Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole
09.23.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Go to our film page
09.21.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: R for a rape scene, violent images, some graphic nudity and language.
Release Date: 2010-04-16
Starring: Juan José Campanella
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:Argentina
Official Website: http://www.elsecretodesusojos.com/
09.21.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: PG-13 for violence including intense sequences of warfare, and some sexual content.
Release Date: 2010-05-14
Starring: Brian Helgeland
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.robinhoodthemovie.com/
The new adaptation of Robin Hood, directed by Ridley Scott (Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator) and starring Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett hits the big screen after much anticipation and hype. Is this the definitive version to ever be done by Hollywood? Not by far, but it is a noble intent. This adaptation is a prequel, that is, an account of the origins of the green hero before he stole from the rich and helped the poor. The film has some fine moments but also lacks of a fresh new approach to an old story.
The plot begins with the death of King Richard of England (Danny Huston) and Robin Longstride (Crowe) traveling to Nottingham, a city that suffers from corruption and oppressive taxes from the sheriff, to start a new life. There, Robin falls in love with the widow Lady Marion (Blanchette), meets Friar Tuck (Mark Addy) and fights in the war against the French.
To be fair, I found the film to be entertaining and visually absorbing, but due to weak development of the story and shortcomings of some secondary characters, there were moments of confusion in several of its sequences. For example, for most of the film, I could not distinguish who were the British or the French, I couldn’t understand the dialogue very well at first due to the rough and the villains motives weren’t fleshed out properly.
However, if you’re looking to entertain yourself, any imperfections the film might have are put aside for the high level entertainment value. I particularly left satisfied enough to recommend it for a few reasons: one because Crowe and Blanchette are tremendous actors, second because the director Ridley Scott captured beautiful scenes, and third, the locations and details of the movie transport you to back to that period. Robin Hood is worth the watch.
09.17.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Last night I had the chance to see the first screening of ‘Devil,’ written and conceptualized by M. Night Shyamalan, the same guy who everyone seems to be laughing at nowadays. The movie in my mind was entertaining, suspenseful, freaky at times, thrilling and what I think to be, a wonderful and captivating premise.
Five strangers (Logan Marshall-Green, Geoffrey Arend, Bojana Novakovic, Jenny O’Hara, Bokeem Woodbine) in Philadelphia begin their day with the most commonplace of routines. They walk into an office tower and enter an elevator. As they convene into this single place, they are forced to share a confined space with strangers. Nobody acknowl- edges anybody else. They’ll only be together for a few moments. But what appears to be a random occurrence is anything but coincidental when the car becomes stuck. Fate has come calling. Today these strangers will have their secrets revealed, and face a reckoning for their transgressions. Slowly, methodically, their situation turns from one of mere annoyance to sheer helplessness and abject terror. Terrible things begin to happen to each of them, one by one, and suspicion shifts as to who among the five is making it all happen…until they learn the unspeakable truth: one of them is the Devil himself. As those on the outside try in vain to free them, the remaining passengers realize that the only way to survive is to confront the very wickedness that has led them to today.
Devil is the first installment of The Night Chronicles, a series of terrifying stories conceived by Mr. Shyamalan that he now turns into movies with up-and- coming filmmakers. The man chosen for his fist foray into the series is John Erick Dowdle, who displayed a natural sensibility for camera placement and pacing.
Perhaps one of the most delightful experiences of the film was accomplished Spanish composer, Fernando Velázquez’ Hitchcockian score. It was an obvious throwback to the classic Hitchcock scores of Rope, The Man Who Knew Too Much, etc.
The movie is also sprinkled with a plethora of superstitious Latino legends and myths about the devil that I remember hearing ever since I was a kid. Shyamalan did great work in incorporating that Latino theme into the film via Ramirez the security guard (Jacob Vargas), a devout Catholic, recent immigrant who is superstitious and the first to realize the demonic aspects of what is happening in his building. He’s trying to convince the others that the events taking place are supernatural. Vargas played the part innocuously somber, but peppered with a touch of unintentional humor.
The acting by the cast was very solid and not at all deserving of criticism. There was really no blunders to speak of, which is why I can’t review this film as if it were bad. It’s actually good!
I’ve seen all of Shyamalan’s films and I have to say to those who think his films are deplorable, then you haven’t seen Vampires Suck or Miss March. Devil serves its purpose as entertaining escapism and it does it well. It will make you cringe and twinge all while still subtly humoring you. The quality to scare people is a difficult task for any director and Devil manages to do it without misstep. Devil serves up the scares, the screams and the creepiness. Is it the best horror film of the year? No, but you will get your money’s worth.
09.16.2010 | By Jack Rico |
In his second effort as a director, actor Ben Affleck tackles another Boston theme film in ‘The Town,’ about a romance that stems from a bank heist. This sophomore project is not as enthralling as his first film ‘Gone Baby Gone,’ yet, it is perhaps one of the better films of the 2010. Come Oscar time, it wouldn’t surprise me if it is elected to the ten best films of the year. The acting is wonderful yet again, the story is as interesting as any other this year and its entertaining enough to keep you from ever thinking of ‘Gigli’.
On the surface, ‘The Town’ is a bank heist film and a darn good one too, but at its core, it is about a guy who’s trying to get out of the slum, and more importantly, the life of crime he’s inherited from his father. The premise follows Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck), a ‘good guy’ bank robber who is the leader of a crew of ruthless bank robbers, who pride themselves on taking what they want and getting out clean. However, everything changed on the gang’s last job when Jem (Jeremy Renner) briefly took a hostage: bank manager Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall). Doug unfortunately crosses the line and becomes romantically involved with the hostage. Yes, he’s crazy, but it’s part of the thrill of the tension-filled film. Don Draper (cough), I mean Jon Hamm, decides he’s Melvin Purvis and Eliot Ness combined and is on a mission to get Doug and Jem. So what’s it going to be Doug? Betray your friends or lose the woman you love?
Compared to other recent crime dramas, like Brooklyn’s Finest or Pride and Glory, this one stands higher because the characters feel more real, like they could exist in real life, except of course, Don Draper who is a walking comic book.
Affleck co-wrote, directed and acted in this film, which is not an easy task for anyone, just ask Woody Allen and Quentin Tarantino. He is establishing he has a skilled and adroit hand at the camera, emotional depth as an actor with each passing film and a keen and intuitive sense for story selections.
The film has very good entertaining value. It has sequences full action and suspense worthy of knots in your stomach. If you like bank heist films this will definitely be on the top of your list along with ‘Inside Man,’ but without the rapid cutting, loud thumping explosions helicopter scenes. This is slower paced, the characters are more thoroughly developed, almost methodically. The Town is a fantastic selection for this weekend and any other time you want to see a film that is a bit better than the rest.
09.15.2010 | By Karen Posada |
‘Never Let Me Go‘ is based on a novel by Kazuo Ishiguro, the drama is followed by a sci-fi twist that can be perceived as realistic. It is developed over three different chapters narrated by Kathy (Carey Mulligan), who tells the story retrospectively, which should give you a better sense of the story but still leaves some gaps in it. The film has a nostalgic feel all throughout, the characters are seen smiling on screen briefly; the pained feeling is always floating in the atmosphere. This thriller/drama is well done, but if it wasn’t for the ambiguity of key points to the movie it could have been better.You will be left with a hollow feeling after watching it and after being hit with a very strong closing line.
The story is set in England, it revolves around Kathy and her two childhood friends Ruth (Keira Knightley) and Tommy (Andrew Garfield), who grew up in a boarding school for special children called Hailsham. The school seems to be an orphanage as the only adults are the teachers better known as ‘guardians’, here the children are taught to take care of their bodies and obey all rules without questioning them. The children’s faith is revealed pretty early in the story and that is what sets the mood for the rest of the film. The love triangle that is formed and continues to follow the children into their adulthood is meant to be a strong aspect of the movie and although it is easy to sympathize with it, their naivety and innocence which brings them together takes away from the strength of this bond.
These three children are forced into companionship by their own loneliness and fear of a world that they don’t know. When at 18 they leave the premises of Hailsham knowing the purpose for their existence they try to explore the world around them and figure out where they came from. Kathy becomes isolated by the relationship between her friends and she suffers silently until she makes the decision to change her life, even if it is still within the realm of what she is allowed in the few opportunities they are given. When they reach adulthood they try to fix mistakes made in the past and try to change the path they were given.
Knightley’s casting as a secondary character was surprising, but by the nature of the character it is understood, she gives a good performance and even makes us pity her. Mulligan’s innocence is really convincing and her sweet and obedient attitude keep the mood of the movie steady and at some points you just want to shake her to give her some confidence. Garfield is just there, but he does play one of the strongest moments of the movie remarkably. For director Mark Romanek this is definitely a step up from One hour photo.
The movie questions ethics, humanity, relationships and how much we really understand about our own lives and our purpose on earth as well as our time in it. The story line is good but it is not strong enough to be convincing. It is worth a watch specially for the hopeless romantics, but it is also worth the wait on the DVD.
09.15.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action.
Release Date: 2010-05-28
Starring: Doug Miro, Carlo Bernard, Jordan Mechner, Boaz Yakin
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://adisney.go.com/disneypictures/princeofpersia/
Movies based on videogames are usually not very successful in Hollywood as in the case of Max Payne, Street Fighter and Hitman recently. But ‘Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time‘ is perhaps one of the best in the genre and that’s not necessarily a compliment.
The film starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Gemma Artenton and directed by Mike Newell (Love in the Time of Cholera), follows an adventurous prince who joins a rival princess to stop an evil ruler whose plan to unleash a sandstorm could destroy the world.
Although the film is visually stunning and at times entertaining, the film tends to be very childish and not absorbent enough to retain the interest of adults. However, the infantile humor and cheezy romance is perfect for teenage audiences.
09.15.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: PG for brief rude behavior, some language and incidental smoking.
Release Date: 2010-05-14
Starring: Jose Rivera
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.letterstojuliet-movie.com/
Men: ‘Letters to Juliet’ is a film with such pipe dream romance that you can’t help but barf more than once. Mexican heartthrob Gael Garcia Bernal co-stars and Puerto Rican Jose Rivera writes this cheesy and predictable film very hard for any straight man to like.
Women: You’ll love, love, love ‘Letters to Juliet’ because you’ll be swept away in the glittering panoramas, the unconditional search for love and the poppy soundtrack that your local top 40 station plays. Moreover, the true reason you’ll love this film is because men like Charlie (Christopher Egan) will fight for your love even though you’ll push men like this away all the time in real life.
The plot of ‘Letters to Juliet’ is interesting. An American girl (Amanda Seyfried) on vacation in Italy finds an unanswered “letter to Juliet” — one of thousands of missives left at the fictional lover’s Verona courtyard, which are typically answered by a the “secretaries of Juliet” — and she embarks on a quest to find the lovers referenced in the letter.
When it comes to romantic movies, I have adopted a philosophy. All you really need to develop a love story, successfully, is that the characters are well developed, the actors playing the leads display a degree of sexual chemistry, and that their relationship is portrayed on the screen naturally. Details of the plot are relatively irrelevant as all romance films follow a predictable path. Unfortunately, lately, romantic movies have become less and less convincing, with stars having higher priority than the narrative and interesting supporting characters never being fully fleshed out. Unfortunately, ‘Letters to Juliet “does not apply my formula to the ‘letter’, thus, its virtues are few. Its core narrative is more given to the sensibilities of young women and tweeny girls.
Gael Garcia Bernal plays Victor, a chef whose top priority in life is to open his own Italian restaurant in New York. Gael plays one the romantic interests to Amanda Seyfried. For Gael to be acting in this film, it had to be a hefty paycheck to convince him. He derides these types of films and more likely did it to make an indie back home in Mexico.
‘Letters to Juliet’ is for women who are looking for their prince charming or are not happy in their own relationship. If you female friend are in this situation, you’re gonna love, love, love this film.
09.10.2010 | By Jack Rico |
I have seen some really putrid films in my life (i.e: Punisher: War Zone, Miss March, All About Steve, I Love You Beth Cooper, Year One, to name just a few). ‘Resident Evil: Afterlife’ is not one of them. It is a highly stylized movie that borders on the absurd, yet it has moments of pure entertaining 3D sci-fi action bliss.
This time around, Alice (Milla Jovovich) fights off mean deadheads and continues on her journey to find survivors and lead them to Arcadia, a safety zone somewhere in the Arctic.
This is the fourth installment of the Resident Evil series and it can still deliver a good dose of action. This one, unfortunately, didn’t indulge as much in that department as the previous efforts. We got more dialogue than needed. The 3D experience was top notch though and it made up for the sluggish and sedate middle act. It was definitely the highlight. If you are still interested in seeing the film after this review and were wondering on spending a few more extra dollars to see it in 3D, I say go for it. It is money well spent.
As for the rest of the film, let’s be honest – you don’t go see these films for their cinematic achievement. You go see it to laugh with your buddies at the ridiculous over the top posing done by B and C list actors (obviously requested by the B director). Oh and yes, how could I continue without mentioning the obligatory relentless mass killings, death defying jumps, inconceivable far-fetched escapes and slow motion backflips. A great example of those delicious and ludicrous, cheezy, risible scenes include Ali Larter’s character Claire Redfield. She flees a giant wielding axman to only do a backflip at the last second, against a wall, and land perfectly on the floor with a smile as if she was posing for a Maxim magazine cover – oh wait, didn’t she already do one of those? Nevertheless, that scene alone merited a hearty laugh out loud moment on my behalf. There were a plethora of those scenes throughout the film that doomed it from being the best of the four. But alas, this is the type of movie that Paul W.S. Anderson creates. Interestingly enough, he was the director of the first Resident Evil film.
Perhaps one of the most laughable characters of the film was Albert Wesker – the villain. I’m not sure if actor Shawn Roberts was deliberately trying to do his best Agent Smith impression from the Matrix movies or what, but it was embarrassing. Once again, I laughed, laughed, laughed every time he came on the screen. Be original for christ sakes! Then there is the issue with the token Latino (Sergio Peris-Mencheta) and black guy (Boris Kodjoe). From those two, I dare you to take a wild guess at who dies and who lives. Most likely your first gut answer is right.
Yes, most of this review harps on the bad. But as you can tell, the bad is adjoined with laughter, good laughter that serves a purpose – to escape reality for a bit and share the lampooning with your friends. ‘Resident Evil: Afterlife’ is a good bad movie. Go see it and stay for the credits – there is a surprise if you’ve seen the previous three parts.
