The Latest in Latino Entertainment News

Jack Rico

By

2009/11/12 at 12:00am

The Messenger (Movie Review)

11.12.2009 | By |

The Messenger

The first 20 minutes of ‘The Messenger’ should remind you of the power movies can have on anyone. It is very well acted, but a tough movie to watch. This film is not for most people, but if you can stomach it, it is worth the watch and money to see. It’s not every day war movies are released and less so when they have to do with such a gut-twisting premise as this.

In his first leading role, Ben Foster stars as Will Montgomery, a U.S. Army officer who has just returned home from a tour in Iraq and is assigned to the Army’s Casualty Notification service. Partnered with fellow officer Tony Stone (Woody Harrelson) to bear the bad news to the loved ones of fallen soldiers, Will faces the challenge of completing his mission while seeking to find comfort and healing back on the home front. When he finds himself drawn to Olivia (Samantha Morton), to whom he has just delivered the news of her husband’s death, Will’s emotional detachment begins to dissolve and the film reveals itself as a surprising, humorous, moving and very human portrait of grief, friendship and survival.

Let me tell you why the film is good and worth the watch. The Messenger will jolt you emotionally, close to the way Precious does. It’s emotionally raw with situations that feel very real and unsettling. It’s brutal. You say “why do I want to see that?â€, but it’s like watching a car wreck on the highway – you slow down to see the post carnage. It’s the macabre part in all of us. Once the story reels you in, the film hits you with excellent acting from Foster and Harrelson. They own the screen and you are absorbed by their lives, problems and thoughts. Just when you can’t take enough drama, Harrelson breaks the tension with off the cuff humor which reminds you that this is just a movie. However, the pacing is off and it feels choppy at times. It goes off into tangents sometimes the way a conversation with a friend might. You can reel him back in, but you can’t do that to a movie. Part of those tangents that didn’t work were the bizarre romantic scenes with Morton and Foster which just didn’t match the level and intensity of the rest of the film, then a wedding crash by the protagonists which seemed out of place.

Credit goes to first time Israeli director Oren Moverman and Italian co-writer Alessandro Camon for creating a script that effectively captures the tribulations of post war trauma and the complex scenarios they harbor within them.

You won’t find many films that shake you ardently the way this does. Even with some of its flaws, it was a satisfying piece of work that you can for sure be pleased with.

Alex Florez

By

2009/11/11 at 12:00am

Fantastic Mr. Fox (Movie Review)

11.11.2009 | By |

*Updated December 2025

As daring as it might seem for director Wes Anderson (Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums) to switch gears and take a crack at an animated film for the first time, adapting a best-selling children’s book from a legendary author is arguably the bigger gamble. Or so you would think. With Fantastic Mr. Fox, Anderson proves he is up to the challenge. Read More

Terry Kim

By

2009/11/09 at 12:00am

Pirate Radio (Movie Review)

11.9.2009 | By |

If you are a fan of the 60s, and especially of 60s pop and rock music, then Pirate Radio is a must-see. There are more than fifty songs on the soundtrack, boasting familiar tunes by The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, and The Beach Boys, to name a few. Read More

Karen Posada

By

2009/11/09 at 12:00am

2012 (Movie Review)

11.9.2009 | By |

2012

If you’ve seen the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” by the same director Roland Emmerich then you’ve seen most of “2012”. It is definitely what one expects after seeing the preview, a movie that has a lot of entertainment value because it is action packed, there is not much more to take from it.
 
Emmerich seems to be stuck in the same genre with the last couple of movies he’s made, movies about the apocalyptic end of the world, this one just adds to that agenda. Not only do they develop a similar plot but the characters also seem to be the same just played by different actors. The movie which lasts 2hrs and 35minutes has a slow beginning and then slowly builds up to the earth cracking and the world sinking in, to comply with a myth from the Mayan calendar about the end of the world. Putting the Mayan calendar into play gives it a good backbone but it is barely discussed in the film, giving a little more thought into it would have made the film less surreal and the ending less utopical and carefree.

 

Our hero John Cusack (Jackson Curtis) was perfect for the role; he delivers every time and seems to be in control despite of the world falling around him. He is in charge of saving his family and what remains of the human race. Jackson is part of the broken family on which the film mainly focuses on; despite of the length of the film there’s not a real connection between these main characters. Amanda Peet (Kate Curtis) fails to convince me of her role as a caring mother. Chiwetel Ejiofor (Adrian Helmsley) who plays the all knowing scientist is pretty believable and takes on the role of leader with ease.
 
Emmerich wanted to make a film to entertain the audience and it does. The movie doesn’t drag but the fact that the world is ending and these few people are smarter than anyone else and are able to surpass a lot of the obstacles, made the film to me ridiculous to the point that I was laughing on scenes that I’m pretty sure I wasn’t supposed to. If you still want to see the movie it might be best to watch it in the movie theater to appreciate the special effects, otherwise save yourself the money and rent any of Emmerich’s latest films.

SBC Staff

By

2009/11/06 at 12:00am

A Christmas Carol (Movie Review)

11.6.2009 | By |

Every Christmas season we get hit with a multitude of holiday cheer films and every so often that film happens to be a new rendition of A Christmas Carol, so why is this one a cut above the rest? It’s not just because it’s in 3D this time, or because of Jim Carrey’s score of excellent performances, or just because of the cinematography, but because of the wonderment that everyone feels when they leave. Read More

Jack Rico

By

2009/11/06 at 12:00am

The Box (Movie Review)

11.6.2009 | By |

The Box

With such a simple title, how can ‘The Box’ end up being so convoluted? Thank director/writer Richard Kelly (the mastermind behind Southland Tales, one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen) for that costly gaffe. This film had the promise to be exceptional, marked by its beginning and ending, but the middle wrapped itself in tangled conundrums and it never managed to fully correct itself.

Norma and Arthur Lewis (Cameron Diaz and James Marsden), a suburban couple with a young child, receive a simple wooden box as a gift, which bears fatal and irrevocable consequences. A mysterious stranger (Frank Langella), delivers the message that the box promises to bestow upon its owner $1 million with the press of a button. But, pressing this button will simultaneously cause the death of another human being somewhere in the world; someone they don’t know. With just 24 hours to have the box in their possession, Norma and Arthur find themselves in the cross-hairs of a startling moral dilemma and must face the true nature of their humanity.

The message at its core is the avarice of men and how its implications will set off the cataclysmic genocide of mankind. This deep philosophical notion was not told well by Kelly. I don’t mind a mental challenge while at the movies, but at least provide me with some clarirty while you tell it. His adapted script is based on the short story ‘Button, Button’ from legendary fantasy writer Richard Matheson (I Am Legend, What Dreams May Come) and it is quite seductive and full of intrigue. Kelly’s version had the chance to be just as good if it weren’t for the occasional hiccups.

On the other hand, Ms. Diaz, of cuban ancestors, and Mr. Marsden (Enchanted, 27 Dresses) did a wonderful job of deciphering the jumbled script to give, in my opinion, strong and compelling performances. Marsden, in particular, is good every time out. Even in family fare such as ‘Enchanted’ (he was hilarious in it), Marsden can be proud of his work. Unfortunately, Langella just didn’t have enough to work from here.

Was it suspenseful? Yes. Was it interesting and compelling? Yes. Did it get so incoherent that it irrevocably lost me? Yes to that! Enjoy the film if you so choose, but remember, you’re also paying more than you should for it. It is not a bad film, but wait, wait, wait for it on DVD. 

Jack Rico

By

2009/11/06 at 12:00am

The Fourth Kind (Movie Review)

11.6.2009 | By |

The Fourth Kind

The Fourth Kind has many a scares, but it feels more like a made-for-tv movie than anything else. That doesn’t make it bad, it just makes the decision to wait for it on DVD that much easier. 

 

The film, based on ‘real events’ and shot juxtaposing documentary and reenactment footage, is a good thrill… for a few minutes. The film’s publicity and marketing material suggest that The Fourth Kind is based on actual occurrences , but the reality is that this is as “based on a true story” as Fargo was (not at all). It’s all part of a backstory that extends beyond the screen. The director, Olantunde Osunsanmi, purports include “real” footage of unexplained phenomenon that transpired in Nome, Alaska during the early years of the 21st century, but there are plenty of clues both in the footage and outside of it that debunk its veracity. One doesn’t need to be aware that no one named Abbey Tyler practiced psychology in Alaska to know this woman is not real. The makeup applied to her face during her “interviews” is not convincing and the unidentified actress playing Abbey may cause pause even for those who want to buy what Osunsanmi is selling.

 

Although it’s fascinating to dissect the movie on an intellectual level and examine what pieces and structural choices work and don’t work, I’m sure that’s not how the filmmakers intended their production to be approached. On a purely narrative level, The Fourth Kind offers the occasional “boo!” moment but is too tame (consider the PG-13 rating) to generate any lasting horror and too contrived to work on a dramatic level. The best thing I can say about it is at least it’s not another Asian horror remake.

SBC Staff

By

2009/11/05 at 12:00am

The Men Who Stare at Goats (Movie Review)

11.5.2009 | By |

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. Read More

Jack Rico

By

2009/11/03 at 12:00am

The Taking of Pelham 123

11.3.2009 | By |

Rating: 3.0

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/

 Go to our film page

“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.

SBC Staff

By

2009/10/29 at 12:00am

Michael Jackson’s This is It (Movie Review)

10.29.2009 | By |

Like much of anything Michael Jackson this film is a landmark. This Is It will immediately capture your heart. Read More

Select a Page