Please enable javascript to view this site.

Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Movie Reviews

Karen Posada

By

2011/11/18 at 12:00am

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1

11.18.2011 | By |

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

The highly anticipated fourth film of The Twilight Saga has finally arrived: Breaking Dawn-Part I. The last book of the series was broken up into two films, which was a wise choice since most of the harder to grip subjects occur in this last chapter.  This last film follows the vibe from the previous one in keeping along the lines of the book series, so for those that haven’t read the books keep your eyes and ears open so that you don’t get lost in all the mind twisting things that Meyer came up with here.

 

The film begins with the buzz from the wedding of Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson). Although the film is all about what to most people are happy occasions: marriage, honeymoon & pregnancy; there’s a tone of worry, tension and sadness all throughout that make the few happy moments tough to enjoy. The wedding itself seems just like a backdrop for the love triangle and although Stewart portrays well the nervousness of Bella during this happy occasion she doesn’t seem heartbroken to be saying her “goodbyes” to her friends, family and mortal life. The sexual tension in the honeymoon is definitely felt, the couple spends most of the time playing chess instead of enjoying the beautiful private island off the coast of Brazil. The lovey-dovey couple have a rude awakening when they encounter their first disagreement as a married couple: to bring a “monster” into the world or get rid of it.  There’s no real time frame here, the storyline seems to develop within a week. The character that seems to bring the most balance to the story is Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), although he’s hot headed, in this chapter he’s more of an adult and he helps for the three worlds mixed into this story (humans, werewolves and vampires) to not get too confusing for the audience.

 

The actors seem more comfortable with their characters in this film, they make them a lot more believable but they still need more work convincing us. At points the story-line gets overly dramatic for no reason and some actors seem to be by-standers that reappear from behind the shadows, which makes us want to scream at them and ask why they didn’t intervene earlier; since supposedly these are beings with more acute senses than us humans (Pattinson being the main example). All the tension culminates in the last 15 minutes of the movie when you are just waiting to see where it will get cut off. There’s so much happening towards the end that the characters try to narrate quickly about imprinting and immortal children.

 

For those that have read the book and even enjoyed the movies they will be happy with the result of this one because it stays true to the series. The few funny moments help ease over the soap opera atmosphere the movie reaches at times. For the squeamish ones there are some moments where the story gets very real and bloody so beware. This film helps mature the story and keeps it in range with its followers who are probably no longer teens but young adults. You will like the film if you don’t expect too much from it and remember that very little has changed in the sense that we are still seeing the same actors develop a story that just keeps getting more complicated and wacky. The second and final part of this chapter will come to us November 16th, 2012, which might be the end of the vampire craze that The Twilight Saga began.

Jack Rico

By

2011/11/17 at 12:00am

Jack Rico

By

2011/10/21 at 12:00am

Jack Rico

By

2011/10/12 at 12:00am

Trespass

10.12.2011 | By |

Trespass
Jack Rico

By

2011/10/07 at 12:00am

Jack Rico

By

2011/09/30 at 12:00am

Ted Faraone

By

2011/09/11 at 12:00am

Contagion

09.11.2011 | By |

Contagion

There are several things wrong with “Contagion,” the latest from helmer Steven Soderbergh.  The most egregious is Warner Bros.’ US marketing campaign which uses taglines including “The world goes viral September 9,” “Don’t talk to anyone,” “Don’t touch anyone,” and the heroic “Nothing spreads like fear.” Oh, please!

 

This is nothing more than a cynical attempt to hypo a less-than-average big-budget picture featuring a big-name cast who could have been used far better in another vehicle — almost any other vehicle.

 

Plot revolves around a pandemic, worse than SARS, worse than H1N1, and probably worse than AIDS, although none of the creators has the fortitude to say so in as many words.

 

Structure takes its cue from some successful pics, such as “It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World,” “Crash” (2004), and “Babel,” wherein several storylines are intercut and woven into one.  Title cards help the exposition, of which pic is bedeviled by too much.

 

The big cheat comes into play in the final reel, where the origin of the pandemic, which is not exactly a mystery, is revealed in flashback.  To make matters worse, said revelation is no more than a bit of mudslinging at multinational corporations and at China.

 

Your critic has not brief for or against cross border businesses.  He couldn’t care less unless he owns stock in one of them.  The fictional corporation unwittingly at the heart of the “Contagion” pandemic is no more than a straw man set up in the final reel to give “Contagion” a degree of social significance — and create a villain for auds to hate.  Pic also takes a low view of Chinese agricultural hygiene, which shares blame for killing something like two or three percent of the world’s population.  Your critic also has little to say about China other than what Noël Coward wrote in “Private Lives”: “Very large.”  Malthusians should love this picture.  “Contagion” is sort of a bad version of “The Andromeda Strain.”

 

“Contagion” is billed as an action, sci-fi thriller.  Two out of three aren’t bad.  It falls short in the thriller part.  It does, however, boast a very attractive cast of stars including Matt Damon, pic’s sole sympathetic character, who appears to be immune to the disease, Marion Cotillard, who appears to be on her way to becoming the French Charlize Theron in that she never looks the same in two pictures, as a World Health Organization official, Kate Winslet as a US public health field agent, and Laurence Fishburne as the Centers for Disease Control honcho (also her boss) who directs the US end of the investigation into the pandemic.  Also central to the plot is Gwyneth Paltrow, who gets to appear without makeup, a mistake she should never again make in any picture, and who is central both in the opening and final reels to the denouement — even though she dies in pic’s first 20 minutes.  Jude Law appears in an unlikely role as a corrupt blogger attempting to profit from the pandemic.  His character’s name, Alan Krumwiede, is blatantly allegorical.

 

Give the filmmakers credit for sledge hammering home a point:  Paltrow in the opening reel is in Hong Kong on the phone with her boyfriend in Chicago discussing a tryst.  Her wedding and engagement rings take center screen.  If anyone thinks that this scarlet letter has nothing to do with pic’s action, he or she should go back under his rock.  This is about the most blatant giveaway your critic has ever seen.  She plays the Minneapolis-based Damon’s wife.

 

Another significant plot element is the official Chinese penchant for covering up disasters, even of the epidemiological sort, such as SARS.  Your critic had the benefit of the very attractive amateur film critic who makes her living as a doctor in international practice to confirm that pic is correct on the Chinese behavior as well as the medical facts.  Filmmakers at least got the context right.  But as the beautiful doctor also said, “If they found a guy like Matt Damon who was immune to the virus, they would have been all over him.”  “They” in this case are the US public health authorities.  In pic, Damon is more or less ignored or treated as a nuisance.

 

Unfortunately, in this ensemble pic, Damon is wasted to the extent that as its most sympathetic character, he does not get enough screen time.  Augmenting his role might have given auds someone for whom to root.

 

But pic’s biggest waste is the legendary Elliott Gould.  He gets only one fabulous moment, about half an-hour into pic, as a San-Francisco based epidemiologist who violates CDC orders to destroy his virus samples and gives the world its first real insight into the nature of the bug that kills almost without warning.  Note to filmmakers:  If you cast Elliott Gould, at least give him enough to do!  If you don’t believe your critic, have a look at “The Caller” (2008).

 

In pic’s favor are staccato scenes, one right after another, which move the plot along.  It has no fat.  It is short on character development, but it is clear that other than Jude Law, pic’s bad guy is the germ, and it’s tough to write dialogue for a microbe. Title cards help put pic’s action in chronological context.  About two thirds of the way through, “Contagion” develops a breakdown of society, a theme Fernando Meirelles handled so much more eloquently in “Blindness.”  Unfortunately, Soderbergh does not rise to Meireilles’ hights.

 

“Contagion” carries a PG-13 rating.  It runs 105 minutes but feels longer.  Editing by Stephen Mirrione is crisp.  Lensing by director Steven Soderbergh, himself, is workmanlike but displays a few flaws.  Sound recording could be better.  Some key lines of dialogue are inaudible.  Production design is more than adequate, and kudos go to Howard Cummings for keeping it simple and straightforward.  Thesps all turn in above par performances.  It’s a pity that Scott Z. Burns’ screenplay and Soderbergh’s direction make “Contagion” less than the sum of its parts.  It will depend on star power, which it has in spades, for revenue.  Take the kids.  They’ll probably laugh at the unintentional humor in a picture utterly devoid of comic relief.  A professional screening audience did.

Jack Rico

By

2011/08/19 at 12:00am

Conan the Barbarian

08.19.2011 | By |

Conan the Barbarian

‘Conan the Barbarian’ is by far one of the cheesiest movies of 2011, yet, the gory violence is so ubiquitous in the film that action fans are going to enjoy it. The acting is second rate, the dialogue is abominable and the editing is dizzying. By no means is this a good film. Quite frankly, this is as bad as they come. But the film has such an uncanny ability to make fun of itself that the shortfalls are ignored. What prevails is the applause for the gore, which is a testament to how twisted we are as a society. I’ll leave it at that for now, but it’s worth the conversation some other time.

Here’s the synopsis of the movie: A quest that begins as a personal vendetta for the fierce Cimmerian warrior soon turns into an epic battle against hulking rivals, horrific monsters, and impossible odds, as Conan (Jason Momoa) realizes he is the only hope of saving the great nations of Hyboria from an encroaching reign of supernatural evil. 

The first opening sequence is just ridiculous as we see the birth of Conan during battle. The way he is brought out of the womb of his mother is so laughable that you are ready to either walk out or stay to see how worse it can get. Then the extreme violence kicks in as young Conan slices and dices some tribal assassins. What we ultimately get is entertainment on two levels: a) A bad movie that we can satisfyingly laugh at without shame, and b) the brutality and savagery of the violence which is where the movie makes its mark.

The re-imagination of this ‘Conan’ is nothing like the Arnold Schwarzenegger versions from the 80’s except in story, but that’s attributed solely to the Robert E. Howard books. Jason Momoa, the man who plays the new Conan, brings a vastly different approach than what Arnold brought to his character. Momoa is more like a lion, ferocious and cruel, dark and cold blooded. Think of Sean Connery and Daniel Craig’s James Bond. Two drastic approaches to the same character.

The rest of the cast is filler and worth a laugh or two. Ron Perlman, who plays Conan’s father, once again delivers a heavy dose of risible bad acting. Everything from his face to his delivery is just funny. When you see this movie know that you’re watching a lousy film, but one that you’ll acknowledge the entertainment value in. The characters grow on you and the masculinity of the film is just to chortle at for hours.

The 3D is subpar and nothing I would recommend paying extra for. Momoa directly told me in an interview that he couldn’t believe how good the 3D was. I’d have to disagree with ‘Conan’, but I wouldn’t want say that in his face. If you’d like to see good use of 3D effects, check out Fright Night 3D. That is excellent use of the technology and worth every cent you pay.

‘Conan the Barbarian’ is man’s movie and a really cheesy B film at that. It’s Jason Voorhees meets Jason Statham. This is not good moviemaking at all, but it is fun enough to have a good time with with the guys.

Jack Rico

By

2011/08/05 at 12:00am

Ted Faraone

By

2011/07/29 at 12:00am

Attack the Block

07.29.2011 | By |

Attack the Block

Other than the accents, the thing that may most differentiate British sci-fi pic “Attack the Block,” from its American counterparts is a relative lack of firearms.  It was only a few years ago that the British copper began to carry a gun.  Clubs were sufficient for generations.  Otherwise, American filmmakers could learn something from this contemporary tale of space-alien invasion of Earth.

Like “Cowboys & Aliens,” it has elements of a morality tale.  It also offers suspense, crime, an unlikely band of street rabble forced to save the planet, and a good deal of understated, classically British, comic relief.  It is not, however, a comedy as it is billed.  But it does have “coming of age” elements, which actually work.

Title will make little sense to American auds.  In UK, a “block” can mean many things.  In this case it refers to a subsidized apartment house, what the Brits call a “block” of “council flats.”  The block is turf to two gangs, a group of teen and pre-teen thugs led by Moses (John Boyega), whose weapon of choice is the knife, and whose mode of transport is the bicycle, and a rather more lethal bunch of drug dealers who are a generation older.  The two gangs come into conflict by accident of alien invasion.  Auds can guess which gang lives to tell the story.

Pic opens with Sam (Jodie Whittaker, who played opposite Peter O’Toole’s Maurice in “Venus” a few years ago) about to be mugged by Moses and his juvenile delinquent gang.  The mugging is interrupted by what looks like a meteorite but is in fact a space alien landing on a parked car.  It’s an ugly thing but not quite as awful as the creatures from “Cowboys & Aliens.”  Moses and the gang slay the thing and parade it around as if it were a prop.

All well and good until its mates come looking for it.  These nasty creatures are eyeless, black, hairy blobs who jump higher than an Olympian, scale tall buildings, and tear the guts out of their human victims.

The attack of the killer blobs leads to a couple of plot twists.  First, it brings about an encounter, founded on a misunderstanding, between Moses’ gang and the older drug dealers.  Second, it puts Moses gang into an almost guerilla mode as they flee to safety in the block’s “weed room,” a reinforced indoor greenhouse for growing marijuana.

For all his bravado as a delinquent, Moses is not exactly the bravest of guerilla fighters.  One of pic’s amusing subplots is Moses’ coming of age.  Another amusing subplot is provided by a couple of small kids, aged seven or eight, who show just what a super soaker can do to nasty space aliens.  The main plot, however, as with “Cowboys & Aliens,” lies in the alliance between erstwhile enemies in the face of greater danger.  Sam joins the teen gang.  The girls of the block get involved in fighting the aliens, too.  Even the geek, who come in for special bullying by Moses & Co. provides a critical plot twist and is eventually accepted as one of the in-crowd.  The plot twist is deceptively simple:  It seems, he points out, that the alien slain by Moses is a female.  The hairy blobs are males.  Moses and Co. have the female pheromones all over them.  That is what attracts the hairy blobs.  Auds can figure out the rest as Moses steps up to the plate in an action of almost commando precision.

Pic’s fall guys are the older drug dealers and the cops.  The latter can’t seem to get anything right, even a space alien invasion, which they see with their own eyes.

Unusual for British import, “Attack the Block” can be understood by American ears.  Sound recording is adequate.  Action takes place in one night, which is a money-saving device for filmmakers.  An abundance of night cuts the cost of set design.  Lensing by Thomas Townend is up to par.  Writer-director Joe Cornish helms with a steady hand, and pic is littered with ironic punch lines delivered in deadpan.  How English!  Kudos to Jonathan Amos for keeping pic down to 88 minutes in the cutting room.  Action, which abounds, is convincing, if a tad bloody.  Special effects lack the razzle-dazzle a Hollywood effort would offer, but it is not missed.  The aliens get their point across without it.

“Attack the Block” is rated R, largely for language and violence.  Sex is implicit rather than explicit.  The rating is a joke.  Today’s kids would love it.  Pic offers nothing they have not already seen in a video game.

Select a Page