M: Absolutely loved it. Blew me away. The movie was just the right mix of paying homage to the original while allowing itself the freedom to depart as it needed. Intense from the opening scene. 4 stars.
V: I LIKED this movie. It was really enjoyable. I did not love it, but I LIKED it. I never got bored. It was funny. Fun to see the classic characters reincarnated (in the past). Time travel always gets a little messy though. And there were just too many spaceships. Spaceships are boring. Just my own little bias. 3 stars.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Harry Potter 6
M: A rare full price movie. We try to catch the Harry Potter's in the theater. This was the best looking Harry Potter yet. Amazing. On the other hand, the story did not seem compelling. I loved the book, yet the movie did not do it justice. The movie, like the book, simply moved toward the 7th book, with no real resolution on its own. But, with a movie, it is nice to have some resolution. Also, the Harry and Ginnie in a field scene was not in the book, yet they cut so many things out that were in the book. What's up with that. Also, I didn't like the changes to the end, where Harry had been frozen under a cloak in the book, and he was just kind of hiding in the movie, not as good. Plus, now I hear that the 7th book is going to be split into two movies. That seems excessive. Our Harry Potter in the theater streak may end. Nevertheless, very good looking movie. 3 stars.
V: I agree that it looked great. And I thought there was a lot of fun humor in this movie. The field scene was really weird. And there were tiny things that bugged me making it not a 4 star movie - but otherwise - I really enjoyed it! There were some genuinely scary things in this one - I did jump and grab onto Mike's arm (or was it his head) during the cave with the dead thingies scene. Malfoy is growing on me. And Slughorn was really great. 3 1/2 stars.
M: I agree that Slughorn was fantastic. Not what I imagined, but so good.
V: I agree that it looked great. And I thought there was a lot of fun humor in this movie. The field scene was really weird. And there were tiny things that bugged me making it not a 4 star movie - but otherwise - I really enjoyed it! There were some genuinely scary things in this one - I did jump and grab onto Mike's arm (or was it his head) during the cave with the dead thingies scene. Malfoy is growing on me. And Slughorn was really great. 3 1/2 stars.
M: I agree that Slughorn was fantastic. Not what I imagined, but so good.
Monsters vs Aliens
M: We went and saw this in the Dollar. Not a bad way to go. The kids loved it, and it was a fun movie. It is not going to change your life, but it is pretty good. 2 1/2 stars.
V: The blob guy is super funny, especially when it thinks the boyfriend is really his. Cute show. 3 stars.
V: The blob guy is super funny, especially when it thinks the boyfriend is really his. Cute show. 3 stars.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Paul Blart: Mall Cop
V: It was art film time in our household, so we picked up this little beauty from, yes, the Red Box. This film deals with a variety of classic themes that humanity must deal with: evil vs. good; unrequited love; loyalty vs. treachery; and hypoglycemia. It really got me thinking about the importance of having sugar on hand. And since I'm still thinking about sugar, I'll keep this short. 2 stars.
M: We finally got around to watching this movie. I am a fan of King of Queens, and I generally think that Kevin James is hilarious. And this movie did have some real laugh out loud moments and some good lines. But, all in all, I came away disappointed. The first 30 minutes of the movie was just too sad, and the last 30 minutes too packed with silly action. The criminals were way too athletic, with their flipping and jumping, and there appeared to be no good reason the cops just sat around waiting for Blart to save the day. Also, I didn't really buy the love interest. This movie is pretty funny, very funny in parts. But, the movie definitely does not make my top comedies list, it simply does not compare to the likes of So I Married an Axe Murderer, Tommy Boy, and Dumb and Dumber. I don't know why, it's not like those movies are critically acclaimed masterpieces. Kevin James is capable of real greatness, but I think the writing in this one ultimately held him back. Go ahead and see the movie, laugh a bit, its worth a buck. 2 1/2 stars.
M: We finally got around to watching this movie. I am a fan of King of Queens, and I generally think that Kevin James is hilarious. And this movie did have some real laugh out loud moments and some good lines. But, all in all, I came away disappointed. The first 30 minutes of the movie was just too sad, and the last 30 minutes too packed with silly action. The criminals were way too athletic, with their flipping and jumping, and there appeared to be no good reason the cops just sat around waiting for Blart to save the day. Also, I didn't really buy the love interest. This movie is pretty funny, very funny in parts. But, the movie definitely does not make my top comedies list, it simply does not compare to the likes of So I Married an Axe Murderer, Tommy Boy, and Dumb and Dumber. I don't know why, it's not like those movies are critically acclaimed masterpieces. Kevin James is capable of real greatness, but I think the writing in this one ultimately held him back. Go ahead and see the movie, laugh a bit, its worth a buck. 2 1/2 stars.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
M: This movie seems to evoke high emotions on both sides. Many I have talked to say they found it long and boring. Many critics loved it. I am on the fence. First, I like the character of Buttons. I thought he was well played, for the most part. Especially young (old) Buttons, who was endearing (When Brad Pitt emerged and the movie turned into a series of beauty shots, he wasn't so endearing). Here are a couple problems I had.
Warning, major spoiler alert.
First, Buttons started as a tiny old man with a baby mind. So he should have ended as a giant baby (like Mork and Mindy's man-baby).
Second, it made no sense that Buttons abandoned his wife and kids. After having been abandoned by his own father, and suffering from those scars, he should know better. His reasons for leaving? He didn't want his wife to have to care for him, and he wanted his daughter to have a grown-up (old) father. Well, his wife ended up caring for him in the end anyway, and his daughter would have had her own father, although young in body and old and wise in mind. (What's wrong with that?) Plus, by the time he was senile, his daughter was grown. Anyway, a tiny senile baby is easier to care for than a full grown senile person anyway, I would imagine. And any child would exchange knowing their father for caring for the father in old age. It seemed like a total cop out. Plus, Ms. Button found a new husband only to cheat on him later with Button. Why?!! I say.
Finally, I have a hard time rooting for characters that frequent prostitutes, and cheat on spouses.
Anyway, I could go on. Like I said, high emotions. And that is worth something. But in the end, this is a visually good looking movie that has no real soul and ultimatly, I think, no point. 2 1/2 stars.
V: What's the point? So it was an interesting concept: a man grows younger rather than older. Yeah it was interesting, but for a show that sure seemed to be trying to be profound, or make some point, I think it failed. They even stuck in this hummingbird twice - obviously symbolic of . . . well, of something, I guess. But you can't just shove things into a piece and say, "Look! a symbol! oooh, deep." So what of this hummingbird? Let's put our high school symbol decoding hats on. First stabs: It represents death, or rather LIFE, and how fleeting it can be, or maybe it's the spirit of someone who has died coming to comfort us when we face death, or when our friends died but we survived, or when we are about to die... Hmmmm. Yessss. Very deep. Something about time. Flying fast? Backward? Anyway, I didn't buy it. What about time? What about life? What about death? That it is? Or that it is (here it comes . . .) CURIOUS? Cinematography and makeup: excellent. Benjamin's mother: great. Felt a little like it was trying to be a Forrest Gump, but lacked the heart. Too pretty for a 2 (fair), too many problems for a 3 (good), so I agree with M: 2 1/2 stars.
Warning, major spoiler alert.
First, Buttons started as a tiny old man with a baby mind. So he should have ended as a giant baby (like Mork and Mindy's man-baby).
Second, it made no sense that Buttons abandoned his wife and kids. After having been abandoned by his own father, and suffering from those scars, he should know better. His reasons for leaving? He didn't want his wife to have to care for him, and he wanted his daughter to have a grown-up (old) father. Well, his wife ended up caring for him in the end anyway, and his daughter would have had her own father, although young in body and old and wise in mind. (What's wrong with that?) Plus, by the time he was senile, his daughter was grown. Anyway, a tiny senile baby is easier to care for than a full grown senile person anyway, I would imagine. And any child would exchange knowing their father for caring for the father in old age. It seemed like a total cop out. Plus, Ms. Button found a new husband only to cheat on him later with Button. Why?!! I say.
Finally, I have a hard time rooting for characters that frequent prostitutes, and cheat on spouses.
Anyway, I could go on. Like I said, high emotions. And that is worth something. But in the end, this is a visually good looking movie that has no real soul and ultimatly, I think, no point. 2 1/2 stars.
V: What's the point? So it was an interesting concept: a man grows younger rather than older. Yeah it was interesting, but for a show that sure seemed to be trying to be profound, or make some point, I think it failed. They even stuck in this hummingbird twice - obviously symbolic of . . . well, of something, I guess. But you can't just shove things into a piece and say, "Look! a symbol! oooh, deep." So what of this hummingbird? Let's put our high school symbol decoding hats on. First stabs: It represents death, or rather LIFE, and how fleeting it can be, or maybe it's the spirit of someone who has died coming to comfort us when we face death, or when our friends died but we survived, or when we are about to die... Hmmmm. Yessss. Very deep. Something about time. Flying fast? Backward? Anyway, I didn't buy it. What about time? What about life? What about death? That it is? Or that it is (here it comes . . .) CURIOUS? Cinematography and makeup: excellent. Benjamin's mother: great. Felt a little like it was trying to be a Forrest Gump, but lacked the heart. Too pretty for a 2 (fair), too many problems for a 3 (good), so I agree with M: 2 1/2 stars.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
The Tale of Despereaux
M: We have been getting our fill of some pretty good animated movies lately. I loved the idea of the mice learning how to be scared, and I laughed at how Despereaux's bravery was so appalling to the other mice. But, as the story progressed, I got a little bored. The storyline wasn't great, and the lessons seemed a bit heavy. All in all, it is a decent show, very good looking, but not great. I struggle where to put this, for me, 2 means average, 2 1/2 above average, 3 means good, 3 1/2 great, and 4 is exceptional. This movie falls somewhere in between above average and good. I have seen a lot of cartoons lately that make this pale in comparison. So I think I will give it 2 1/2 stars.
V: I enjoyed the book, which won the Newberry Award. Although, I felt the end wrapped up a little too quickly. What I really loved about the book was the language. That's hard to translate to film -- which is where the narrator voiceover comes in. That almost always weakens a movie, because they just can't seem to resist stating the moral. People don't like to be told what they've already figured out. (And when they figure it out for themselves, it seems profound, egotistical as we are. When it's stated for us, it seems trite.) For example, I really was enjoying the movie Seabiscuit and then, at the very end, the voiceover came on and said something like, "Seabiscuit may think I healed him, but actually, it was him who healed me." Groan. So anyway, the voiceover weakened Despereaux. I think they filled out the resolution better than the book. My main complaint was that they didn't keep all the story lines tight enough, so that I began to wonder, are they ever going to say anything more about the princess? the rat? Otherwise, it was stylishly done, some good humor and good characters. I agree with M, yet again, 2 1/2 stars.
V: I enjoyed the book, which won the Newberry Award. Although, I felt the end wrapped up a little too quickly. What I really loved about the book was the language. That's hard to translate to film -- which is where the narrator voiceover comes in. That almost always weakens a movie, because they just can't seem to resist stating the moral. People don't like to be told what they've already figured out. (And when they figure it out for themselves, it seems profound, egotistical as we are. When it's stated for us, it seems trite.) For example, I really was enjoying the movie Seabiscuit and then, at the very end, the voiceover came on and said something like, "Seabiscuit may think I healed him, but actually, it was him who healed me." Groan. So anyway, the voiceover weakened Despereaux. I think they filled out the resolution better than the book. My main complaint was that they didn't keep all the story lines tight enough, so that I began to wonder, are they ever going to say anything more about the princess? the rat? Otherwise, it was stylishly done, some good humor and good characters. I agree with M, yet again, 2 1/2 stars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
