Precious
11.5.2009 | By Jack Rico |
11.3.2009 | By Alex Florez |
Rated: Not available
Release Date: 2008-04-26
Starring: Jorge Franco Ramos, Juan Manuel Rendon
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:Colombia
Official Website: http://www.paraisotravelmovie.com/
11.3.2009 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: R for violence and pervasive language.
Release Date: 2009-06-12
Starring: Brian Helgeland
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.catchthetrain.com/
“The Taking of Pelham 123” is good summer film fare, but it isn’t great. Not that this is a bad thing. The only reason you should go out and see this film is if you are a fan of either Denzel Washington or John Travolta, and are looking for some respectable acting. Otherwise, the action sequences are scant, and even though the premise is captivating, some implausible moments occur that deter you from investing too much of your time and brain power.
Denzel Washington stars as New York City subway dispatcher Walter Garber, whose ordinary day is thrown into chaos by an audacious crime: the hijacking of a subway train. John Travolta stars as Ryder, the criminal mastermind who, as leader of a highly-armed gang of four, threatens to execute the train’s passengers unless a large ransom is paid within one hour. As the tension mounts beneath his feet, Garber employs his vast knowledge of the subway system in a battle to outwit Ryder and save the hostages. But there’s one riddle Garber can’t solve: even if the thieves get the money, how can they possibly escape? That is what the film is all about.
If you ever had the chance to see the original ‘The Taking of Pelham 123’ with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw, you’ll see in this new version that there are many changes to the storyline. Director Tony Scott, who we spoke to in New York before the release of the film, commented how this project is not a remake but a new movie altogether. The changes do make the film better, but there is something to be said about the tone of the original that made it a good watch. Nevertheless, both stand on their own as good films, not great.
Latin actors Luis Guzman and Ramon Rodriguez played role characters and had some visible screen time, but not enough to for me to engage you in this particular review.
If I had to pick from the original and the new version to watch tonight, I’d go with the new one, because it provides more entertainment than the first. It won’t blow your mind away, but it’ll keep it from getting bored.
11.2.2009 | By Mack Chico |
Rated: PG-13 for crude and sexual content, language, some teen drinking and drug references, and brief violence.
Release Date: 2009-07-10
Starring: Larry Doyle
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.iloveyoubethcoopermovie.com/
Â
I Love You, Beth Cooper is a film that blends the satirical and the serious, although the former lacks the edge to give it bite and the latter is only occasionally applied with conviction. The result feels at odds with itself and never fully satisfies. There’s a sense that a much better movie is trying to get out but it never attains escape velocity.
Â
It’s graduation day for the seniors of Buffalo Grove High, and valedictorian Denis Cooverman (Paul Rust) is about to deliver an unusual address. In it, he professes unrequited love for the school’s head cheerleader, Beth Cooper (Hayden Panettiere). This delights Denis’ best friend, Rich (Jack T. Carpenter), who is the instigator of Denis’ confession. Beth is conflicted – despite being embarrassed, she finds the whole thing “so sweet.” Her thuggish, drugged-out boyfriend, Kevin (Shawn Roberts), decides that ending Denis’ life might be the best way to resolve an unpleasant situation. Events conspire to group Denis, Beth, Rich, and Beth’s two best friends, Cammy (Lauren London) and Treece (Lauren Storm), together for the night. Their misadventures include avoiding Kevin when he launches an attack on Denis’ house, breaking into the school for some fun in the showers, turning up at the most popular party of the evening, and spending time in a cabin in the woods. Out for blood, Kevin is always in hot pursuit, and both Beth and Denis discover things about their feelings for one another they weren’t expecting.
Â
The intended raunchy content has been watered down for PG-13 consumption. There is nudity, but it’s of the peek-a-boo variety. Director Chris Columbus, a graduate of the John Hughes school of filmmaking (perhaps best known for handling the first two Harry Potter movies), avoids anything deeply scathing or controversial. Although I Love You, Beth Cooper doesn’t quite fit neatly into the teenage romantic comedy mold, it comes close, with titles like Risky Business and The Girl Next Door being appropriate antecedents. (The Tom Cruise movie is even mentioned explicitly.)Â
Â
Hayden Panettiere is best-known for her role in the TV series Heroes, although her acting career stretches back much farther. She shows impressive range here, essentially having to play three versions of Beth Cooper: the image that attracts the eyes and stirs the hormones of all the boys in school (including Denis); the scary, reckless one who pushes boundaries and buttons; and the “real” girl behind all the curtains. Panettiere integrates the three into one, which is a more adept task than one might imagine. The performance is better than the movie deserves.
Â
There’s a sense that I Love You, Beth Cooper has been smoothed out and dumbed down to reach the broadest audience. (Not having read the novel by Larry Doyle, who also penned the screenplay, I can’t say for sure.) As good as some of the bonding material is, that’s how unfortunate many of the so-called comedic and generic story elements are. I Love You, Beth Cooper is schizophrenic – two very different movies uneasily occupying the same space and time. One of them has promise; the other is annoying and off-putting. The filmmakers lacked the courage and conviction to tell an honest, character-based story and resorted to something that has been massaged into a more comfortable, easily consumable cinematic morsel. Too bad the inevitable result of ingesting this is heartburn.
10.29.2009 | By Namreta Kumar |
Like much of anything Michael Jackson this film is a landmark. This Is It will immediately capture your heart.
The film takes you on a roller coaster ride. It opens with the tears of joy of the opportunity to work with the man who has defined music and dance in so many ways. While watching the film you almost forget that Michael Jackson is not here anymore. His vibrance, humor, and spirit leap off the screen and touch you.
This project developed by the archived videos of Michael Jackson’s last concert reveal art-making as an unfinished masterpiece. Kenny Oretga’s mosaic of Michael Jackson’s last days and dreams will undoubtedly inspire Michael Jackson fans. The raw images never hinder, as other documentaries may, but deliver the energy of another thrilling performance.
Through the eyes of these rehearsal lenses every music fan is delivered to the stage. The respect and L-O-V-E, love, that Michael Jackson works on every detail with is sure to move anyone. It is almost hard to judge the film objectively, because it seems to have another quality about it altogether.
Whether you look at it from a subject point of view or from a genre point of view This Is It is unique. You get a lot more than what you bargain for – A Film, A Concert, A Journey – This Is It honors the entertainer of entertainers.
10.27.2009 | By Jack Rico |
Rated: R for disturbing violent content, some sexuality and language.
Release Date: 2009-07-24
Starring: David Johnson, Alex Mace
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://orphan-movie.warnerbros.com/
Spanish helmer Jaume Collet-Serra begins ‘Orphan’ like your usual thriller, with scare alerts and false alarms, but it then becomes savagely violent and because it’s source is an innocent child, that savagery is heightened to a surreal peak that makes one twitch and uncomfortable. The first hour is a pure frightful delight, but it’s second half discombobulates into a typical, laughable yet unpredictable Hollywood fare.
So you have an idea of the story, some have compared this film to ‘The Good Son’ starring Macaulay Culkin, but the similarities stop at the first half. ‘Orphan’ is the mother load of all evil child movies. It’s sick and beyond anything you’d expect. The script has parts where it is absurd and ridiculous, but what about ‘Friday the 13th’ and ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ movies and we all love it, don’t we? Orphan is actually better than those films. The first half is as good as any suspense movie as I’ve seen since The Strangers, regrettably the rest of the film cannot be defended. What it could have been.
In this premise, the tragic loss of a couples’ (Vera Farmiga, Peter Sarsgaard) unborn child has devastated them. It has taken a toll on both their marriage and Kate’s fragile psyche as she is plagued by nightmares and haunted by demons from her past. Struggling to regain some semblance of normalcy in their lives, the couple decides to adopt young 10 year old girl. At the local orphanage, both John and Kate find themselves strangely drawn to a young girl named Esther. Almost as soon as they welcome Esther into their home, however, an alarming series of events begins to unfold, leading Kate to believe that there’s something wrong with Esther – this seemingly angelic little girl is not what she appears to be. Concerned for the safety of her family, Kate tries to get John and others to see past Esther’s sweet facade.
Director Jaume Collet-Serra is known in the circles for making the horror remake ‘House of Wax’ co-starring one rich and young Paris Hilton. This is by far a better offering than the aforementioned. The protagonists Peter Sarsgaard and Vera Farmiga are well-cast in the role, however, the manner in which the movie handles the other children, Daniel and Max, are perturbing. The film uses them as pawns in a demented game of danger and peril.
The climax is rather startling, combining the logic of the situation with audacity in exploiting its terror. Yet you have to hand it to ‘Orphan.’ You want a good horror film about a child from hell, you got one. This film is not for minors and I say this with all frankness, do not take children to see it. You’ll thank me for it later.
10.27.2009 | By Mack Chico |
Rated: PG for some mild rude humor and peril.
Release Date: 2009-07-01
Starring:
Director(s):
Distributor:
Film Genre:
Country:USA
Official Website: http://www.laeradelhielo3.com/
With each release, Pixar explores new themes and ideas. Meanwhile, animation studios like Fox retread tired “franchises” like Ice Age. Never representative of more than mediocrity from a technical or story-based standpoint, the Ice Age series has reached a new nadir with its third entry. Rather than adding an extra dimension to the entertainment, the decision to release Dawn of the Dinosaurs in 3D merely gives the animators an opportunity to be more slipshod in their design and execution. For the most part, the movie plays out like a demo for the video game, careening from one improbable action sequence to the next. I can see how the challenge of mastering some of these puzzles might be fun in an interactive forum, but they’re deadly dull in a movie.
The story has Manny the Mammoth (voice of Ray Romano) and his mate, Ellie (Queen Latifa), about to embark upon parenthood. Diego the Sabertooth Tiger (Denis Leary), feeling he has lost “it,” elects to leave behind the herd and strike out on his own. And Sid the Sloth (John Leguizamo) decides that, like Manny, he wants a family of his own. He achieves this goal not by finding a female and doing it the old fashioned way but by discovering three unhatched dinosaur eggs. Soon, he is being followed by three newly hatched T-Rexes, which is okay until a perturbed mother shows up wondering where her babies are. It turns out that there is a lost world of dinosaurs under the ice and, when Mama T-Rex kidnaps Sid and transports him down there, Manny, Ellie, and Diego follow. They are soon joined by a crazy weasel (Simon Pegg) denizen of the underworld who spends his days and nights hunting the biggest, baddest dinosaur of them all: a gargantuan carnivore called “Rudy.”
In the previous Ice Age movies, the best reasons to watch were related to the misadventures of Scrat the Sabertooth Squirrel, the prehistoric equivalent of Wiley Coyote. In Dawn of the Dinosaurs, Scrat is the only reason to watch.
Very little happens over the course of the film. What passes for a “story” is nothing more than a thinly-veiled excuse to incorporate dinosaurs into the proceedings, presumably because they’re popular with little boys.
The most disappointing thing about Dawn of the Dinosaurs is the movie’s look. Everything in this world is bland and generic. There’s no texture in the foreground and no detail in the background. It’s a small step up from Saturday morning cartoon quality. The excuse, I suppose, is that the “3D experience” compensates, but it also mutes the colors and dims the brightness. Dawn of the Dinosaurs looks awful. If I was one of the CGI animators, I’d be embarrassed to be associated with the film. I have seen amateur filmmakers do better work on their Macs.
Like Madagascar and Shrek (both Dreamworks properties), Ice Age is a brand-name and people will see it for that reason alone. Quality doesn’t come into it. It’s another example of something that offers a passable diversion for kids and a restless 90 minutes for the adults who accompany them. The 3D surcharge is a rip-off: the movie doesn’t do anything with the effect and there are even a few instances when it appears to be improperly applied. The best option is to ignore the existence of Dawn of the Dinosaurs altogether and see Up a second time. A repeat viewing of the Pixar film will be more rewarding than a first viewing of the latest Ice Age entry.
10.23.2009 | By Ted Faraone |
In an extraordinary move the Spanish government have restricted “Saw VI†(not surprisingly the sixth installment in the Jigsaw horror series) to the nation’s eight theaters that are allowed to show porno. While this begs the question, “Are Spaniards really into Pay Per View?â€Â Your critic says that it is an over-the-top judgment call.
Â
Your critic entered the screening room expecting something akin to a snuff film that would arouse men who harbor violent thoughts against women. Fortunately such was not the case. However, pic contains moments that those with weak stomachs should avoid.
Â
“Saw VI†meets or exceeds all standards on a technical level. Sound recording works. Lensing is competent. Special effects don’t look expensive, but work. Editing delivers just the right amount of tension. Where it falls down is in storyline and acting. There are three thesps who turn in creditable performances: Tobin Bell, who created the role of Jigsaw John, Betsy Russell as his wife, addiction doc Jill, and Peter Outerbridge as William, a medical insurance executive who is pic’s evil capitalist. The rest, notably Costas Mandylor as crooked detective Hoffman, either sleepwalk through their roles or need to go back to acting school. In Mandylor’s case, those who remember him from TV’s “Picket Fences†will be disappointed to know that he has both gained weight and lost talent. Dialogue is subpar. Plot leaves a ton of loose ends. Most of them have to do with the question, “Why?â€
Â
While dying of a cancer for which William’s insurance company refused to cover treatment (pic is at least timely) Jigsaw John has developed a very nasty post mortem revenge plot cloaked in pseudo human decency. He sets up William, the insurance VP who refused coverage for an experimental procedure, in a catch 22. He has to save himself by killing others. Instead of building suspense, plot is an excuse to string together a series of bloody vignettes. It’s a sort of “Galaxy Quest†on acid. Such clues as exist are telegraphed. Surprises surprise without any credible setup.
Â
It is never explained why wife Jill goes along with the bloody scheme and why crooked detective Hoffman executes it. It’s those pesky loose ends….
Â
Direction on a technical level by Kevin Greutert is good. Screenplay by Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton should have been sent back for rewrites. But “Saw†is a franchise. It functions on a different plane from the rest of cinema. It has a track record at the box office and a loyal audience. Lionsgate’s marketing strategy of not showing it to crix until opening day is open to debate, but pix such as “Saw VI†tend not be affected by notices.
Go to our film page
