Latino movie reviews

Last Night (Movie Review)

The “1-4-0″: ‘Last Night’ explores temptation from the female and male perspectives. Which one will give and the questions that surround it in is what this film centers on.

The Gist: Infidelity. Can people really be faithful to one another no matter how in love they are? This is the topic director Massy Tadjedin explores in an authentic, intimate, emotionally charged depiction of love in New York City. During an evening apart, married couple Joanna and Michael encounter tempting opportunities to cheat on each other: Michael spends time on a business trip with his sexy colleague, Laura, while Joanna crosses paths with a former flame, Alex.

What Works: I really enjoyed this film. ‘Last Night’ is a realistic look at what happens to people when sexual temptation is presented to them front and center. What most pulled me in was how director Tadjedin delved deep into the struggles of infidelity. The performances are modest here, but great casting choice in Eva Mendes who was perfect as Washington’s seductive paramour. This is an eye opener, one that shows how much pain and anguish one goes through when feelings of unfaithfulness begin to take hold. You stick around intensely engaged to see how the whole thing will it end. Will they cheat on each other, will you as a viewer lose faith in your own relationship because of it? The storyline is relatable, the outcome is unexpected, just like in real life.

What Doesn’t Work: If you’re not used to intensive dialogue, even one as interesting as this one, then you shouldn’t watch this film. It’s for people who enjoy cinema that cates to real issues that people can identify and connect with.

Pay or Nay? Pay. Keira Knightley is becoming good at acting in these indie romance NYC films that focus on women in search for love in the big city. The movie serves up a good dose of raw emotion and tension in the form of temptation. It’s a wonderful date movie, one which will perhaps spark many questions about your own relationship.

[youtube id=”sTDyNxXutLs”]

Thor (Movie Review)

‘Thor,’ the first Marvel superhero film of the year, debuts this weekend to high expectations from cinephiles to film executives. This film adaptation is faithful to the mythology of the comic book hero, has a well blend of humor and drama, is visually stunning, but stumbles through the end, and although it recovers, it does not manage to have a place in the pantheon of superhero classics such as ‘Superman II’ and ‘The Dark Knight.’ However, the film, mostly, is great popcorn fun and is worth spending the money to see, especially in IMAX 3D. Read More

Water for Elephants (Movie Review)

‘Water for Elephants’ is one of the most beautiful films you’ll see this year. With the help of one of the greatest Mexican cinematographers in Rodrigo Prieto, director Francis Lawrence who helmed ‘I Am Legend’ and ‘Constantine,’ gives us a visually beautiful, colorful picture full of vibrancy and panache with love at its core. This is the theme that traverses the story at every level. You see it subtly, passionately, and in complex ways. A mixed bag of everything. Unfortunately, you need real chemistry to pull this off, not a modicum. ‘Water for Elephants’ has its great moments but it also possesses some mediocre mush that weighs it down. It is ultimately a fine film, but because it could’ve been perfect, it is measured at a different scale. The criticisms here are not of the negative kind, but would like them to be viewed as constructive, a ‘what could have been better’ analysis of the events.

The film, in essence, is the circus story version of 1997’s Titanic. It follows almost the same exact plot structure: old man narrates his story of a tragic event in the form of flashbacks when he was young, his romance with a woman that was out of his reach, and the memory of the tragedy that our narrator has never been able to forget. Robert Pattinson is Leonardo DiCaprio and Reese Witherspoon is Kate Winslet’s character, with a circus ambience. This structure is very successful, but I have already seen it and have seen it done better. I don’t think it’s nonsensical to say that many who watch the movie will feel like they’ve seen it before. It’ll be an involuntary and subconscious reaction, but one that will affect the viewer’s judgement of it.

Based on the book by Sara Gruen, ‘Water for Elephants’ swirls around the life of a veterinary student from the wrong side of the tracks, Jacob (Robert Pattinson), who meets and falls in love with Marlena (Reese Witherspoon), a star performer in a circus of a bygone era. They discover beauty amidst the world of the Big Top, and come together through their compassion for an elephant named Rosie. Both are faced with the challenge of her charismatic and dangerous husband August (Christopher Waltz), who seeks to keep his matrimony and the circus alive no matter the consequences.

Twilight heartthrob Robert Pattinson’s individual work here is the best I’ve seen him do. He’s photogenic, charming and definitely has the magic to attract a vast contingency of female cinephiles with that ‘aww shucks’ demeanor. Witherspoon is Witherspoon, nothing more, and Waltz channeled Col. Hans Landa. Very good, but again I’ve seen him perform this character better in Inglorious Basterds. I tip my hat and salute the performance of Hal Holbrook as the elderly Jacob. You almost choked up in most of the scenes he was in, especially at the end. There’s something to say about watching an elderly person be so fragile and vulnerable in a close up. It’s powerful stuff.

Pacing and dialogue play a big part in the reasons this film made one or more yawn a few times. The pace is at times uneven because the dialogue withers a bit in the middle and it felt slow and wearisome. It then picks back up only to wane again. It did this a few times until it moved consistently enough to engross you once and for all through the end. Lawrence should’ve cut some scenes and push the movie forward even if it risked cutting out his favorite scenes with Pattinson. During the fist hour I must’ve looked at my watch once or twice and a guy in the back let out a loud yawn. Is it entertaining? No, not in the Fast Five type of way, but it’s not supposed to. It is supposed to titillate my senses and crescendo into a rousing symphony of engagement for me. It never reached those heights, but it also didn’t ruin my experience. This is a delightful movie, not a preeminent one.

SCRE4M (Movie Review)

Source Code (Movie Review)

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules (Movie Review)

The Lincoln Lawyer (Movie Review)