Animated film with Johnny Depp as the voice of Rango, a chameleon with a vivid imagination and love of story telling. Rango accidently winds up in the town of Dirt an old west town full of residents looking for a hero. Rango's story telling convinces the town he is a hero and soon he is the sheriff. As with all westerns, at some point the big showdown comes and Rango has to look deep inside himself, with a little help from the man with no name, to find his courage.
I liked Rango, this is an animated film, but it isn't a kids film. The humor is for adults and the characters are adult characters. I found the film funny and the story, once it got going, was compelling. Recommend
Source Code
Jake Gyllenhaal plays Colter Stevens an Air Force pilot shot down in Afghanistan, most of his body is gone, but his brain is still functional. In a high level experiment the Air Force has found a way to place Colter in another person's consciousness. He is sent back to a commuter train in Chicago to stop a person from bombing the train and he only has 8 minutes to do it. He fails, but is sent back to try again and again and again.
I didn't hate this film, but I didn't really like the film either. The story fails to build any suspense, at times, I thought Colter's actions were dumb and the romantic ending was a little too sweet for my taste. I will say that Michelle Monaghan, Jake Gyllenhaal's love interest, is very good in the film as is Vera Farmiga. Jeffrey Wright also has an important role in the film. Despite the good work of the cast I can't recommend the film..
Matt Damon and Emily Blunt star in the film as two people in love with each other being kept apart by fate. In this case, fate is actiual people who are assigned to make sure a person's life turns out like it is intended to by the higher powers. Damon, a politician, won't listen to the powers that tell him if he ends up with Blunt both their lives will be altered for the worse and he continues to pursue her. To be with her, he must overcome the forces opposed to their love and risk the bright future intended for him.
I really enjoyed this film, the story is original and the chemistry between Damon and Blunt is exceptional. Blunt is especially good as an elite dancer who has a bit of a wild streak in her, when she is on screen the film really comes to life. The film is cleverly told, well acted and a lot of fun to watch. Recommend.
Yesterday I took in a rare double feature. In the afternoon I went to the local multiplex and saw Rise of the Planet of the Apes. I thought I'd like the film, but I didn't think I'd all but LOVE it. . .it really is beautifully made and surprisingly touching. I also got a kick out of the clever references both to the original film and to the best of its sequels, Escape from TPOTA; and it was nice seeing Draco Malfoy get his hindquarters kicked by a computer-animated chimp instead of a computer-enhanced Harry Potter.
On the other end of the spectrum, though, in the evening I watched Jack Black's assault on Gulliver's Travels. I didn't expect it to have much fidelity to Jonathan Swift's great satire, and it doesn't; but I hoped it might be funny and maybe have something to say about modern times. . .but it doesn't. Nope: just Jack Black in super-slacker mode, teaching little people to chill out and love rock 'n' roll. He did that much better in School of Rock. So: I recommend the movie made about apes, not the one made by apes.
Not Only But Always, a biopic about Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, with Rhys Ifans (never looking tidier and better-groomed) as the former, Aidan McArdle as the latter. I'd heard the Cook-Moore collaboration described as a bad marriage--even this movie makes the comparison--and the film was pretty well like watching one. The focus is all on jealousy, bitterness, and alcoholism; little to nothing is on what made them a meaningful--or even memorable--comedy duo. Rent a video of the originals. . .
Oddly, here's this clip of the pair in chat with Mavis Nicholson around 1992, interspersed with flashbacks from 1973. The pair seem more than happy to get on, and if it's an act, well it's a good one, and what wouldn't one give to see Lennon and Macca trading quips over a liquid lunch many years after the Beatles. Of course, they might well have gone on to do that had some nutter with a gun not got in there first.
How was the 3D ? The reviews I read said the film was good but the 3D was poor....
It's a post-conversion so the 3D will never be as good as something that was shot natively in 3D.
I'd give the 3D a 7 out of 10; even though its a post-conversion the film was clearly shot with 3D in mind and the filmmakers managed the placement of foreground and background objects well enough so that there was a nice sense of depth most of the time. At my screening the brightness was very strong as well and I never had trouble making things out. In terms of stuff popping out of the screen, there is very little of that but the few attempts do work well, including a great shot of Cap's shield bouncing off a tank and flying straight at you (that one actually made me flinch in my seat).
Of the 3D movies I've seen this summer (Thor, Priest, Green Lantern, Transformers 3 and Captain America) I'd say Transformers had the best 3D (obvious since it was shot natively) with Captain America coming in a respectable second.
Of course, your mileage may vary since how an individual screen is set up will greatly impact the quality of the 3D.
Took in the 3D showing of Captain America today. I must say the movie impressed me a lot. Better than Green Lantern. For me the movie moved quick. Some people have said the build-up took to long. I thought it was just right. Just the right amount of humor at the right times. It probably also helped with some of the special effects. The movie is set in the early 1940's. Some of the technology shown in the movie isn't in use today, like Starks anit-gravity car. The monorail also impressed me, even though it was shown for only a few seconds. I'm not too good at writing reviews. I'll just leave it at a must see movie.
Now about the 3D. I was also impressed with the 3D in the movie. As Tony mentioned it has a nice sense of depth in the movie and not much pops out at you. Yes Tony, the shield made me flinch to. It just happened so quick. Only downside was a couple scenes. One is when CA jumps off a ramp of concrete. The camera is shooting upwards. The motorcycle and CA seem so small against the backdrop. I also noticed it in a couple other scenes, huge backdrop, small main focus. Is this a downside to post-conversion 3D? Otherwise, most of the movie was decent in 3D. The movie wasn't quite 2D, but had that little extra depth to it.
Some people would complain even if you hang them with a new rope
Last night I sat down with a DVD and received a huge Sucker Punch. What an appropriately named film! I really thought I'd see a dumb-but-harmless action film laden with FX images; what I received was one of the nastiest, most dour, joyless, and misogynistic films I've seen in ages. Although I liked Zack Snider's 300 and Watchmen, I could detect these elements in those films, too; that he wallows in them in Sucker Punch has me very worried about his take on Superman.
Cinema - Captain America. Entertaining....but looking forward to the Avengers more.
Tend to agree with TonyDP though in that Transformers 3 is the best 3D film so far this year.
DVD - a couple in the last few nights. The 2001 Planet of the Apes that I fell asleep in first time round. Made it to the end and then scratched my head for a while (bit like an ape really), trying to work out the ending.
Last night - The Expendables. Amusing, but the plot was a bit too predictable. Harmless escapism (and a timely reminder that Arnold Schwarznegger still can't act!)
"The distance between insanity and genius is merely success"
Our Idiot Brother, with Paul Rudd as a modern hippie who always sees the best in people and always tells the truth--which of course causes havoc for the people around him. A genuinely genial comedy--pleasant but not great--that avoids the modern trend toward being gross. . .unless you count having to look at Steve Coogan's bare buttocks. . .
Spirits of the Dead - Three tales of the supernatural and the macabre inspired by the works of Edgar Allan Poe.
Metzengerstein was directed by Roger Vadim and stars a young Jane Fonda as the debased Countess Frederique. When her cousin Wilhem spurns her advances she inadvertently brings about his death by setting his stable of horses on fire. No sooner does Wilhem perish than a mysterious black horse appears, completely mesmerizing Frederique. Vadim takes some liberties with Poe's original story, changing the gender of the main character and adding a fairly explicit layer of eroticism that was only vaguely hinted at in the original text. Despite its liberties, the sight of Ms. Fonda in various skimpy outfits seemingly left over from Barbarella as well as a general atmosphere of dread and forboding still make this a worthwhile adaptation.
William Wilson, directed by Louis Malle, stars Alain Delon in the dual role of the evil William Wilson and his mysterious doppleganger who mysteriously appears every time Wilson intends mischief. While Malle adds a level of gore and graphic violence that was not in the original text, this is still a very faithful adaptation that makes good use of the European locales to really capture the vibe of the short story.
Toby Dammit, directed by Federico Fellini, drifts the furthest from the original story. "Never Bet The Devil Your Head" was a satirical piece about a never-do-well braggart named Toby Dammit who used the phrase "I'll bet the devil my head..." once too often. Fellini turns the tale into an exercise in the surreal and populates it with his trademark strange characters and locations. Terrence Stamp plays Toby as as washed out, self-destructive actor who keeps seeing a little girl with a ball that might be the devil. Set in modern times, the story still manages to convey Poe's creepy vibe, especially the final scenes of Toby driving around aimlessly in a Ferrari and his fateful encounter with a damaged bridge.
When I was younger I absolutely devoured Edgar Allan Poe's stories and to me these are solid adaptations. Rather than completely changing the subject matter and reducing each story to some kind of plot involving infidelity, as Roger Corman regularly did with his adaptations, these embrace the stories on which they are based (especially Metzengerstein and William Wilson) and the genuine locations, atmospheric scores and period dress really serve to set a proper vibe.
I'll keep it simple, the first ever Bond release, Dr No
Ursula Andress really is cute
Connery hitting big spider with slipper to dramatic sound effects is unintentionally hilarious
Jospeh Wiseman doesn't have enough screen time
cringeworthy ending and end credits lasts for all of 10 seconds
but still one of Connerys finest and a good starting point for the entire franchise
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,769Chief of Staff
Last night I watched 1969's The Bed Sitting Room...WOW ! Surreal doesn't begin to cover this one ! Written by Spike Milligan and John Antrobus, it's set in a post nuclear holocaust England...and really has to be seen rather than described....it stars Ralf Richardson, Michael Horden, Peter Cook, Dudley Moore and Spike himself...all ably supported by a who's who cast...it's both comic genius and startlingly bizarre at the same time...
Unknown is an excellent action/thriller starring Liam Neeson, January Jones and Diane Kruger. Neeson plays Dr. Martin Harris an expert in bio-crops, shortly after arriving in Berlin for a conference he is involved in a taxi cab crash. Saved by the taxi driver, Diane Kruger, he wakes up four days later with no identification and no memory. He begins to regain his memory, but when his wife claims to not know who he is and another man (Aidan Quinn) presents himself as Dr Martin Harris, he begins to wonder who he really is. With the help of Kruger and an old East German spy played well by Bruno Ganz he starts to unravel his past and is surprised when he finds what his real past is.
Despite a couple scenes that seem a little too convenient, I really enjoyed the film. The film is well acted, I especially enjoyed Kruger and Ganz, and the story is well written with several plot revelations I did not see coming. Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra with Cinematography by Flavio Martinez Labiano, the film, shot in Germany, has the feel and look of an old cold war mystery. With an excellent cast, well written story and a visually interesting production, Unknown is well worth a viewing.
Bradley Cooper of The Hangover fame stars as Eddie Morra a writer living in a cheap apartment in New York, unable to think of one sentence for his book. He loses his girlfriend, has no money for rent and has a drinking problem. However, everything changes for him when his ex-brother-in-law gives him a pill that allows him to use 100% of his brain. Suddenly he writes an entire novel in days, conquers the stock market and gets his girlfriend back. He becomes physically and mentally addicted to the pill and powers the pills give him, which leads to run-ins with low life mobsters, police, and corporate tycoons.
Although I liked parts of the film I would say I was disappointed in the overall movie. The film fails to delve into any of the moral questions of having the powers the pill gives Cooper, he does no societal good with the powers, he just enriches himself. In addition, I absolutely hated the ambiguous ending, I simply could not believe the movie ended as it did.
Wow, Barry, we seem to be on the same wavelength. . .I watched Limitless last night and had the exact same reaction: great premise, great start, but completely peters out. Hmmm--two AJBers, one movie, same response. . .there could be a movie in THAT setup. . .
Wow, Barry, we seem to be on the same wavelength. . .I watched Limitless last night and had the exact same reaction: great premise, great start, but completely peters out. Hmmm--two AJBers, one movie, same response. . .there could be a movie in THAT setup. . .
And it stays at two AJB members...for now...
I went to the cinema to watch this movie and quite enjoyed it...I felt it wouldn't have benefited from delving into the moral questions...it wasn't that type of film...plus Eddie was moving into politics at the end...he may have done that for 'societal good'....or not...as can be the case with some politicians )
Wow, Barry, we seem to be on the same wavelength. . .I watched Limitless last night and had the exact same reaction: great premise, great start, but completely peters out. Hmmm--two AJBers, one movie, same response. . .there could be a movie in THAT setup. . .
And it stays at two AJB members...for now...
I went to the cinema to watch this movie and quite enjoyed it...I felt it wouldn't have benefited from delving into the moral questions...it wasn't that type of film...plus Eddie was moving into politics at the end...he may have done that for 'societal good'....or not...as can be the case with some politicians )
I'm with you sir miles.... I enjoyed it... Not exactly tosca but fun- fare with a corny catchy ironic ending....
I saw this a few years ago but couldn't remember much about it other than I liked it. I can see why, even though it was last night and I stayed and enjoyed it all on telly, the set pieces aren't vivid in my mind. Lots of fight scenes and T2 type stuff. Actually what did happen to the Senator at the end? Did he reappear in villainous form after 'dying'? I can't remember.
I saw the second one also but damned if I can remember anything of that either.
The origins of how Professor X and Magneto first met, their friendship and eventual falling out is covered in this prequel to the popular X-Men films. The plot involves a mutant who plans to manipulate the USA and Soviet Union into starting World War III in a bid to wipe out humanity so that the mutants can sweep in and take over. You can be forgiven if you think that sounds a little bit like a 60s Bond movie; First Class is a period piece that takes place during the cold war era 1960s and throws more than a few homages to the classic Bond films of that era.
I never got to see this entry at the movies so I was curious how it played and how the new actors would inhabit these roles made famous by other performers and I came away thinking that despite a few minor issues, this was probably the best mutant movie yet filmed.
The leads are all very good. James McAvoy makes for a more energetic and engaging Charles Xavier and while Patrick Stewart's reserved, borderline stuffy performances may have been closer to the comic, McAvoy gives the more interesting performance. Michael Fassbender's rendition of Magneto is also notably different from Ian McKellan's, discarding the latter's flamboyant theatrics in favor of a more reserved, focused performance. Fassbender makes it look like he could drop a car on you with the wave of a hand, something McKellan never really accomplished. Kevin Bacon at first sounded like an odd choice to me to play the villain, Sebastian Shaw, but he actually delivers a very menacing performance without descending into the realms of camp or mockery.
The supporting cast is largely competent but also doesn't really stand out in any particular way. Though the film is called "First Class" and secondary mutants like Beast, Banshee and Havok have their moments, the story focuses primarily on Xavier and Magneto. Much was made of January Jones playing Emma Frost and while she does look quite yummy in her various skimpy outfits, she really doesn't have much to do and seems mildly disinterested and detached a lot of the time.
There are a few missteps along the way. I long ago tired of the whole "mutants just want to fit in but can only be persecuted" angle and there is some of this here. I could have done without some of the excesses during the obligatory bonding scenes of the young mutants and other than CIA agent Moira McTaggart, every single human is portrayed as a bigoted, sexist racist. I get that the filmmakers wanted to convey the alienation some mutants feel but it does get a bit heavy handed at times. Magneto's final turn to the dark side also seems a little rushed; while there were hints all along that he had his own agenda and didn't care much for "normal" people, the final switch still feels forced and his eagerness to kill so many just doesn't ring completely true. I also thought the film was guilty of a couple of instances of negative profiling; I found it odd that the first mutant to switch sides and go bad was hispanic while the only mutant killed was black. The whole mutant storyline is supposed to be a thinly veiled commentary on racism and intolerance so having those two characters end up the way they did didn't feel genuine to me.
Still, in spite of those issues, I thought director Matthew Vaughn managed to make the most entertaining and well-balanced mutant movie yet, delivering some good action and interesting characters while largely avoiding the turgid, pretentious tone of the first couple of films. He also manages to sneak in a couple of neat little cameos including a hilarious appearance by a certain feral mutant. Its kind of sad this underperformed at the box office as I would have liked to see this set of actors continue with their roles, especially McAvoy and Fassbender.
Like Tony, I took in a movie I missed on its first run: Cowboys & Aliens. I have to say, I was really intrigued by the premise of the film, and I hoped putting two genres together would both be fun and raise some interesting questions about each genre. Alas, the movie is even worse than I'd heard. There's no consistent tone, no directorial point of view, not even a sense of fun--for a few minutes it's a western, then it's an alien monster movie, then it's back to being a western, and soon they're all hunting alien monsters. I wound up bored. On the positive side, Daniel Craig is actually pretty good in a Clint Eastwood-ish role; but Harrison Ford, as he does with greater frequency, falls into a stock performance: he grumbles, growls, scowls, and then has one scene where he shows he actually has some heart. At one time, wasn't he the world's biggest movie star? Otherwise, the best performances were all from supporting actors. Don't bother.
Cloverfield was something of a cult hit when it was released in 2008, produced on a relatively small budget the film managed to make three times the cost of production. The film has an interesting premise, 5 young New Yorkers are at a going away party for one of them and are recording the event on a home video camera. During the party a monster attacks New York and through the lens of the video camera we watch them try to escape Manhattan and the monsters wrath.
The film is very effective in making you care about the characters which is helped, I believe, by the video camera premise. All the characters look into the camera to share little bits of information about themselves and they all seem very real. You have the smart guy, the girl who planned the party worrying about every detail, the brother who doesn't want to help, the friend who isn't too sharp, etc, all characters we have probably known in our own lives. The film is pretty intense at times, again helped by the video camera premise as the action scenes are up close and confusing with the video camera being swung around to catch the action. One warning, the shakiness of the video camera can be nauseating at times. At least once I had to look away from the scene as the bouncing camera was bothering me.
All the young actors do a fine job and the CGI is very effective with the large buildings in New York being destroyed appearing even more real through the video camera lens. The film is short, about 85 minutes, but well worth a look. Recommend.
Film critic Mark Kermode has a book out about why there are so many bad blockbusters around, and how blockbusters rarely lose money be they good or bad, so why not make a good blockbuster, like Inception?
And yet surely if C&A and X-Men prequel fail and don't get a second one, it shows movies can bomb. And I doubt there'll be a follow-up to Inception.
Would be In Bruges type comedy - the writer/director is the brother of the guy who did In Bruges, and it stars Brendan Gleason, but that's about it. I found In Bruges absolutely hilarious, though like The Guard both have a muted soundtrack, I had to strain to hear the dialogue.
It's about a Cork-based Irish policeman, a sort of Bad Lieutenant character played by Gleason, who is - in due course - thrown in with a black FBI agent Don Cheadle who is investigating drug smuggling and associated deaths.
Not a bad premise, but none of it was exactly as funny as it thought it was and it left a bad taste. In one scene, Gleason treats himself to two hookers dressed up as policewomen which sounds like a great laugh, but it just wasn't. Really, Robbie Coltraine would have been a better choice, were it not for his being Scottish, he does have that sense of darkness fighting light in his soul, and charisma. Plus, you can't tell if Gleason's character is actually thick or not at times, and it like its not down to clever ambiguity either. Only Mark Strong came out of this quite well.
It's the sort of film where the audience titter when the anti-hero makes some boorish, racist remark because ooooh he's not supposed to do that...
EDIT: Got back for Craig's Flashbacks of a Fool on telly, quite an appealing slice of nostalgia though far from perfect, a coming of age story. Stuck record time, but wow Craig really did look the haggardest actor who ever lived, an albino zombie and that film was four years ago!! I mean, you could cast Craig alongside Gollum in The Change Up, and Gollum's agent would put in a complaint if his client wasn't in the aspirational category...
John Ford directed film from 1957 starring John Wayne, Maureen O’Hara :x and Dan Dailey. The film tells the true story of Frank “Spig” Wead an early proponent for naval aviation, who later becomes a successful playwright and then reenters the Navy during World War 2. Unfortunately, his dedication to the Navy and screenwriting pulls him away from his family. This is a quintessential John Wayne film, he is in almost every scene, he brawls, he argues, he drinks and he is the hero.
Maureen O’Hara plays his wife Min Wead, who is continually rejected by her husband so that he can pursue his love of flying and the Navy. O’Hara is not given much to do in the film, she shows up every 15 minutes to have a scene where she and her husband are about to pursue their love, only to be rejected as something more important comes up and Spig leaves. Why she remains married to him through all the years is a mystery to me, because he essentially abandons her and the two daughters. Dan Dailey is quite good as “Jughead”, Spig Wead’s best friend who accompanies Wead everywhere. He helps nurse Wead back to health after a bad fall and is always there to remind Spig what is important.
After a very entertaining first 15 minutes, I was disappointed in the rest of the film as I found the main character “Spig” Wead to be a selfish individual. He is more interested in his life and his accomplishments than his family. I also found O’Hara’s role to be too minimized, as I mentioned she is given little to do and it is a shame, because the few scenes she has with Wayne are entertaining and as in all their films, they have a spark when together.
I have seen a lot of John Ford flms and for the first time, Ford, Wayne and O’Hara failed to provide a film that entertains, cannot recommend.
Your Highness. What a concept: stoner comedy (High-ness--get it?) meets Pythonesque medieval farce. Too bad it turns out like a compilation of the scenes Mel Brooks cut out of Robin Hood: Men in Tights for being too crude and stupid. And Natalie Portman fans should beware the bait-and-switch: she gets third billing but doesn't show up until an hour into the film! Avoid.
Back to the Future Part III - The two sequels to the first Back to the Future made the same mistake that the first two PotC sequels did by filming back to back and then nearly collapsing under a bloated storyline, but that doesn’t stop Part III from being a slightly above average inoffensive romp (that’s less darker and convoluted than Part II). The film is about Marty McFly (Michael J. Fox) rushing back in time to the late 19th century Hill Valley, then a sanitised frontier town, to rescue Doc Brown (Chris Lloyd) who is trapped there and involved in a deadly feud with “Mad Dog” Tannen (Thomas F. Wilson), however the Doc meets love along the way. Is it a patch on the first instalment? Of course not - the novelty of the series’ premise is wearing thin and the Western setting is so generic, however Doc Brown as a character gets further developed, the effects have aged surprisingly well, and the DeLorean saga gets neatly tied up. No Part IV, please. 6/10
Rush Hour 3 - The second sequel to the surprise hit Rush Hour and boy is the premise flogged into the ground. Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker have excellent chemistry as they take down a Japanese-Chinese crime lord (Hiroyuki Sanada), the fight scenes and stunt work is top drawer, but the plotting is exceedingly dull and you suspected Max von Sydow as a secondary villain from a quadrillion miles away. Also the Anglo-American stereotyping of East Asians and Europeans is more offensive than the stereotyping from a Sean Connery or Roger Moore era Bond film. 4/10
Cowboys & Aliens - Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig co-star in this po-faced Western adventure with a twist (fighting a small army of giant frogs from SPAAAAACE). Helped along by Jon Faveau's solid directing (Faveau has an eye for visual flair and futuristic hardware) Cowboys & Aliens (mostly) succeeds where such infamous dreck like Wild Wild West so miserably failed. Daniel Craig plays the mysterious stranger who has a strange metal band on his wrist who drifts into town and gets into trouble with Harrison Ford who plays an unscrupulous cattle magnate, however a squadron of strange flying machines show up and start blasting the town with their ray guns. Olivia Wilde is easy on the eyes, but her role is underwritten and somewhat illogical; the better supporting actors who populate the surprisingly raw Western setting are Sam Rockwell, Clancy Brown, and Adam Beach. The first two thirds of the movie had the right mix of action, mystery, and suspense, while the final third descends into a more predictable shoot ‘em up when the fight is brought to the alien invaders in their ominous flagship (the final battle reminded me of Turok). Kinda less than the sum of its parts. 7/10
Serenity - The third sci-fi Westerner that I’ve seen this week. Not quite having the warmth and wit of the ill fated TV show it is based on, Serenity follows the adventures of a band of misfits led by Malcolm Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) as they evade the military authorities led by the mysterious Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) while carrying a dangerous passenger (Summer Glau). Meanwhile a terrible threat known as the Reavers carves a path of destruction across the frontier of civilised space. The setting is still interesting and a lot of the ambitious back story remains unresolved, with Firefly (despite its potential) unceremoniously dumped on the scrapheap alongside Space: Above & Beyond and Dark Skies. A shame. 8/10
'Alright guard, begin the unnecessarily slow moving dipping mechanism...'
Comments
the things you'll do for love... B-)
Animated film with Johnny Depp as the voice of Rango, a chameleon with a vivid imagination and love of story telling. Rango accidently winds up in the town of Dirt an old west town full of residents looking for a hero. Rango's story telling convinces the town he is a hero and soon he is the sheriff. As with all westerns, at some point the big showdown comes and Rango has to look deep inside himself, with a little help from the man with no name, to find his courage.
I liked Rango, this is an animated film, but it isn't a kids film. The humor is for adults and the characters are adult characters. I found the film funny and the story, once it got going, was compelling. Recommend
Source Code
Jake Gyllenhaal plays Colter Stevens an Air Force pilot shot down in Afghanistan, most of his body is gone, but his brain is still functional. In a high level experiment the Air Force has found a way to place Colter in another person's consciousness. He is sent back to a commuter train in Chicago to stop a person from bombing the train and he only has 8 minutes to do it. He fails, but is sent back to try again and again and again.
I didn't hate this film, but I didn't really like the film either. The story fails to build any suspense, at times, I thought Colter's actions were dumb and the romantic ending was a little too sweet for my taste. I will say that Michelle Monaghan, Jake Gyllenhaal's love interest, is very good in the film as is Vera Farmiga. Jeffrey Wright also has an important role in the film. Despite the good work of the cast I can't recommend the film..
Matt Damon and Emily Blunt star in the film as two people in love with each other being kept apart by fate. In this case, fate is actiual people who are assigned to make sure a person's life turns out like it is intended to by the higher powers. Damon, a politician, won't listen to the powers that tell him if he ends up with Blunt both their lives will be altered for the worse and he continues to pursue her. To be with her, he must overcome the forces opposed to their love and risk the bright future intended for him.
I really enjoyed this film, the story is original and the chemistry between Damon and Blunt is exceptional. Blunt is especially good as an elite dancer who has a bit of a wild streak in her, when she is on screen the film really comes to life. The film is cleverly told, well acted and a lot of fun to watch. Recommend.
On the other end of the spectrum, though, in the evening I watched Jack Black's assault on Gulliver's Travels. I didn't expect it to have much fidelity to Jonathan Swift's great satire, and it doesn't; but I hoped it might be funny and maybe have something to say about modern times. . .but it doesn't. Nope: just Jack Black in super-slacker mode, teaching little people to chill out and love rock 'n' roll. He did that much better in School of Rock. So: I recommend the movie made about apes, not the one made by apes.
Oddly, here's this clip of the pair in chat with Mavis Nicholson around 1992, interspersed with flashbacks from 1973. The pair seem more than happy to get on, and if it's an act, well it's a good one, and what wouldn't one give to see Lennon and Macca trading quips over a liquid lunch many years after the Beatles. Of course, they might well have gone on to do that had some nutter with a gun not got in there first.
Pete and Dud chatting
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Took in the 3D showing of Captain America today. I must say the movie impressed me a lot. Better than Green Lantern. For me the movie moved quick. Some people have said the build-up took to long. I thought it was just right. Just the right amount of humor at the right times. It probably also helped with some of the special effects. The movie is set in the early 1940's. Some of the technology shown in the movie isn't in use today, like Starks anit-gravity car. The monorail also impressed me, even though it was shown for only a few seconds. I'm not too good at writing reviews. I'll just leave it at a must see movie.
Now about the 3D. I was also impressed with the 3D in the movie. As Tony mentioned it has a nice sense of depth in the movie and not much pops out at you. Yes Tony, the shield made me flinch to. It just happened so quick. Only downside was a couple scenes. One is when CA jumps off a ramp of concrete. The camera is shooting upwards. The motorcycle and CA seem so small against the backdrop. I also noticed it in a couple other scenes, huge backdrop, small main focus. Is this a downside to post-conversion 3D? Otherwise, most of the movie was decent in 3D. The movie wasn't quite 2D, but had that little extra depth to it.
Tend to agree with TonyDP though in that Transformers 3 is the best 3D film so far this year.
DVD - a couple in the last few nights. The 2001 Planet of the Apes that I fell asleep in first time round. Made it to the end and then scratched my head for a while (bit like an ape really), trying to work out the ending.
Last night - The Expendables. Amusing, but the plot was a bit too predictable. Harmless escapism (and a timely reminder that Arnold Schwarznegger still can't act!)
Metzengerstein was directed by Roger Vadim and stars a young Jane Fonda as the debased Countess Frederique. When her cousin Wilhem spurns her advances she inadvertently brings about his death by setting his stable of horses on fire. No sooner does Wilhem perish than a mysterious black horse appears, completely mesmerizing Frederique. Vadim takes some liberties with Poe's original story, changing the gender of the main character and adding a fairly explicit layer of eroticism that was only vaguely hinted at in the original text. Despite its liberties, the sight of Ms. Fonda in various skimpy outfits seemingly left over from Barbarella as well as a general atmosphere of dread and forboding still make this a worthwhile adaptation.
William Wilson, directed by Louis Malle, stars Alain Delon in the dual role of the evil William Wilson and his mysterious doppleganger who mysteriously appears every time Wilson intends mischief. While Malle adds a level of gore and graphic violence that was not in the original text, this is still a very faithful adaptation that makes good use of the European locales to really capture the vibe of the short story.
Toby Dammit, directed by Federico Fellini, drifts the furthest from the original story. "Never Bet The Devil Your Head" was a satirical piece about a never-do-well braggart named Toby Dammit who used the phrase "I'll bet the devil my head..." once too often. Fellini turns the tale into an exercise in the surreal and populates it with his trademark strange characters and locations. Terrence Stamp plays Toby as as washed out, self-destructive actor who keeps seeing a little girl with a ball that might be the devil. Set in modern times, the story still manages to convey Poe's creepy vibe, especially the final scenes of Toby driving around aimlessly in a Ferrari and his fateful encounter with a damaged bridge.
When I was younger I absolutely devoured Edgar Allan Poe's stories and to me these are solid adaptations. Rather than completely changing the subject matter and reducing each story to some kind of plot involving infidelity, as Roger Corman regularly did with his adaptations, these embrace the stories on which they are based (especially Metzengerstein and William Wilson) and the genuine locations, atmospheric scores and period dress really serve to set a proper vibe.
Ursula Andress really is cute
Connery hitting big spider with slipper to dramatic sound effects is unintentionally hilarious
Jospeh Wiseman doesn't have enough screen time
cringeworthy ending and end credits lasts for all of 10 seconds
but still one of Connerys finest and a good starting point for the entire franchise
Unknown is an excellent action/thriller starring Liam Neeson, January Jones and Diane Kruger. Neeson plays Dr. Martin Harris an expert in bio-crops, shortly after arriving in Berlin for a conference he is involved in a taxi cab crash. Saved by the taxi driver, Diane Kruger, he wakes up four days later with no identification and no memory. He begins to regain his memory, but when his wife claims to not know who he is and another man (Aidan Quinn) presents himself as Dr Martin Harris, he begins to wonder who he really is. With the help of Kruger and an old East German spy played well by Bruno Ganz he starts to unravel his past and is surprised when he finds what his real past is.
Despite a couple scenes that seem a little too convenient, I really enjoyed the film. The film is well acted, I especially enjoyed Kruger and Ganz, and the story is well written with several plot revelations I did not see coming. Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra with Cinematography by Flavio Martinez Labiano, the film, shot in Germany, has the feel and look of an old cold war mystery. With an excellent cast, well written story and a visually interesting production, Unknown is well worth a viewing.
Recommend
Bradley Cooper of The Hangover fame stars as Eddie Morra a writer living in a cheap apartment in New York, unable to think of one sentence for his book. He loses his girlfriend, has no money for rent and has a drinking problem. However, everything changes for him when his ex-brother-in-law gives him a pill that allows him to use 100% of his brain. Suddenly he writes an entire novel in days, conquers the stock market and gets his girlfriend back. He becomes physically and mentally addicted to the pill and powers the pills give him, which leads to run-ins with low life mobsters, police, and corporate tycoons.
Although I liked parts of the film I would say I was disappointed in the overall movie. The film fails to delve into any of the moral questions of having the powers the pill gives Cooper, he does no societal good with the powers, he just enriches himself. In addition, I absolutely hated the ambiguous ending, I simply could not believe the movie ended as it did.
A missed opportunity can't recommend.
Weekend at bernies?
And it stays at two AJB members...for now...
I went to the cinema to watch this movie and quite enjoyed it...I felt it wouldn't have benefited from delving into the moral questions...it wasn't that type of film...plus Eddie was moving into politics at the end...he may have done that for 'societal good'....or not...as can be the case with some politicians
I'm with you sir miles.... I enjoyed it... Not exactly tosca but fun- fare with a corny catchy ironic ending....
I saw this a few years ago but couldn't remember much about it other than I liked it. I can see why, even though it was last night and I stayed and enjoyed it all on telly, the set pieces aren't vivid in my mind. Lots of fight scenes and T2 type stuff. Actually what did happen to the Senator at the end? Did he reappear in villainous form after 'dying'? I can't remember.
I saw the second one also but damned if I can remember anything of that either.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
The origins of how Professor X and Magneto first met, their friendship and eventual falling out is covered in this prequel to the popular X-Men films. The plot involves a mutant who plans to manipulate the USA and Soviet Union into starting World War III in a bid to wipe out humanity so that the mutants can sweep in and take over. You can be forgiven if you think that sounds a little bit like a 60s Bond movie; First Class is a period piece that takes place during the cold war era 1960s and throws more than a few homages to the classic Bond films of that era.
I never got to see this entry at the movies so I was curious how it played and how the new actors would inhabit these roles made famous by other performers and I came away thinking that despite a few minor issues, this was probably the best mutant movie yet filmed.
The leads are all very good. James McAvoy makes for a more energetic and engaging Charles Xavier and while Patrick Stewart's reserved, borderline stuffy performances may have been closer to the comic, McAvoy gives the more interesting performance. Michael Fassbender's rendition of Magneto is also notably different from Ian McKellan's, discarding the latter's flamboyant theatrics in favor of a more reserved, focused performance. Fassbender makes it look like he could drop a car on you with the wave of a hand, something McKellan never really accomplished. Kevin Bacon at first sounded like an odd choice to me to play the villain, Sebastian Shaw, but he actually delivers a very menacing performance without descending into the realms of camp or mockery.
The supporting cast is largely competent but also doesn't really stand out in any particular way. Though the film is called "First Class" and secondary mutants like Beast, Banshee and Havok have their moments, the story focuses primarily on Xavier and Magneto. Much was made of January Jones playing Emma Frost and while she does look quite yummy in her various skimpy outfits, she really doesn't have much to do and seems mildly disinterested and detached a lot of the time.
There are a few missteps along the way. I long ago tired of the whole "mutants just want to fit in but can only be persecuted" angle and there is some of this here. I could have done without some of the excesses during the obligatory bonding scenes of the young mutants and other than CIA agent Moira McTaggart, every single human is portrayed as a bigoted, sexist racist. I get that the filmmakers wanted to convey the alienation some mutants feel but it does get a bit heavy handed at times. Magneto's final turn to the dark side also seems a little rushed; while there were hints all along that he had his own agenda and didn't care much for "normal" people, the final switch still feels forced and his eagerness to kill so many just doesn't ring completely true. I also thought the film was guilty of a couple of instances of negative profiling; I found it odd that the first mutant to switch sides and go bad was hispanic while the only mutant killed was black. The whole mutant storyline is supposed to be a thinly veiled commentary on racism and intolerance so having those two characters end up the way they did didn't feel genuine to me.
Still, in spite of those issues, I thought director Matthew Vaughn managed to make the most entertaining and well-balanced mutant movie yet, delivering some good action and interesting characters while largely avoiding the turgid, pretentious tone of the first couple of films. He also manages to sneak in a couple of neat little cameos including a hilarious appearance by a certain feral mutant. Its kind of sad this underperformed at the box office as I would have liked to see this set of actors continue with their roles, especially McAvoy and Fassbender.
Cloverfield was something of a cult hit when it was released in 2008, produced on a relatively small budget the film managed to make three times the cost of production. The film has an interesting premise, 5 young New Yorkers are at a going away party for one of them and are recording the event on a home video camera. During the party a monster attacks New York and through the lens of the video camera we watch them try to escape Manhattan and the monsters wrath.
The film is very effective in making you care about the characters which is helped, I believe, by the video camera premise. All the characters look into the camera to share little bits of information about themselves and they all seem very real. You have the smart guy, the girl who planned the party worrying about every detail, the brother who doesn't want to help, the friend who isn't too sharp, etc, all characters we have probably known in our own lives. The film is pretty intense at times, again helped by the video camera premise as the action scenes are up close and confusing with the video camera being swung around to catch the action. One warning, the shakiness of the video camera can be nauseating at times. At least once I had to look away from the scene as the bouncing camera was bothering me.
All the young actors do a fine job and the CGI is very effective with the large buildings in New York being destroyed appearing even more real through the video camera lens. The film is short, about 85 minutes, but well worth a look. Recommend.
And yet surely if C&A and X-Men prequel fail and don't get a second one, it shows movies can bomb. And I doubt there'll be a follow-up to Inception.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Would be In Bruges type comedy - the writer/director is the brother of the guy who did In Bruges, and it stars Brendan Gleason, but that's about it. I found In Bruges absolutely hilarious, though like The Guard both have a muted soundtrack, I had to strain to hear the dialogue.
It's about a Cork-based Irish policeman, a sort of Bad Lieutenant character played by Gleason, who is - in due course - thrown in with a black FBI agent Don Cheadle who is investigating drug smuggling and associated deaths.
Not a bad premise, but none of it was exactly as funny as it thought it was and it left a bad taste. In one scene, Gleason treats himself to two hookers dressed up as policewomen which sounds like a great laugh, but it just wasn't. Really, Robbie Coltraine would have been a better choice, were it not for his being Scottish, he does have that sense of darkness fighting light in his soul, and charisma. Plus, you can't tell if Gleason's character is actually thick or not at times, and it like its not down to clever ambiguity either. Only Mark Strong came out of this quite well.
It's the sort of film where the audience titter when the anti-hero makes some boorish, racist remark because ooooh he's not supposed to do that...
EDIT: Got back for Craig's Flashbacks of a Fool on telly, quite an appealing slice of nostalgia though far from perfect, a coming of age story. Stuck record time, but wow Craig really did look the haggardest actor who ever lived, an albino zombie and that film was four years ago!! I mean, you could cast Craig alongside Gollum in The Change Up, and Gollum's agent would put in a complaint if his client wasn't in the aspirational category...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
John Ford directed film from 1957 starring John Wayne, Maureen O’Hara :x and Dan Dailey. The film tells the true story of Frank “Spig” Wead an early proponent for naval aviation, who later becomes a successful playwright and then reenters the Navy during World War 2. Unfortunately, his dedication to the Navy and screenwriting pulls him away from his family. This is a quintessential John Wayne film, he is in almost every scene, he brawls, he argues, he drinks and he is the hero.
Maureen O’Hara plays his wife Min Wead, who is continually rejected by her husband so that he can pursue his love of flying and the Navy. O’Hara is not given much to do in the film, she shows up every 15 minutes to have a scene where she and her husband are about to pursue their love, only to be rejected as something more important comes up and Spig leaves. Why she remains married to him through all the years is a mystery to me, because he essentially abandons her and the two daughters. Dan Dailey is quite good as “Jughead”, Spig Wead’s best friend who accompanies Wead everywhere. He helps nurse Wead back to health after a bad fall and is always there to remind Spig what is important.
After a very entertaining first 15 minutes, I was disappointed in the rest of the film as I found the main character “Spig” Wead to be a selfish individual. He is more interested in his life and his accomplishments than his family. I also found O’Hara’s role to be too minimized, as I mentioned she is given little to do and it is a shame, because the few scenes she has with Wayne are entertaining and as in all their films, they have a spark when together.
I have seen a lot of John Ford flms and for the first time, Ford, Wayne and O’Hara failed to provide a film that entertains, cannot recommend.
Rush Hour 3 - The second sequel to the surprise hit Rush Hour and boy is the premise flogged into the ground. Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker have excellent chemistry as they take down a Japanese-Chinese crime lord (Hiroyuki Sanada), the fight scenes and stunt work is top drawer, but the plotting is exceedingly dull and you suspected Max von Sydow as a secondary villain from a quadrillion miles away. Also the Anglo-American stereotyping of East Asians and Europeans is more offensive than the stereotyping from a Sean Connery or Roger Moore era Bond film. 4/10
Cowboys & Aliens - Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig co-star in this po-faced Western adventure with a twist (fighting a small army of giant frogs from SPAAAAACE). Helped along by Jon Faveau's solid directing (Faveau has an eye for visual flair and futuristic hardware) Cowboys & Aliens (mostly) succeeds where such infamous dreck like Wild Wild West so miserably failed. Daniel Craig plays the mysterious stranger who has a strange metal band on his wrist who drifts into town and gets into trouble with Harrison Ford who plays an unscrupulous cattle magnate, however a squadron of strange flying machines show up and start blasting the town with their ray guns. Olivia Wilde is easy on the eyes, but her role is underwritten and somewhat illogical; the better supporting actors who populate the surprisingly raw Western setting are Sam Rockwell, Clancy Brown, and Adam Beach. The first two thirds of the movie had the right mix of action, mystery, and suspense, while the final third descends into a more predictable shoot ‘em up when the fight is brought to the alien invaders in their ominous flagship (the final battle reminded me of Turok). Kinda less than the sum of its parts. 7/10
Serenity - The third sci-fi Westerner that I’ve seen this week. Not quite having the warmth and wit of the ill fated TV show it is based on, Serenity follows the adventures of a band of misfits led by Malcolm Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) as they evade the military authorities led by the mysterious Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) while carrying a dangerous passenger (Summer Glau). Meanwhile a terrible threat known as the Reavers carves a path of destruction across the frontier of civilised space. The setting is still interesting and a lot of the ambitious back story remains unresolved, with Firefly (despite its potential) unceremoniously dumped on the scrapheap alongside Space: Above & Beyond and Dark Skies. A shame. 8/10