies. There have been varying quality results of these interpretations. Clearly, Burton’s two first films helped whet the appetite of the cinema-going masses for Batman. Schumacher’s legacy in the Batman franchise is marked as well, if for all the wrong reasons. It can be argued that without Schumacher, there may have never been a desire to give the franchise a reboot. With that reboot, Batman fans were given the ultimate tribute: Nolan’s Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are the most realistic interpretations to date, and, as evidenced, the best.

Alice in Wonderland (in 3D) (2010)

“Who is this giant person?!” the Red Queen asks of Alice, naked and hiding behind a bush.

I was asking myself the same thing as the lights came up and the music went down. Previously in the week, my three-year-old and I had partaken in a refresher course of Disney’s 1951 version to refresh characters and story arc. My silly child thought we were watching it for entertainment value.

The story of the original Alice is a story of growing up; that nonsense gets a person nowhere, and that everything Alice supposes in exposition at the beginning of the animated film turns out to be flawed in execution. Her’s is a story, at its simplest, of growing up.

In the latest iteration of ‘Alice’, she’s older and coming out to society. There is a marriage proposal on the table. However, Alice, while older, is still aloof as ever. Those careless enough to not pay attention to the symbolism should take notice of a discussion about white roses, a set of twins, and an aunt. Tim Burton takes the moment to point these out in obvious fashion to those willing to observe.

Once Alice is confronted with the coming marriage proposal, her world begins to unravel. I would venture a guess that Alice has a disassociative disorder as her stress-coping mechanism. A good sign would be the metaphysical manifestation of a white rabbit moments after she learns that she’s going to be asked to be married in front of a large group of her “peers.”

So, like any good mentally-ill person dealing with feelings of anxiety and possible momentary agoraphobia, she bolts. The only way I can get away with a line like that is to understand those feelings with uncomfortable empathy. Panic can make a person do any number of odd behaviors, but Alice’s is reversion into a world she once knew but has since long forgot. She remembers this place only in dreams, and lands with a thud in a world once familiar but since changed and bent by the wills of a big-headed little Red Queen played fantastically by Helena Bonham Carter. My fears, after seeing the poster, was that Johnny Depp was going to channel his inner Michael Jackson again per his horrific Willy Wonka. I was thankfully and appreciatively wrong. He’s crazy in this movie, not stupid.

The movie’s simply OK. It is standard fair Tim Burton, adding his flair and twist to a world that seemed destined to be touched by him. The artistry and direction were excellent; this is definitely an upside-down world for an upside-down girl, and Burton took us there. I can say, however, that nothing will be lost if you avoid this movie in 3D. I found nothing gained to watching it with the glasses on. It is simply too soon to call 3D a fad, but after Avatar, I think studio and producer alike will beat this technology into the ground implementing it where it is simply unnecessary. I felt that with the action, illustration and environment in this movie, more is lost than gained utilizing 3D. Opinions will differ on this.

The Jabberwocky was fantasticly scary, and not in a good way. I was grateful my little girl didn’t have bad dreams, because this isn’t your Care Bears’ Jabberwocky. This is the real deal, and his life and death is graphic and horrible. Before taking small children, or those with active imaginations, I would encourage you to speak with others who have seen this movie.

I’m not personally moved by this movie. It was fun (The Hatter’s Futterwaken is not to be missed!), but it dared to take classical characters and reinvent them. I don’t think it succeeded. There’s even a name change of one particular place that takes so much more artistic license than I’m willing to give them. The movie was good enough. I would have preferred to catch on DVD, sans the glasses and the ticket price. It wasn’t the tender treatment of Alice I was expecting, it wasn’t the farcical nature of the world we know, and character utilization was unusual. New characters were introduced, the lore was changed, and the story was, to me, sub-par. I can’t call the movie “bad” per se, it just felt untrue to the original, be it the book or the animated film, and to me that’s a shame. Merely, it was more just disappointing.

The flowers growing during the credits were neat, though.

B. I liked it. I just wasn’t moved by it. Nothing new of long-standing value added to the Alice lore. With performances by Alan Rickman, Crispin Glover, and Anne Hathaway, it’s worth watching for what it is.

Shutter Island (2010)

I show you not Leonardo DiCaprio, star of the aforementioned title, but Sir Ben Kingsley, in the moment I started to feel as though I was understanding the subtext of the plot. I pointed out, in a blurt of inconsideration to the others watching, “… And that right there is the most important line in this movie."

For "Shutter Island" to be the length it was, every scene must have a purpose, either to give us subtle clues, or to seemingly to misdirect us from the truth. This moment, frozen here for posterity, is the connecting puzzle piece, a phrase uttered in passing that comes back to be the underlying plot device of the whole movie.

And I could not love it more.

If you’re not already aware, this movie is a thriller. Suspenseful, ever-changing, and based in a mental institution. It’s got all the elements of creepy just waiting to happen. However, there is no jumping gag, no camera angles to get things to pop out at you. No, there is a plot line, running its course, and generally unpredictable for the most part. There are the clues, and as with every psychological thriller, nothing is as it seems. I was expecting that. Anyone paying for a ticket for this movie should.

A woman has gone missing off an island mental institution. The island in and of itself is a fortress. No one can get in or out except at the ferry. Somehow, this woman slipped the walls, shoeless, and vanished into thin air. So the Federal Marshals were called. This is where Marshals Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio) and Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo) come in.

The performances were fantastic. I cannot imagine another person playing Dr. Cawley (Kingsley), as he delivers the grace and understanding of a psychiatrist way ahead of his time. His philosophies on mental health are controversial to the time, when pharmacology is just developing and psycho-surgery has been in full swing for some many, many years. His unorthodox approach to psychiatry makes him highly regarded, and highly suspicious. Without giving too much away, he is a genius beyond regard in his field. In a time when a violent offender would be lobotomized and handed a mop and a drool bucket, he takes an alternate tack.

Ruffalo is excellent as Teddy’s sidekick. His role is complicated by the events that play out, and he takes a pretty steady course to his part. He’s the perfect foil; cliché in all the best ways for the role he needed to have. His part in all of it is relatively innocent, yet the most necessary. His unassuming nature and genuine loyalty to his boss, Teddy, makes for his character arc’s full transition and complete understanding.

A favorite scene for its own merit pits Teddy and the Warden against each other in conversation. The warden leans over and asks him what he would would do if the warden tried to bite his face off? This, in and of its self, is strangely hilarious and gives an otherwise out-of-place chuckle.

DiCaprio just delivers. It is almost underwhelming to watch him act. There’s a mystique to his characters; you know the man, the actor, will not take simple roles. So automatically, and maybe unfairly, the bar is automatically set higher. DiCaprio long since disappears into the wet, determined and “violent” man Teddy Daniels is expected to be. Teddy Daniels gets the job done; he gets his man, and he’ll cut through the red tape to get there. He and the job are one, and he’s not one to not finish the job.

But there’s more. There’s a reason Teddy came out to this island. There’s a reason Teddy’s here, now, at this moment. His assignment is not by pure circumstance. You’ll just have to wait and see.

Prediction: Kingsley gets a nod or at least honorable mention for his role in the awards nominations.

A+. Psychologically deft and suspenseful. A mind-bender, turning into a completely different movie the second time through. What do you choose to believe? You would do good to keep Kleenex close for the third act.

Das Q: My Name is Bruce (2007)

Bruce Campbell is the perfect B-Movie actor. Great chin, strong voice, co-opted by a giant rubber monster.

This movie has fun with a genre that has fun. From the moment you press play, you know this is going to be ridiculous. When the God of Bean Curd, Guan-Di, is accidently awoke in a sleepy little Anywhere town, the perfect antihero to defeat this ancient Chinese menace is none other than Bruce Campbell! Campbell helped write, produce, and direct this movie with some of his buddies in his Evil Dead days, and even has Ted Raimi in there in a couple of comic bit pieces. It’s an homage to his illustrious “career,” from the permanent trailer to the hooker with a penis. The things stardom bring, right?

There’s nothing quite like a happy ending, and “My Name is Bruce” delivers it. With extra bean curd.

B. If you need to know why this was scored this way, you’re missing the point.

The Secret of Kells (2009)

A Saint Patty’s Days tribute:

Here is a movie I made no claim to knowing anything about before I sat down to it. I had no basis for observation except that of a critical movie viewer, watching for substance and meaning as well as entertainment. This is reviewed solely from the eyes of a man who enjoys ‘Cowboy Bebop’, loved ‘The Princess and The Frog’, and regularly enjoys an animated film such as ‘Up’, ‘The Incredibles’, and a pretty selective taste in anime. I regularly take in these jewels vicariously through the eyes of my daughter, whom I have been steadily introducing to more and more feature-length animation.

Watching the Oscars, the standard fare of animated movies I had seen throughout the year were nominated and shown.

But then, there in the mix, was a pair of two eyes through brush. Those eyes were the first mystery to me. I jotted the title down, and anticipated a chance to catch the movie. I purposefully do everything I can to avoid reviews of these movies, which is really counter to the trade I have here. I wanted to see how an otherwise unknown Oscar-nominated animated film fared against the titles I already knew.
I was pleasantly surprised at what I got.

‘The Secret of Kells’ is based on The Book of Kells, a Christian relic of the 9^th century that was created by monks at Kells Abbey. This setting is the background for the story unfolding in the movie.

The story follows a little boy, Brendan, and the discovery of his love of “illumination.” The backdrop of the threat of Viking attack puts his reasonably overprotective uncle (voiced by Brendan Gleeson, one of my favorite actors) on edge. He is leading the charge to fortify the abbey the monks live in. While doing so, a master illuminator from another abbey arrives on the Kells doorstep. And so begins our little hero’s quest of discovery.

There is a small quest, which will soon reveal the owner of those aforementioned eyes. There are Vikings, wolves, a snake god, and moments of visceral honesty all wrapped up in this surprise animated classic. The animation is sharp; different and initially perplexing to look at. Once used to the style, it really became quite beautiful, interesting; different. I initially watched this with abandon, no understanding of the history behind the story. I’ll admit to having no context to judge the movie on. However, after researching the back history, I found the movie to be very true to source, and give light to the sequence of events, making this more myth than story. It’s a fantastic little film, and a worthy contender against all the big studio productions. I’m a better person for seeing it. If you care to learn the history behind the story, you will be, too.

A. A colorful, enlightening story behind a piece of Christian history. Honest and interesting, beautiful and moving, this gem is worth a watch if you have the cultural background to understand it.

Das Q: The Lovely Bones (2009)

I hate Stanley Tucci. A lot.

There. I said it. He does a fantastic job playing roles where I want nothing more than an icicle to stab him in the neck. But I digress.

If you have children, don’t see this movie. If you have daughters, remember there’s a 7-day waiting period on guns. If you have a pulse, leave after the book is found. You’ll understand what that means, and you’ll understand why I say that after you sit through the wayward sap that ensues following that moment.

I enjoyed (and by enjoyed, I mean had my emotions toyed with like a cat plays with a mouse before severing it jugular) the movie right up until the end. Peter Jackson started strong, kept the intensity on, and drove it, like a car chase scene, right off the cliff and into the slow-motion segway before the crash and explosion at the bottom of the cliff.

Fast-paced, well acted, and then launches off the cliff into the waiting sinkhole(You’ll understand that later) of melodrama.

B+. (Great effort, lacks a strong finish)

The Crazies (2010)

“Holy crap, that was crazy!”

It wasn’t intended at the time, but that was a bit of a ridiculous exclamation I made walking out of the movie, you know, ‘The Crazies.’ Starring Tim Olyphant, the movie was a fantastic jump-fest right from the start. Having seen the commercials, and watched some of the brief action sequences in those, I had to chuckle then raise an eyebrow in surprise. The movie makes no bones about jumping right into the action. Less than three minutes in, we have a satellite snapping pictures from the sky of a lazy little town called Ogden Marsh, and shortly there after a crazed ex-drunk lunatic coming out of left field (which I suspect is an ode to the phrase)on a baseball diamond , pump-action shotgun in tow. He looks like he just got out of the sewer, and whenever Smell-O-Vision becomes a technical reality, he’ll probably smell like it too. I was NOT expecting the gunshot wound to the skull like Olyphant’s character has to deliver before you’ve had time to process your first few bites of post-light-dimming gorging.

It was not until after I saw the credits roll did I realize that this movie is actually a remake of the original in 1973. George Romero, classic zombie film producer/writer/director and otherwise plutonic necrophiliac, originally produced the very first. With the success of Zach Snyder’s “Dawn of the Dead,” Romero has figured out that remakes can strike box-office gold if he can translate the zombies and other ill-to-dos to the big screen for this generation. “The Crazies” is his latest producer roll, giving the directorial rights again to an up-and-comer, Breck Eisner. The remake of the 1977 classic, “Dawn of The Dead”, was given to, at the time, a little known director by the name of Zach Snyder. Snyder delivered such a raw and visceral remake, the new “Dawn of The Dead” still stands out as one of Romero’s highest grossing films. Zach Snyder won fame from his execution of the script, and has since gone on to direct a little known movie, 300, and a classic adaptation of ‘The Watchmen.’ I believe “The Crazies,” once embraced by the general public, will go the same route.

But enough on Snyder. This movie shines as a “jumper,” employing camera tricks and otherwise wicked sequences of events that make a grown man such as myself jump and squeal in utter surprise. Hell, there are even moments you know it’s coming, and being lost in the sequence of events, concern for the characters, or the otherwise loud-screaming woman three seats from you, you still get caught with that moment where your hands come up and you heart races and you’re immediately wrapped back up in the suspense of the moment.

Another aspect that really interests me as a watcher of horror movies is the aspect of the virus/biological weapon/unknown infection idea. The classic horror movies didn’t try to explain themselves. “The Crazies,” along with latest zombie horror flicks, has a catalyst that starts things into motion. In “The Crazies,” there is a plane crash that occurs about a week before the events start to place. The story arc is fascinating and eerie, a group of hunters finding the distended remains of what looks to be an Army pilot. “Where there’s a pilot,” says our antagonist, “there’s a plane.”

The spooky really starts to kick up at that point, the cinematography, dialogue, and acting notching up the fear to another level. Olyphant’s character, David, accompanied by a deputy and someone driving the boat go out into an aquifer to search out the plane in question. Someone had reported a loud crash about a week ago, but the plot makes this man out to be a chronic liar, and it was summarily disregarded. There’s a moment, that even as I write this, I get goose-bumps.

David signals to stop the boat. There is a momentary pause for effect as his eyes peruse the waters. His eyes light up in enlightenment and a cursory fear. The boat is coasting to a stop. Another character states “We haven’t found the plane.” Olyphant disagrees and has an intense look into the water.

“Yes we have. We’re right over it.”

The other characters look around, still trying to figure out what’s in the water.

“And it’s huge…”

Camera fades back and up, and the boat is swallowed up in the shadowy outline of the plane lying there in the water. This is a tanker or other subsequent transport aircraft and it’s HUGE.

There’s a clear revelation that something is amiss in Ogden Marsh. This is clearly a military aircraft, and there has been nothing in the news, no one investigating the situation. The camera zooms out further, out of the atmosphere and into the eye of a camera on a satellite. A simple phrase runs across the terminal.

Begin containment procedures.

As an avid zombie movie fan and otherwise post-apocalyptic stories, this gave me a giant grin as I sat there. The first thought in my head was “It’s ON.” This movie has me. This movie is running a unique path through the virus-infected zombie subset, and this is as fresh as it gets. Danny Boyle’s “28 Days Later” reinvented the zombie creature feature, and I believe “The Crazies” takes that idea and notches it up a few levels. In Boyle’s game-changer, the threat was solely the zombies, with a sub-plot of a military influence. In “The Crazies,” the military plays an equally insidious and unapologetic killing machine as well. The duality of the threats, coupled with shotgun-wielding rednecks, the threat of infection among the group, a couple sub-plots that play out in character interactions, and the craziest car wash/Hellcat missile sequence you’ll ever see on film makes this to be a FANTASTIC movie.

A.

Das Q: The Boon Dock Saints 2: All Saints Day (2009)

It is with a heavy heart that I pronounce the Brothers dead. Did I just spoil that for you?

No.

Well, to be honest with you, I don’t know. Maybe they die in the end, maybe they live on in some sort of infamy. I couldn’t tell you, because about fifteen minutes into the movie, I stopped it, swore incoherently under my breath, and put the original back on. I couldn’t take the dialogue, the acting, the story.

Why?

Because there was none. The only shining star in this movie was Julie Benz, what I saw of her, fresh off her ending story arc in Dexter. She made me keep the movie on for longer than I would have normally.

Troy Duffy, you have officially made me turn off a movie. That has not happened to me before. I was so angered with what Duffy was doing to these characters, I had to cleanse my pallet and turn on the original. For me The Saints, as The Dropkick Murphys sing in “The Green Fields of France”, will “be forever nineteen.” As in 1999, the year of the original release.

It is appropriate that the song is a dirge.

The Road (2009)

This review has been haunting me for weeks. After seeing The Road, the feel-good movie of the year, I was depressed for the better part of a week. There were not words for the emotions it conjures; the world dead and a man who’s only warrant is to keep his ten year old son alive for no other reason than to live on. The haunting performances and the world in which these characters had me in an introspective funk for days, pondering, the real meaninglessness of the movement of our daily lives when faced with true and final adversity. It is rare that a movie will take a man down a notch; make him stop and reevaluate everything that is important in lieu of loosing everything.

The story follows “The Man,” played by Viggo Mortensen, as he is named in the Cormac McCarthy book by the same name. The world has died, for whatever reason, and he and The Boy are surviving together ten years on. The world is dead, The Man explaining in a voiceover: “There was a bright light, followed by a series of loud booms.” The movie, and the book I’m told, takes no time to explain why the world is dying; it simply is, and these two are the only thing each other have. They take to the road, The Man’s wife suggesting that if they move south, they can get somewhere where it is much warmer.

The movie, from my understanding, is far bleaker than the book. Nothing has survived. Cannibalism is running rampant. There is no food; our protagonists are eternally hungry. They scavenge and they move and they hide from the prowling marauders of cannibals that move across the countryside.

Really though, these plot devices are really only used to show the relationship between The Man and The Boy. The Man is eternally suspicious of everyone, anticipating the worst for him and his son at every human interaction. The Boy, born into this world, has a far less sinister observation of the world, and yearns for human contact outside his father. The dynamic puts the two at odds. As the two move across the landscape, the father attempts to instill into his son the lessons of a world long since dead. This is counter to the reality of the world they live in now.

In one particular scene, The Man tries to explain to The Boy what a Christmas tree is. The Boy, born into a world that knows no Christmas, looks at him blankly. What would be to us a charming nostalgic moment demonstrates the disconnects between realities; The Man trying to hang onto parts of his world, and The Boy trying to process the reality that history, as we know it, is dead.

Another moment finds them on the beach, looking out at the water. The Boy asks “What’s on the otherside?” The Man simply answers: “Nothing.” There is no need for a lesson here; it has no use to their current survival.

This movie makes you think. This movie challenges you. The current fad of Armageddon end-of-the-world movies is supplemented by Mortensen’s intensely personal and emotionally wrecking performance. There is a whole sequence of flashbacks regarding Charlize Theron that will emotionally crush you. I didn’t have a moment of disbelief when watching a new star in the making, Kodi Smith-Mcfee. There is a story that the boy got the part by recreating the scene where The Man shows The Boy how to commit suicide by putting a .45 in his mouth.

Yeah. It’s that kind of smiles and sunshines that keep this movie going. There is a hook at the end of this movie that has led me personally to much speculation. There is discussion by The Man discussing what happens when they dream. Pay particular attention to this at the end. I have theories, but I will not spoil here.

All in all, the end is worth the means. Take a few hours and travel “The Road.” You may find yourself reconsidering what is important to you, and anything that can do that is worth a watch.

A. Moving. Disturbing. Lost in the world that Director John Hillcoat brings to life, you’re with these two as you can’t help but hope for them through the gray.

Crazy Heart (2009)

This one is just in time for the Oscars:

To all my hard-livin’ friends in the honkey-tonks and dives, I raise a glass and a review. This next one here was written just for you.

I did everything I could to avoid finding out about what “Crazy Heart” was about. When I had heard Jeff Bridges had given an Oscar-nominated performance, like every other male in the 18-25…ish demographic, I wanted to know what The Dude had done. Or, El Duderino if you’re, well, you know.

What I discovered was nothing less than the dusty jewel of what I can only imagine every country singer wishes to capture in the words and music of the art they perform. This story, this journey of Bad Blake, a man apart, spoke volumes to anyone who has ever called a honkey-tonk dive a home and fifth of the cheapest sour mash whiskey a blanket. This movie empathizes with those who have traded, as the song goes, ”wedding bells for the sound of clinking glass”. This movie hazards an observation of the most talented among us, the artistic undercurrent of those who lived life the hardest and sucked deep at the dusty wind of a spring morning and were chewed up by the demons they made their bets with. These poor trubadors just never took the time to die, roaming the countryside, singing their songs of truth, and love and pain.

“Crazy Heart” takes a strong, hard look at the life of a man lived in regret, seeking some redemption for the mistakes he’s made and some inspiration to harness what he once had into something new. Saturated with whiskey, women, and more talent than any one human deserves, he’s meandering through life, failed marriages and relationships scattering the countryside. His strength is his charm, but so is his weakness. He’s an entertainer, a consummate performer and a tribute to this trade. Even if he does stumble off a stage to puke mid-song.

With a surprising performance from Maggie Gyllenhall, sudden “what the Hell?!” moment(s) from otherwise movie bad boy Colin Ferrel, and an accapella from none other than Robert Duvall, it’s a heart-warming and heart-breaking ride through the life of a man who’s most prized possession is his classic guitars and his ’78 Chevrolet Suburban, ‘Bessie’. Anyone who’s known anybody with too much talent and too much time, with a good heart but an old, sad soul, will understand this movie on a different level.

The added bonus of the movie is Jeff Bridges does all his own singing and playing of the guitar. The same for an aforementioned character. I was actually a little distracted by that question, and it made it all the more powerful when I realized that it truly was Jeff Bridges letting loose on the ballads. The music director and an executive producer on the movie is none other than T-Bone Burnett, the great Nashville record producer (he’s produced many number one hits and was once married to Shania Twain). He wrote and produced almost all the music in the movie, and the quality shows. Bridges lent his voice, and there wasn’t a question to the validity of his ability. The man has chops.

So does this movie.

A. Jeff Bridges delivers with a surprise supporting cast and the heart-breaking truth prevails over any Hollywood dream.

Das Q: Where The Wild Things Are (2009)

I enjoyed Spike Jonze’s work on it, it just was NOT what I was expecting. The kid’s subconscious and the manifestation of all the creatures as his insecurities. Was not expecting that, and I respected Jonez (and Maurice Sendak, obviously) for going that direction. For a long while, I thought the film was meandering and pointless, but it really had a strong underlying theme of the pain of being a kid and growing up. I really had to think about it to process, and it took on a whole new meaning, albeit too late in the movie to really “like” the movie. I understood it at last, but didn’t really enjoy it.

Again, the thought I kept having as I left the theater: unexpected. Perhaps a second viewing in a year will see how it holds up.

The Rocker (2008)

There are a few movies that I wished I had made the effort to support the film in the theatre. Joe Dirt is the one that comes most to mind. That, and ‘Blades of Glory’. Maybe it’s just me, but there are just some ads for movies that turn me off to the idea of spending hard-earned cash to watch casual Hollywood formulaic drivel.

I just finished ‘The Rocker’ with Rainn Wilson. Perhaps I’m still a bit out of sorts from a late Friday night, but I liked it.

I know.

The movie is simple enough. Old rocker gets kicked out of band at the height of their popularity. Old rocker moves in with family to fall back on. New rockers trying to put together a little band to play at the Prom. Conveniently, position Old rocker used to have opens in new band from a mishaps regarding brownies and markers. Through a series of montages, old rocker joins new band, band goes through ups and downs, band comes out victorious, and we all learn a moral lesson somewhere along the way.

That, and gloriously cute girl-next-door Emma Stone is pouty and cute throughout. Christina Applegate delivers an unexpected performance, and then there’s Rain Wilson.

I’ve got to admit I’m not a huge fan of Rain Wilson’s work on The Office. What I’ve seen of the show has left me underwhelmed with his aloof, over-confident sort of comedy. There are moment in “The Rocker” where that shines through, and it can grate on the nerves. However, that said, he has his serious moments, interspersed with a lower-key physical comedy and more facial, reactionary humor that plays a bit better. It’s Jim Carrey on ‘In Living Color’, but the physical comedy toned down and the outfits glaringly loud.

I can’t fairly state that this movie is good, or even original in its execution. There’s not really a whole lot to say about the plot; it’s easy to guess and easy to pick apart. It is, however, a great capture of a few key performances that really carry the lacking plot on its back. Rainn Wilson: Rock on.

B+. Good effort, fun but foo-foo. Rainn Wilson shines with a good supportive cast.

Spiderman 3 (2007)

(Originally posted to grioghar.blogger.com May 4th, 2007. Posted here to capture all reviews into one place.)

What a steaming pile of crap that movie was. It was heavy-handed, emotionally devoid, melodramatic, jingoistic in moments, and Emo Peter Parker really just sent it over the top in utter ridiculousness. There were several points in the movie where everyone was laughing or groaning, or even rolling their eyes and saying “whaaat?”, when it was meant to be a serious, emotional moment.

I personally was lost about 35 minutes before the end, and wanted it desperately to be over. I stormed out the back pissed and yelling. People were getting mad at me as I swore at the movie. I didn’t care. Some girl was like “well, I liked it,” and all I could snap back was “You would.” I was just so mad I gave up good money, time, and sleep to watch what I could have ripped from Netflix.

I almost think Sam Raimi MEANT to make this drivel. My guess is he wanted out of the Spiderman contract so he could have his schedule open for The Hobbit if New Line can’t figure out what they’re doing with Peter Jackson. My gut makes me hope that that was the case, and not the latter, that Sam Raimi ACTUALLY BELIEVED this was a good movie.

The good parts of this movie were, suprisingly, James Franco (Harry/The Hobgoblin), and Topher Grace (Eddie Brock/Venom). I’ve frowned on James Franco as a pretty-boy wanna-be actor, especially considering his previous jobs between Spiderman movies. Here, finally, he really comes into his own. His character really makes the movie, really brings to life the torn psyche of Harry’s good and bad side, and how he chooses to balance it. Not to mention the RIDICULOUSLY cool action sequence between him and Parker in the movie’s first act.

Topher Grace knocks this character out of the park. The smarmy, ambitious Eddie Brock was nailed on the head with Topher. His alter ego in the form of Venom needed MUCH more screen time. I’m crossing my fingers and hoping that someone with some pull at Sony Pictures recognizes that Eric from That 70’s Show could have his own film franchise using Venom’s character. I have no misconception that they will miss this little jewel they found in their hand and throw it away with the detritus left over when the Spiderman 3 series enthusiasm cools, and people start debating which three-quel was worse, X-Men, Spiderman, or Godfather?

I don’t think Transformers will be blockbuster hit my inner 8-year-old hopes it to be. The last good movie Michael Bay directed was ‘The Rock’. I find myself enthusiastically looking at the Pirate’s three-quel with a faded hope. I didn’t even really LIKE the Pirates of The Caribbean movies, but I thought they were OK. Now I look to them as the saving grace in summer blockbusters.

Pirates of The Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

(This was originally posted in May 27th, 2007 at grioghar.blogger.com Moving the text here to capture all my reviews in one place.)

This is why I have to write the stuff down while I’m still angry.

Let’s start. Opening. Allusion to Bush’s Patriot Act. “There will temporarily be a loss of rights, such as right to a lawyer.” Welcome to heavy-handed. Anyone caught cavorting with a pirate, talking to a pirate, talking LIKE a pirate, or otherwise wearing an eye-patch with a wooden leg for Halloween will be murdered with a cold blood thirst people are being murdered like in the streets of Baghdad. Pirate is metaphor for terrorist, and the British Gub’ment is a metaphor for G-Dub. Gay? Check.

“They’re singing… Good.”

Blah blah, I’m Chow Yun Fat, and these writers and directors want me to over-act. Sweet. And where’s my fucking steam? Better question: who cares? The chick was shot in the head. It was as if she was going to get some sort of vengeance, instead you got fake hate. So angry!

Barbosa was foilrific in these scenes. Comedy AND explanation.

Let’s see if we can confuse the hell out of all the players here. I plan to write this as disjointedly as the movie through around plot twists, betrayals, agonizingly trying to be clever and confusing all at the same time, without a whole lot of success in doing any of the aforementioned in a reasonable execution.

The title was “At World’s End”, when, in all actuality, only the first of three acts spent any time there, and that was negliable. I kept hearing Ed Norton from Fight Club when I was watching Jack’s nose. “I am Jack’s Smelling Nose.” That scene insensed me. Gore, Bruckheimer, and God knows who else said “Hey, what can we do to oversaturate the crowd with as much Jack Sparrow as possible? Hey, let’s have 2 MILLION Jacks, like they did with that Agent Smith guy, and make them do all kinds of crazy shit in a hallucination? Call those guys that did those Matrix movies and see if we can borrow that old software!”

Barbosa made no sense going all maniacal as they were about to fall of the edge. And what did the crew expect? They were just going to float up to Davy Jones’ Locker (which, in lore, is not some sandy joint, but THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN) and the natives would run out to greet them? “You’ve doomed us all!” a shipmate screams out at Barbosa, to which I couldn’t help think, “And you expected any less at the ‘World’s End?’” I thought. And like THAT boat was sea-worthy. I wouldn’t put that out on our lake in a high wind, let alone, THE SEA.

WHY did Swan’s dad die? Because they didn’t want to keep up with him through the plot, so they threw him over. And then “She canno leave da boot,” and yet Jack can flip the boat, guys can fall off, and that’s OK.

WHY was Davy Jones’ heart blowing up such a big deal. If the heart died, Davy Jones…what? Died? Wait, that’s not right, because you have to stab the heart to kill him. Oh, wait, but The Flying Dutchman MUST have a Captain. So… If Davy Jones died by a canon shot at the chest… Then who captains The Dutchman? Plot hole as big as the hole in Davy’s chest where his heart used to be.

I grow weary just thinking about this, and I’m not even halfway done.

If Davy Jones can move through time, space, and water like he did to visit Calypso, couldn’t he set up a plot to steal his chest back? Waiiiiit, that wouldn’t make sense.

Orlando Bloom, please stop talking. And “Well, I guess it always belonged to you. Keep it safe?” The melodrama had me rolling my eyes. By that point, the movie had lost me, so maybe the line was delivered with some acting talent, but I was too see-sick to notice. Yes, I spelled it that way intentionally.

Why didn’t Calypso destroy the Black Pearl, The Flying Dutchman, all the Pirate Lords (Who were RIDICULOUS), and the whole British armada? “They shall feel my fury” was melodrama when Calypso, you know, tried to sink, you know TWO ships in the whole sea of hundreds.

When the Black Pearl and The Flying Dutchman destroy the Flagship of the British Navy, and the rest scatter, I rolled my eyes and wanted the pain to end. It wouldn’t for another 25 minutes.

Thank God this series is over. From Disneyland ride to pop culture in 5 years, one can only hope they don’t go all George Lucas on us and decide to make the first three prequels. Jack Sparrow as a little boy, rescued from Rum Island, growing into his pirate abilities, influenced by an older, more clever deckhand named Barbosa. Come to think of it, THAT might have more potential.

Superman Returns (2006)

(Originally posted at grioghar.blogspot.com on June 28th, 2006. This is my very first movie review ever put online. Moved here for posterity.)

In the same way Christopher Nolan reinvented the Batman franchise, Bryan Singer has made Superman a relevant movie franchise again. Singer, poised with his co-producers and writers, has brought Superman back from a 19-year hiatus from the silver screen with all the integrity, emotion, action and competency we've all come to expect from a comic-book-to-big-screen adaptation. The movie length was pleasantly unnoticeable, initially annoying to me to discover it was a lengthy 2 hours, 37 minutes. The movie's pace, from galloping action segwaying into emotional sentiment never found me checking my phone's clock for the redemption of the popcorn stand (read: Pixar's Cars).

The CG was the best I've seen this summer, with the singular exception of Pixar's summer smash. A sequence involving two airplanes coupled together was arguably the coolest cinematic CG sequence I've seen this summer, if ever. I won't go into detail as not to reveal plot or action, but I found once the action had subsided, I had to scoot back into my seat.

Another item of interest in this scene was something that I think was aimed at all the space geeks: It APPEARED that Richard Branson was the third pilot in the space ship. Watch for the bearded third pilot with just a few lines. For those that don't know who Richard Branson is, ever heard of the Virgin corporate empire? I thought it was a very cool add-in to have Branson, who's currently trying to make commercial spaceflight possible, an Easter egg for those who knew what to look for.

Brandon Routh has successfully succeeded Christopher Reeves as Superman. There's no questions the "the son has become the father" in this respect. I don't capitalize the nouns, but I'll get into that in a moment. I have to say, not knowing who Routh was previous to this performance probably made him more believable as The Man of Steel. That being said, however, I don't want to downplay Routh's performance; his kinetic and sure-footed Superman, clumsy, socially underdeveloped Clark Kent and the crazy, bi-polar predicament the world's greatest man and more endeared alien find himself in. Routh executes with a touch of lovable humility that has made the Superman comic so successful for the last 70 years.

I've never been much of a fan of Gene Hackman, except for an honorary mention in last year's fiasco of a book known as 'A Million Little Pieces'. That same disdain carries into Hackman's original portrayal of Luthor in the original movies. Comparatively, Kevin Spacey's humanized, intelligent and distinctly much more machiavellian Lex Luthor was... believeable, but something was lost. I don't know. Spacey's performance was even; an exchange between him and Lois Lane was classic Luthor. I just didn't get the shear evil that Smallville's Michael Rosenbaum's Lex portrays. Lex on Smallville is still making the descent into the malevolent, self-serving destroyer of Man that he ultimately becomes. In the process, he loses all that is good to become the ultimate Superman-universe evil. Compared to the Luthor Singer gives us, Spacey's Luthor is childish, playful yet maniacal. Sinister wouldn't be a word I would use to describe Lex; resourcefully annoying is more accurate.

Kate Bosworth makes a satisfying enough Lois Lane. I wasn't moved one way or the other, though I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. Her looks were demure, a modest but beautiful and her acting was well enough done; I won't reveal plot, though her conflict external and internal concerning her feelings for Superman were done with the proper amount of exposition by the other, lighter characters.Jimmy Olsen's comic relief and dialogue in Act 1 helped jumpstart Lois' character for us from the end of Superman II, which is what has been rumored to be where this story is supposed to start from.

I'll not comment on James Marsden. I'm not a huge fan, and this guy being a core character throughout the movie made for rather arduous internal grumbling. I wasn't a huge fan of him in the X-Men series orThe Notebook, so I'd rather not tear into him unneccesarily due to a personal dislike.

Now that I've segwayed from favorite to least favorite character, I'm going to go into some things I observed about the movie that were... lacking... This section of the writeup may be better suited for you once you've actually seen the movie; some of the observations here may and probably will give away plot and plot devices.

* I'm going to have to watch Superman II again. I don't know HOW Lex was able to figure out where the Fortress of Solitude was.
* Also, is it just me, or did no one in the movie make the correlation between Clark being gone for five years and Superman being gone for five years? Where's Clark been this whole time? "Off talking to llamas" wasn't a good enough explaination. Why doesn't Jimmy further persue Clark when he steps out of the bar, only to run down the alley and fly off to save Lois?
* I believe the sickly little boy that is ultimately revealed as The Son of Superman is being constantly poisoned by Kryptonite somewhere in Lois' home.
* Where is Clark? I mean, seriously? There's a good hour of this movie where Clark is unaccounted for, and Superman is running around.
* There are shots with the airplane that seem to have been left out of the digital effects editing. Given the dense accumulation of all the crystals throughout the water, some of the scenes just didn't make any sense.
* The boy flies the plane up. Pure and simple. His fear kindles a small part of his ability to fly.
* Superman is not Jesus Christ. There's a sequence later in the movie where I couldn't help but roll my eyes. I understand the director's message: Superman is the savior of man, back, sacrificing himself to save all of humanity. More important was the aquisition of the crystals that I believe Kitty would have grabbed. The heavy-handed moments of the arms extended hanging-on-the-cross style, followed by his death, and resurrection and the "stone being moved away on its own" was a little more cheesy than I was expecting.

Overall I loved the movie. I'll own it when it comes out on DVD. I don't write movie reviews, if that's any indicator of how it moved me. Nothing really now to look forward to in the comic book world for a while except the potential Wolverine series, Ghost Rider, Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman, and of course, Spider Man 3!