Please enable javascript to view this site.

Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Movie Reviews and Ratings

Jack Rico

By

2010/04/01 at 12:00am

The Last Song

04.1.2010 | By |

The Last Song

Of his six titles sent to the big screen, ‘The Last Song’ is Nicholas Sparks worst film. Most of the drawbacks hinge on Miley Cyrus’ acting. She is officially on my list for a 2011 Razzie for worst actress. But perhaps the biggest problem with the film is the calculated, manipulative script that delivers phony, inorganic moments that don’t seem plausible enough for any teenager or adult to believe. It has some feel good moments, but not enough to deserve praise. This is definitely not a date movie adults will enjoy, but rather a transitional primer young fans of Cyrus will be expecting from her in the near future.

‘The Last Song’ centers on a rebellious girl (Miley Cyrus) who is sent to a Southern beach town with her brother (Bobby Coleman) for the summer to stay with her father (Greg Kinnear). Through their mutual love of music, the estranged duo learn to reconnect, but in typical Sparks fashion, some sort of calamity strikes.

I’ve seen Miley’s work on TV and I’ve seen her in concert. Her work seemed to embody the desires and ambitions of her contemporaries and it fit perfectly well within those parameters, but now her and her team of agents and managers are treading treacherous territory to put her in the same dramatic genre where the likes of Carey Mulligan and Anne Hathaway feast on. She isn’t ready to act in these roles that demand so much of her limited emotional range. As a result, the scenes where she has to push and drive the emotional guts of the film fall flat. The rest of the cast do well, but Kinnear and Coleman are the highlights. Kelly Preston was probably the most irrelevant character in the film, she was never around.

Nicholas Sparks is a co-screenwriter here and once again we see the trail of sentimental tragedy he has left in his way. His recent ‘Dear John’ from last month, doesn’t help either, if it hadn’t been for actor Richard Jenkins’ gravitas and acting credibility, it could have been a low point for all involved.

Bottomline, you can find this schmaltz for free on Lifetime or Oprah, don’t pay to see it here.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/31 at 12:00am

Clash of the Titans

03.31.2010 | By |

Clash of the Titans

The friend who I shared my screening with last night said, “Clash of the Titans was sooo bad”. I don’t necessarily agree, but have to admit it was light on the entertainment. The main problems is that it’s filled with a plethora of posed shots, cringing one liners and anticlimactic action sequences. The acting was subpar and I have seen better 3D films this year such as ‘IMAX Hubble 3D’ – those effects were unbelievable!

This rehash of the original 1981 film, which I didn’t really particularly care for, has ‘flavor of the month leading man’ Sam Worthington playing Perseus, the mortal son of the god Zeus (Liam Neeson), who embarks on a perilous journey of revenge to stop Hedes (Ralph Fiennes), the underworld and its minions from spreading their evil to Earth as well as the heavens.

The majority of the people who want to see this film is for the promise of seeing some unforgettable action scenes in 3D. If it’s the action that tickles your fancy, then don’t get your hopes up. There are 5 action sequences that the film revolves around. The best one? The scorpion combat which got my heart beating a bit. Save for that scene, the rest is not worth the price of admission. I was geared up for some major entertainment and it fell flat. What director Louis Leterrier (The Transporter, The Incredible Hulk) fails to understand is that action scenes don’t work when the audience doesn’t care. There’s zero interest in them here. Brad Pitt’s ‘Troy’ was just as bad, but it was more compelling and entertaining than this because the sequences were built up with much anticipation. In regards to the 3D imagery, this was also mediocre. The film was shot in regular film stock then converted to 3D. There is a BIG difference when this happens – images in real 3D feel like they are rubbing your face, this film barely registered a difference between 2D and 3D.

This film was supposed to be Warner Bros 2010 version of ‘300’. The look of the films are very similar, but the rating wasn’t and that makes all the difference. Clash is PG-13 and 300 is R. When you see ‘300’ it’s all about the graphic nature of the violence and the masculinity of the film. No need of talk, just head squashing. Clash doesn’t come close.

If you still want to see this film, save yourself a couple of bucks and watch it in 2D, the 3D experience is really not worth it.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/30 at 12:00am

‘Manolete’ with Penelope Cruz ‘Manolete’ gets release

03.30.2010 | By |

'Manolete' with Penelope Cruz 'Manolete' gets release

In his lifetime, Manolete, the legendary bullfighter, caused a stir living with his exuberant left-wing mistress beneath the disapproving glare of staunchly Catholic, 1940s Spain. Manolete, a film about this romance starring Adrien Brody and Penelope Cruz, is raising eyebrows again – this time among the anti-bullfighting camp.

After a three-year delay, the €20m (£18m) British-Spanish production is expected to be released this week in Paris – to the outrage of animal rights activists.

“It is inadmissible to release a film in which the hero is a matador,” said the Alliance Anticorrida, a French anti-bullfighting group, in a message to its 20,000 members. “If they are properly informed, a great number of spectators will avoid this new film.”

The film, by the Dutch director Menno Meyjes, was supposed to be released as early as 2007, but has been beset with production delays, debts and a ballooning budget. Bullfighting scenes were reportedly shot without using real animals, which inflated the cost.

“Let’s thank Lola Films for making a compassionate choice for bulls,” said the US-based People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

In the film, a sombre Adrien Brody plays the matador from Cordoba enamoured with Penelope Cruz’s bonne vivante Mexican actress, Lupe Sino, who pines for a final glimpse of her lover after he is gored to death by the bull Islero in 1947.

The film’s producers and distributors have tried to reassure activists that the film – peppered with phrases like “I’m just your mistress; death is your wife” – is a story about love not killing. But the ever-growing anti-bullfighting movement appears unmoved. “It is forgetting a bit too quickly the images of Adrien Brody, his face and hands stained with blood in his torero costume,” the Alliance Anticorrida said.

Namreta Kumar

By

2010/03/29 at 12:00am

The Greatest

03.29.2010 | By |

The Greatest

The best parts of “The Greatest” are also its worst. Unfortunately, Shana Feste has created a film about spectacular moments but she failed to connect them.

This family drama is all about life and death. It is about loss and strength. Allen (Pierce Brosnan) and Grace Brewter (Susan Sarandon) are faced with the death of their son, Bennett. At that moment walks in Rose (Carey Mulligan), pregnant with Bennett’s child.

What stays with me after the end of the film are some very distinct moments. The honesty with which Shana Feste crafts her scenes is remarkable and is the high point in the drama. Each character has their own catharsis, distinct of the rest. For a second it seems to fool you into thinking that you are with them. However, as you move to the next scene that link is broken. The overall film suffers from this disconnect.

The most powerful connection the audience does make is between Allen and Rose when Rose takes Allen to a “Wouldn’t Be Caught Dead In” party. This is one particular moment to watch out for Brosnan and Mulligan’s performance and the layers that Feste has created in this moment of joint abreaction. Another powerful moment of association to watch out for is between Brosnan and Sarandon at the beach.

The greatest moments of the film are the ones that bring more than one plot in face of another, and unfortunately the lack of those moments leaves to many holes in the film. Unlike films like Crash and Babel, that have multiple stories that connect to some end, this film has a constant connection that does not justify parallel plots.

Alex Florez

By

2010/03/27 at 3:31pm

Types Casino Bonuses

03.27.2010 | By |

Types Casino Bonuses

Who can say no to free money? Not too many people would turn down that offer, especially if it supplemented your online gaming account. Go forth with the knowledge that the amount of a to casino and rollover requirements generally apply.

First a player needs to know what types of bonuses exit. After that, said player needs to determine the size of the deposit and how much will have to be wagered in order to meet the bonus requirements. Before reaching that step though it is necessary to understand what types of bonuses exist.

Nice to meet you

A welcome bonus is pretty much straightforward just like the name implies. Players can receive this benefit when opening an account at an online establishment . Welcome bonuses (aka sign-up bonuses) are awarded as an incentive to get new players on board so that they will try out the casino and their games. often take the form of a match bonus (100% bonus) where the casino matches the player’s deposit up to a certain amount.

Nice to see you again

Reload bonuses are given to active players who have made at least one deposit at an online casino. Loyalty (or reload) bonuses are offered to players who have received a certain VIP status. That usually comes with a high volume of wagering and is given with the hopes of keeping the player coming back to the casino. Reload bonuses are usually larger and bring with them lower wager requirements than other types of reward programs.

No Deposit Needed

The majority of casino bonuses we have discussed require that a player makes a deposit to their online casino account before becoming eligible to receive a bonus. The first type is a simple bonus usually around $10-15 dollars and allows a player to try out some pre-selected casino games. They can keep the winnings after fulfilling some basic wagering requirements.

Preferred Deposit Bonuses

A preferred deposit bonus is usually in the amount of 5-15 percent. It is given when a player uses the casino’s favorite type on money transfer when funding their casino account. Some casinos have preferences with regards to how they would like to receive money; e-wallets such as Neteller, Skrill and Click2Pay.

As an incentive to use the casinos preferred deposit method, players will receive a bonus. The bonus system which includes the percentage and requirements is usually listed at the banking center on your casino.

From a player’s perspective, the advantage of this sort of reward is straight forward: You have more money to play with in your casino account. The disadvantage is that you have to use a specific type of money transfer to get the bonus.

There is also the choice of playing without a bonus. You will not have the extra money to gamble with, but there will not be any restrictions on which games you can play.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/26 at 12:00am

Movie Review: ‘Chloe’

03.26.2010 | By |

Movie Review: 'Chloe'

Chloe,’ Atom Egoyan’s new directorial work, is the lesbian version of Fatal Attraction. You can expect a high level of nudity and explicit, erotic sexual lesbian scenes that almost make it feel like soft core porn. The look of the film is different though and resembles more Stanley Kubrick’s artistic ‘Eyes Wide Shut.’ The pacing, cinematography and camerawork, even its musical score, ignites thoughts of the film. The acting is strong and the story, for 85% of its duration, is utterly enthralling… until it collapses at the very end in an hyperbolic mess.

A gynecologist (Julianne Moore) hires an escort (Amanda Seyfried) to seduce her husband (Liam Neeson), whom she suspects of cheating. The results will back fire on her and reveal a side of herself she didn’t know existed.

For most of the film, this erotic thriller carries a slow enjoyable pace. It never reaches the depths of boredom. Each scene is crafted carefully to develop the characters and the meat of the story. The situations they are all in are plausible, but with an edge to them. Then out of nowhere, 20 minutes before its denouement, it becomes risible and loses all cogency and believability. I don’t even want to try and figure out why that happened, but this movie could have been great.

Despite that one deficiency, the whole of the film should not be dismissed. The engrossing, sometimes transfixing artistic sensuality of the sequences will keep you glued to your seat. The premise evokes real questions that ultimately many marriages suffer from, such as – can one ever really be only with one person for their whole life?

Chloe’ has an answer for that and it’s not necessarily the one you want to hear. The movie is a bit twisted, but it is very entertaining, you can’t wait to see what happens next and am sure most of you will feel the same too.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/25 at 12:00am

Chloe

03.25.2010 | By |

Chloe

‘Chloe,’ Atom Egoyan’s new directorial work, is the lesbian version of Fatal Attraction. You can expect a high level of nudity and explicit, erotic sexual lesbian scenes that almost make it feel like soft core porn. The look of the film is different though and resembles more Stanley Kubrick’s artistic ‘Eyes Wide Shut.’ The pacing, cinematography and camerawork, even its musical score, ignites thoughts of the film. The acting is strong and the story, for 85% of its duration, is utterly enthralling… until it collapses at the very end in an hyperbolic mess.

A gynecologist (Juliane Moore) hires an escort (Amanda Seyfried) to seduce her husband (Liam Neeson), whom she suspects of cheating. The results will back fire on her and reveal a side of herself she didn’t know existed.

For most of the film, this erotic thriller carries a slow enjoyable pace. It never reaches the depths of boredom. Each scene is crafted carefully to develop the characters and the meat of the story. The situations they are all in are plausible, but with an edge to them. Then out of nowhere, 20 minutes before its denouement, it becomes risible and loses all cogency and believability. I don’t even want to try and figure out why that happened, but this movie could have been great.

Despite that one deficiency, the whole of the film should not be dismissed. The engrossing, sometimes transfixing artistic sensuality of the sequences will keep you glued to your seat. The premise evokes real questions that ultimately many marriages suffer from, such as – can one ever really be only with one person for their whole life?

‘Chloe’ has an answer for that and it’s not necessarily the one you want to hear. The movie is a bit twisted, but it is very entertaining, you can’t wait to see what happens next and am sure most of you will feel the same too.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/25 at 12:00am

Hot Tub Time Machine

03.25.2010 | By |

Hot Tub Time Machine

The R rated comedy ‘Hot Tub Time Machine’ is a disappointment that could have been prevented if the writers would have delivered better jokes, more frequently. Besides a few laughs, this comedy isn’t worth the ticket price or your time at the theater, but perhaps at home on DVD on a lazy Saturday night.

The story is simple. Four guy friends (John Cusack, Clark Duke, Craig Robinson, Rob Corddry), all of them bored with their adult lives, travel back to their respective 80s heydays thanks to a time-traveling hot tub. What ensues is nostalgic moments for most of the protagonists and a predictable twist for the finale.

For many men, there is nothing better than calling friends on a Friday night and catching a riotous R rated comedy. The attraction is the raunchy sexual humor and dialogue, ape-like rationale and an inane plotline that is already inherently funny. Many comedies in the decade of the 80’s embodied that sort of unrefined and unpretentious hilarity such as ‘Airplane’, ‘The Naked Gun’ and ‘I’m Gonna Git You Sucka‘. They were made for men and boy did we love them. 2008 saw one of my personal favorites – Role Models starring Paul Rudd and and Sean William Scott. They created a gem with scenes that pushed the envelope of comedy to its limits by having little kids curse like old curmudgeon truckers. ‘The Hangover’ reached perfection in the last decade. It received a Golden Globe nomination and even speculation that it would be nominated for an Oscar in the best picture category.

So what went wrong with ‘Hot Tub Time Machine’?

The jokes began strong and then they lagged. Those lagging moments cost the film everything. The writers, Josh Heald and Sean Anders needed to create rapid-fire jokes to avoid the sour comedic bits from affecting the strong, quick pacing of the beginning. As a result, the audience is left in limbo awaiting on hilarity that is saved for seldom occasions, as if there were rations of jokes left for us to laugh at. The acting overall was fine, some secondary 80’s cast selections were great such as Crispin Glover (Marty MacFly from Back to the Future) and Chevy Case.

The protagonists were a nice mix of actors that provided their fair skill of comedy. The highlight was Craig Robinson, who seems to be at home in this genre. If you ever saw him in ‘Zack and Miri Make a Porno’, he carried that movie on his back! John Cusack was a nostalgic touch that director Steven Pink I’m sure had as his secret weapon. John Cusack is the 80’s and it was great to see how he behaved under the ambiance of the period that made him a star.

Nevertheless, I was expecting so much more from this film. Whenever you see “rated R” next to a comedy, you feel like we’re in for something different (e.g. The Hangover). It’s a movie that filmmakers can sink their creative juices into without restraint. That mere idea is obviously much more difficult than it looks.

Terry Kim

By

2010/03/23 at 12:00am

Men Who Stare at Goats

03.23.2010 | By |

Rating: 2.5

Rated: R for language, some drug content and brief nudity.
Release Date: 2009-11-06
Starring: Peter Straughan
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.themenwhostareatgoatsmovie.com/

 Go to our film page

The Men Who Stare at Goats is based on a book by Jon Ronson of the same title, and judging by his track record—Ronson wrote books with titles like Out of the Ordinary: True Tales of Everyday Craziness and Them: Adventures With Extremists—it isn’t surprising that Heslov’s movie is an hour and a half of paranormal activity (or something like it) inside the U.S. Military. Bob Wilton (played by Ewan McGregor), at first searching for a way out of his heartbreak (his wife and college sweetheart leaves him for his one-armed editor), lands himself in uncanny situations that cannot possibly be real… or are they?

 

Bob begins his adventure in Kuwait City, where he runs into Lyn Cassady (played by George Clooney), who will ultimately be the link to the story behind the First Earth Battalion. When the Cassady-Wilton duo courageously ventures into the deserts of Iraq, the first big thing that happens is a car crash, and into a glaring boulder in the middle of the road, no less. Not to mention that the first “help” they acquire is a group of petty thugs that want to sell this clueless American pair. For Wilton’s first big adventure, he’s doing pretty great. Once he starts to glean out some of Cassady’s stories, however, he realizes that the U.S. Military isn’t as tough as it looks.

 

Meet Bill Django (Jeff Bridges), leader of the First Earth Battalion, who uses his “education” (if naked hot tub sessions count as education) to get his men in touch with Mother Earth. Lyn Cassady is Django’s main protégé, and when a fellow Battalion member, Larry Hooper (Kevin Spacey) enters their Garden of Eden, things go terribly amiss: Django gets a dishonorable discharge, and even worse, Cassady stares at a goat so intently that it drops dead. Lyn has thus traversed into the dark side, and to top it off, Larry taps him with the “death touch.” But not to worry; all ends well, with Bill’s vision of Timothy Leary, and some military breakfast laced with LSD. Thus Bob Wilton emerges, cured of his heartache, and in tune to his inner hippie.

 

The director of The Men Who Stare at Goats is Grant Heslov. This is his feature debut behind the camera, but not his first opportunity to join forces with Clooney. He co-wrote (with Clooney) and produced Good Night and Good Luck and filled similar producing duties for Leatherheads. The two men clearly know each other and work well together, and it shows in the easy way this movie unfolds. Heslov is not performing without a net. Who better than Clooney to lend a helping hand – a man who has learned from Soderbergh and the Coens and directed three films in his own right (two of which he collaborated with Heslov)?

 

George Clooney seems to have walked off the set of Burn After Reading and straight into this one: the expressions and the speech are identical. Comments on the acting aside, the laugh-out-loud moments are worth the psychedelic overload. The attention, however, appears to have gone mostly into the dialogue, and the audience knows all too well that dialogue alone does not carry a whole movie. If you’re looking for more reasons—as if there aren’t enough already—to scoff at our former president, look no further than The Men Who Stare at Goats. It’s always fun to make fun.

P.S. Warning to all hamster owners: remember to keep your furry friends away from glaring men.

Jack Rico

By

2010/03/21 at 12:00am

IMAX:Hubble 3D

03.21.2010 | By |

IMAX:Hubble 3D

How many times are you going to hear someone say that there is a film out there right now that has better 3D special effects than Avatar? Most likely you won’t until you witness ‘IMAX: Hubble 3D,’ one of the most tantalizing 3D imagery ever put on celluloid.  It is a truly eye-popping experience that will make you shake your head over and over again. This is a documentary done by NASA, not be confused for a fictional film. The images and scenes you will see here is real. None of it is fake.

The story crafted by the director/writer Toni Myers and narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio is about seven astronauts who in May of 2009 traveled to space to repair and update hardware on the Hubble telescope. The images that were later captured, according to the documentary, were the farthest pictures ever captured by human machinery. It is from what they say, the end of the known universe.

The most boggling and staggering thing about Hubble is the 3D ‘voyage’ the director takes us on billions of light years away to what is presumably the actual end of the universe as captured by the Hubble telescope. This happens a few times and it feels like you’re on a ride at Epcot Center.

Leonardo DiCaprio isn’t the best narrator, I would have much preferred Morgan Freeman or Tom Hanks, even Tom Cruise, but he gets the job done.

Overall, ‘IMAX: Hubble 3D,’ is a technological advancement that is sure to be adopted by many studios from now on. I hope it is, because if this is the future of films, then we are in for an IMAX HUGE treat!

Select a Page