Monsters
10.28.2010 | By Jack Rico |
 Go to our film page
10.25.2010 | By Karen Posada |
Rated: R for some strong sexual content and language.
Release Date: 2010-05-27
Starring: Michael Patrick King
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website:
They weren’t kidding when they said SPARKLE. Sex and the City 2 was completely extravagant and exaggerated, which is what in a way made it fun. This movie does more justice to the series than the original movie did. It is not full of ‘Carrie’ drama, like the last one. Instead we get to go away on a fabulous trip with the girls. It is a Cinderella story, they have to live and enjoy their time quickly before the clock strikes midnight. We travel to a world of fantasy, it is predominantly what we go to the movies for anyway, to dream and live vicariously through others.
It all starts with Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) taking us back in time to when she met each one of her girlfriends; Charlotte York-Goldenblatt (Kristin Davis), Miranda Hobbes (Cynthia Nixon) and Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall). The first main scene reunites them at a fabulous gay wedding. To describe it as a sparkly dream wedding is an understatement. We see how the girls lives have changed, Carrie living the Mr. & Mrs. Married life, which to her is getting boring and she wants to bring the sparkle back in the relationship. Charlotte has 2 little girls, that are driving her crazy and has a super hot nanny that makes her worry her husband might stray. Miranda is still the same workaholic she’s always been, but soon realizes what she’s missing out on. Samantha is fighting off menopause by taking 1.000 natural pills and keeping up with her sexcapades. The only man in the movie that doesn’t have a short appearance is Mr. Big (John James Preston) (Chris Noth); we see how he’s still trying to please Carrie even after they are married. The other men are barely showed in the film at all, it is after all about the girls. The best guest appearance was the one of Liza Minnelli; it was perfect; she does a fun dance performance. Penélope Cruz also does a cameo, she looks gorgeous and sexy more so than in her own movies.Â
I think what this movie gives the true fans of the show is a chance to spend more time with the girls, get away with them without all the drama. They go on a trip to a foreign land – Abu Dhabi, where Carrie bumps into her old flame Aidan (John Corbett), Samantha has a new set of hot boys to go crazy after, Charlotte gets a chance to rest from stressful motherhood and Miranda finds her fun self again. This trip brings them closer together and strengthens not only their relationship but the ones with their loved ones as well. One of the most interesting scenes of the film is when the girls are discussing how they perceive Muslim women as well as themselves. There’s a hint of feminism with a sprinkle of humor, which makes the subject light hearted.
There are several aspects that take away from the movie, there are a lot of ridiculous scenes, which might be meant as just fun, but it makes one laugh out loud sarcastically. The characters have become pretty predictable, which is the reason why there should have been no movies after the show ended; it takes away from the element of surprise. The women have become a parody of themselves, which takes any essence of reality left away from them. Lastly, although there is character growth the sole purpose of this movie is to make money; there was no need for a sequel, there’s nothing new that we learn from the characters.
If you were a fan of the show I recommend you watch it but you can certainly wait for it to come out on DVD, unless you have the time and the money to kill at a movie theater (it is pretty lengthy, maybe a little too lengthy). Samantha is definitely what makes this movie fun; if it wasn’t for her friends restraining her, the movie would be hilarious! Truth is that we all have girlfriends that are like any one of these women, which is what made the show so successful and it is what makes it so fun to watch. Just take the movie for what it is, a world similar to ours except that it is nearly perfect and beautiful but it was created for the sole purpose of entertaining. Ladies my only advice is not to torture your boyfriend with this film, go watch it with your girls.
10.24.2010 | By Ted Faraone |
It has been reported that “Monsters†was made for $15,000. That would put it in company with the awful “Paranormal Activity.â€Â It’s also a lot of baloney. Helmer Gareth Edwards feature debut is not a big budget effort. The most credible press report your critic has seen pegs shooting at $100,000 and post-production, which is where pic was really made, at $450,000. That should astonish no one who has looked at Edwards’ resume. He made his name as a visual special effects man. Edwards and backers got a lot of bang for their buck. Heck, Edwards even worked three more jobs — as writer, cinematographer, and special effects guru.
Â
Backstory is handled quickly. Six years prior to pic’s action, a NASA probe carrying life forms from outer space, crashed over Central America on re-entry to the Earth. The northern half of Mexico is now quarantined as an “Infected Zone.â€Â It turns out, about halfway through pic’s 94 minutes, that the Infected Zone is so named because that’s where the alien “creatures,†which look like giant squid (about 150 feet across), float through the air, and sound like elephants with sinus trouble, lay their eggs. Said eggs are attached to trees and glow when touched. US and Mexican military fight their advance mostly with air strikes and a giant border wall, the sight of which would probably put anti-immigration zealots into a state of ecstasy.
Â
Enter Andrew Kaulder (Scoot McNairy) a news photographer with a touch of sleaze, who is ordered to rescue the daughter of his publisher, Samantha Wynden, a cute blonde played by Whitney Able.  This is the last thing a guy who gets $50k from Wynden’s dad for shots of blood and gore, wants to do, but do it he must. His job is on the line. Meanwhile, the “creatures†show menacing signs of branching out from the Infected Zone. They also seem to be attracted to light at night, a tidbit auds should bear in mind.
Â
A dangling participle requires almost total suspension of disbelief. Why can’t Samantha simply get on a plane and fly back to the US — and what was she doing in Mexico in the first place given the nation’s chaotic state? And what about going south, to an airport or ship terminal far from danger? That would be too easy, and there wouldn’t be a movie.
Â
No. Kaulder and “Sam†have to take a train to the gulf coast and from there board a ferry to the US. Neither cares much for the other. Due to trouble ahead, the train stops and reverses course. The pair set off on foot, hitchhiking to the coast, which they finally reach late at night; pay an exorbitant amount for ferry tickets, and crash at a local hotel — in separate rooms.
Â
Herein lies pic’s turning point, where action finally achieves liftoff. Perhaps it is a lesson of sorts. Kaulder suggests that he and Sam bunk together. Sam vetoes the idea. He also suggests they go do tequila shots. She’d rather sleep. The ferry leaves at 7 am. Sam closes door on Kaulder. Kaulder hits the bar, does tequila shots, and picks up a prostitute.  She steals the pair’s passports and money while hungover Kaulder, in his underwear, chases a ticked off Sam who has walked away in disgust after paying him an urgent wakeup call. Note to girls: If your life depends on a guy, keep him in sight. Note to guys: 1. Don’t be so obnoxious that the girl you are to protect refuses to let you do so, and 2. Don’t get drunk and pick up a whore on the eve of your escape. The pair miss the ferry. No refunds.
Â
A price gouging ticket broker, who had charged the exorbitant sum of $5,000 for ferry tickets — It had better be the Queen Mary II at those prices — now wants an additional $5k per person to get them a river boat passage through the Infected Zone to the US. Sam pays with her diamond engagement ring.
Â
Despite a few close encounters with “creatures,†pic never really develops the suspense common to the genre as the pair claw their way to the US border. Here, too, pic takes some liberties with geography. Northern Mexico is not jungle terrain. Riverboat scenes were shot further south, in Guatemala. The genre issue is a tad complicated. Edwards is a special effects man who set out to shoot a love story. You send a special effects man to make a love story, and what you get is a love story pasted over a sci-fi thriller.  It’s not quite one or the other. Sharp-eyed readers will note that your critic made no mention of Sam having to be persuaded to pay for the trip through the Infected Zone with her diamond engagement ring. Perhaps hers is not a match made in Heaven.Â
Â
The ending, which comes almost unexpectedly — “Monsters†was edited crisply by Colin Goudie — is a tad loopy. It involves a pair of “creatures†mating. At least that’s what Edwards says they are doing, and one sort of gets the idea, but it is not entirely clear from the material. There is a parallel to be drawn, however, and Edwards draws it. But it also begs the question as to whether the “creatures†are pernicious, which is pic’s premise.
Â
“Monsters†carries an “R†rating. Your critic would give it PG. There is little objectionable language, no drug use, and no sex between humans.
10.22.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Paranormal Activity 2, the sequel to the already labeled cult classic original of the same name, offers more scares than the original, yet, it lost some of the genuine feeling of originality and authenticity that the first so frightfully showcased. It did add a Latino element… more on that later.
The plot line, which was so carefully concealed from the perusing press, is a prequel that leads into the sequel, and eventually is left open for a second sequel, meaning part three. In order to understand this movie, you must have seen the first one in order to appreciate the dialogue, specific occurrences and the appearance of a couple of characters.
From the opening frame, we witness a home video of a suburban family moving into a new household with their new born baby, Hunter, three weeks before the grim events of the first film. Rather quickly, we are informed that the mother and wife just so happens to be the sister of the vanished and possessed female victim (Katie Featherston) who was the lead actress from the original movie. Many allusions are then referenced to the previous film more than once throughout movie, even until the very end. The family, unfortunately, begins experiencing what they think are a series of ‘break-ins,’ but even their security cameras around their home only serve to realize that the events unfolding before them are more sinister than they seem.
Before I continue, it must be said how much the original weighed over this sequel. The first one was as good as they come. It felt real, much like The Blair Witch Project did. The supernatural incidents were filled with the simplicity and freakish genuineness that one can believe as true. Even the cast was perfect. Ms. Katie Featherston, large chest and all, had the characteristics that typifies the genre. This sequel didn’t necessarily sell the physical attributes of its female cast.
Speaking of females, one actress that really stood out to me, not necessarily because of her acting, but because of the her heritage, was the Latina nanny (note: Paramount has not given press any production notes on the film so many of the actors are uncredited). She speaks only in Spanish, no subtitles, and she mostly talked about how she kept on feeling an uncomfortable, malign presence in the house. It’s funny, Latino actors, for better or worse, are now becoming Hollywood’s go-to authorities on everything paranormal. If you remember Drag Me To Hell, Adriana Barraza played the exorcist and most recently, Jacob Vargas in ‘Devil’, was the first to detect the devil’s presence in the film. I guess it’s a jump up from gangsters and thieves. It makes sense though, Latinos do come from a long line of spiritual traditions that make them more knowledgeable about the ethereal world.
The film is a mockumentary directed by Tod Williams, and written by the original scribe, Orin Peli and newby Michael Perry. The production budget soared close to 3 million dollars for this one but you can barely tell where it went compared to the $11,000 version of the original.
Overall, Paranormal Activity 2 delivers the thrills and chills one looks for in horror films. The IMAX version also is a welcoming option if you can afford it. Go see it, you won’t be disappointed.
10.21.2010 | By Karen Posada |
Hereafter is a dramatic film that has many elements that make it worth watching, its strongest being the storyline. Don’t’ be fooled by the trailer, if you are expecting an action flick it has been advertised wrong; it is about death and the possibility of an afterlife and trying to understand what happens after we die. The first scene does a nice job in taking you in and wanting to explore more, the fact that it is split into three stories carried out by completely different characters in various parts of the world makes it all the more interesting. The subject matter might make some skeptic and want to turn away; as well as the feeble romance which takes away from the film. The film does convey it’s message well which is to raise questions and curiosity no matter how you feel about the subject.
Hereafter deals with mortality and how three strangers who have completely different lives are affected by it. George (Matt Damon) has a gift or curse from which he’s desperately trying to get away from, Marie (Cécile de France) is completely happy with her perfect life until a near-death experience changes all of that and Marcus (George Mclaren & Frankie McLaren) has to face death as well as separation at a young age. We get a very in-depth look at each one of these characters lives and we get to comprehend each one of their stories which have death, mortality and loneliness as underlying themes that connect them. They each toy with the idea of an afterlife and each one is on a path that they have to travel alone and despite of having some family members or friends it is on this lonely journey that they find their answers or closure and are matured by the process.
The screenwriter Peter Morgan told us a funny story on how after a long process his script, which was inspired by a book he read and the loss of a friend, ended up on the hands of one of the executive producers Steven Spielberg; he then went on to give it to Clint Eastwood who decided to direct it. Eastwood’s name is all over the film, everything is so well thought out and organized that we can see it was done by a top notch director. Here he tried to work with special effects on a well developed sequence which runs through smoothly, but I would not say is the best CGI work I’ve ever seen; it could have been much better, throughout most of it you could pick out the CGI elements easily which took away from it. Also, the final scene has some of the corniest music i’ve ever heard; not only is it cheesy but it changes the storyline as well; I found the romance unnecessary and desperate for a happy ending. The twin brothers in this movie were amazing, knowing that they are non actors made me appreciate their scenes even more. Their story is so touching that it was hard to keep my eyes from watering, close enough to tearing. De France’s strong character shows us that after a storm the sun always comes out with some perseverance and she portrayed that beautifully. It was interesting to see Damon in such a ‘push-over’ role, most of the time he’s kind of being told what to do and he follows along; it shows the quality of his acting and how diverse it can be.
Besides posing questions the film teaches us one thing about death no matter what our beliefs are about it: we need to learn to let go and move on. I appreciated the film for kind of poking fun at one of the themes it promotes, but also because it shows us how deep human relationships go, how easily we are tied to one another and how hard it is to move on from that to be our own individual selves. It deals with the ‘hereafter’ not the idea of heaven or hell, so there’s more of a spiritual tie to it than religious which makes it easier to swallow.
10.18.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: Not available
Release Date: 2010-07-09
Starring: Alex Litvak & Michael Finch
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.predators-movie.com/
Predators, a re-invention of the film that was made popular by Arnold Schwarzenegger in 1987, is what should have been Predator 2 from 1990. For me, Predators, with an ‘S,’ is a cross between a remake and a sequel.
The plot is very similar – a group of murderers are best hunted in a game by three aliens known as Predators.
The film is not as good as the original version. While for DVD it’s entertaining, I hope you didn’t spend your money for it in the theater.
The action is a bit weak and there are no charismatic characters as Arnold was. Not much here to please.
The film features a modest cast: Topher Grace, Laurence Fishburne, Danny Trejo, Alice Braga and Adrien Brody.
10.18.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: PG
Release Date: 2010-04-23
Starring: Christophe Cheysson, Jacques Cluzaud
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:France | Switzerland | Spain | Monaco | USA
Official Website: http://disney.go.com/disneynature/oceans/
Â
Disney is once again at it, creating rapturous sea imagery in ‘Oceans,’ their second cinematic effort distributed through there newly minted Disneynature Studios. If you are glued to the National Geography or Animal Planet channels, you won’t see anything different or innovative here, but what you will see is never before seen footage of sea creatures that we never even knew existed. That one fact makes all the difference in the world.
Documentaries don’t really have scripts, but the ‘plot’ here is the chronicling of the mysteries of the sea the way no human has ever seen it before. Directors Jacques Perrin and Jacques Cluzaud dive deep into the very waters that sustain all of mankind—exploring the harsh reality and the amazing creatures that live within. Actor Pierce Brosnan, an active environmentalist, narrates some of the most fantastic and surreal scenes on Earth.
The filmmakers began my sea experience through the eyes of a boy as he lays his eyes on the beach for the very first time. He’s overwhelmed. Brosnan begins speaking about what questions the boy, as well as us, might have about the crystal, deep blue sea.
What is remarkable and astounding is the onerous production in making a doc like this. Filmmakers traversed all five of the Earth’s oceans and devoted two full years to the preproduction process. That was followed by four years of shooting, with 75 excursions to dozens of the planet’s most untouched spots. It took nearly another year of postproduction to winnow down the 480 hours of footage. Overall, the task took seven years to create all for the price of a movie ticket.
Many of the sites visited where in Latin America such as Costa Rica, Panamá, Argentina, Galapagos, Venezuela and Mexico. The beauty that still lies there is ethereal.
For a mere 83 minutes, “Oceans†manages to extract some emotions from me by putting me in the middle of the action with a great white shark shredding to pieces a lovely sea lion, or watching a symphonic ballet of traveling tuna and awing me with the spectacle of exotic creatures that looked like something out of a Phillip K. Dick novel – The Blanket Octopus, The Spanish Dancer, The Manta Shrimp, The Ribbon Eel and the Leafy Seadragon.
This is beyond art, it is the best nature film I’ve ever seen of the sea. Oceans along with IMAX: Hubble 3D are by far the best documentaries of the year.
To follow Jack Rico’s film review check him out on Twitter at @jackricofficial
10.18.2010 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: Not available.
Release Date: 2010-05-28
Starring: Alejandro Amenábar, Mateo Gil
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA, Spain
Official Website: http://www.agoralapelicula.com/
One of my favorite directors in cinema is Alejandro Amenabar (The Sea Inside, The Others, Abre Los Ojos) of Chilean-Spanish descent. His new film, Agora, is perhaps his most ambitious movie of his career, but not necessarily will it be his most popular.
The plot centers on the life of the philosopher Hypatia, played brilliantly by Rachel Weisz, who lived in Alexandria in the 4th century AD when Christianity had been adopted by the Roman Empire and was displacing the prevailing paganism as a religion. Orestes (Isaac), a slave who clings to the new religious doctrine with the hope of finding in it the aspirations of freedom he craves and one improtant matter, he loves his master and teacher Hypatia.
The theme of Agora to me is fascinating, provocative and intellectually stimulating, but I will not deny that the pacing is dead slow and its middle arc a bit boring. Technically, the art direction and costume design is breathtaking. The performances are worthy of applause. It contains enough conflict and action to make it commercial. Amenábar has created his Quo Vadis, but I think in the end, it is a difficult film to digest for the masses.
10.18.2010 | By Jack Rico |
How to Train Your Dragon is a moving, charismatic 3D animated film that is sure to draw smiles, wonderment and a few tears from most of you. The voices couldn’t have been better cast, the story’s family and friendship themes are on mark and the 3D flight experiences are to applaud. Kids are going to love this film and parents will too, but they’ll be doing most of the sobbing. Read More
