Results tagged “moviereview”

It's generally true that each film in the Harry Potter series has been better than the last—and also darker than the last. And as the series has gone on, we've not only gotten a chance to see Harry Potter, Hermione Granger, and Ron Weasley grow up before our eyes, we've also gotten a chance to see Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint grow up before our eyes—not to mention the rest of the young cast. With each film, these actors get a bit older and a bit more talented. It's especially astonishing to see how much improved Radcliffe is. Take a look back at his awkward, wooden, wince-inducing performance in The Sorcerer's Stone, and then watch how comfortable and funny and real he is in this film.

I think I can say with some confidence that however you felt about Michael Bay's first Transformers film, you will feel the same way about his second one. It's more of the same. More giant robots getting into epic slow motion fights while things explode all around them. More Megan Fox in sexy outfits running in slow motion. More ponderous narration. More of John Turturro thoroughly embarrassing himself for what I hope is a very large paycheck. More lowbrow "comedy." More, more, more.

The Terminator franchise has always been a heady and delicious mixture of horror, sci-fi, and action; time travel, robots, and apocalypse. Every installment in the franchise has spoken of a coming Judgment Day: the apocalyptic moment when machines would rise up and nearly destroy humanity. Afterwards, one man—John Connor—would organize a resistance and fight back, saving the human race. Each film (and TV show) has been about a killer machine coming back through time to try to eliminate John before he can become this savior. Luckily, the resistance has always been able to send back a protector, as well, to keep him safe. We've never really seen the world after Judgment Day, and never really seen John as the savior, except in brief glimpses.

Just to get this out of the way up front: I'm a long-time, dyed-in-the-wool Star Trek fan. I watched the entire original series, every episode of the animated series and Next Generation, put in some time with Voyager and Enterprise, and I stuck with Deep Space Nine far past the point when it was any good. And of course I've seen all the movies. But even I have to admit the last couple films were pretty poor. The plots were nonsensical, the writing lazy and repetitive. How many times would they blow up the Enterprise and how many characters would nobly sacrifice themselves for the greater good and how many non-humans would yearn to be human? The series was getting tired. So when they brought in J.J. Abrams to rejuvenate the whole thing, I was excited and apprehensive at the same time. The guy said in interviews he didn't even like Star Trek. I was all right with him shaking things up a bit, but I didn't want him to turn it into a big dumb action movie and lose the soul of the thing.

At the end of last year, I told you about a presentation I saw on the DreamWorks computer-animated film Monsters vs. Aliens, and the new 3D technology in employs. I wasn't totally blown away by the technology, but I enjoyed what I saw of the movie and looked forward to seeing it in its entirety and reviewing it for Phillyist. Now that I've had a chance to see the whole movie, I'm very pleased with it, and a bit more impressed with the technology than I was originally.

I was sold on seeing Push as soon as I realized it featured telekinetic gunmen. I'm a simple man with simple tastes. However, some might need more information before making their determination, and so I present a synopsis and review.

At one point in Frank Miller's film adaptation of the Will Eisner comic The Spirit, Samuel L. Jackson (who plays the villain of the piece, a crime lord/mad scientist named The Octopus) looks down at the bullet-riddled body of his enemy (the title character, an undead crime fighter played by Gabriel Macht) and says, "There's shot to hell and there's shot to hell, and then there's just plain ridiculous." This film is the latter. There is no part of it that is not silly, overdone, and just plain ridiculous, from the stark, surreal, computer-generated, mostly black-and-white visuals to the horrific dialogue. I really don't know what Miller was going for with this weird combination of earnest, noble speeches; corny melodrama; painfully unfunny, low-brow humor; and utter pointlessness, but if he was trying to make one of the most embarrassing movies of all time, he may just have succeeded.

This movie is going to be up for a lot of awards, and rightfully so. It was wonderfully written (aside from the goofily absurd amount of racial slurs—more on that in a moment), brilliantly directed, and excellently acted. Except for one minor problem. Clint should hang up his acting hat and stick to directing. You gotta love the man playing a bad ass character at his age. And it actually worked, his age wasn't a problem. It's just that he's been doing "Clint" for so long that his acting comes out as over-baked. When he's growling his lines it's hard not to laugh when a laugh isn't intended because he's more like a cartoon character bully than an actual racist Michigan retiree.

Showing at: Ritz at the Bourse, Ritz Sixteen

I often catch heat for disliking the whole inbred cluster of Apatow-related films, but I assure you that my dislike has nothing to do with snobbishness against broad, no-brainer comedies. I do own a copy of Joe Dirt. Sometimes, ridiculous comedy can be good, as in Four Christmases. At times, this holiday comedy is rude and cringe-inducing, but for this film, it works. Being over-blitzed by promos for the movie before viewing it, I was afraid that all the funny bits were wasted in the trailer. (How many times can seeing Vince Vaughn gagging at baby puke remain humorous?) But the comedy was fresh and plentiful, with the audience laughing audibly at many of the scenes. The film clearly had an overabundance of comedic scenes—a funny scene that had been in the trailer was removed from the theatrical cut. In it, Vince Vaughn's trashy sister-in-law is slapping together a spam and mayo salad because they are "trying to eat healthy." Even without that brief laugh, the movie still had plenty to offer.

Special Thanksgiving Eve edition of what's new and/or interesting in Philly theaters this weekend.

What's new and/or interesting in Philly theaters this weekend.

What's new and/or interesting in Philly theaters this weekend. Not a whole lot of films opening this weekend, but here's what's happening.

The movie has been been getting lukewarm to downright bad reviews, which it probably rightfully deserves given its over-the-top, plodding story and unimaginative plot points. What saves the movie, though, is the strong and solid acting by all involved: not only by the four men listed above (especially Noah Emmerich—love him!), but also by the women who play their significant others, and by the supporting cast of police officers. Every actor in this thing gives a top performance. So even though this might not be a movie for you to run right out and see tonight, it definitely deserves a viewing at some point, if only to see Jon Voight's boozy speech at the family Christmas dinner table.

is equally ill-served by the time-lag involved in movie production.

Ed Harris is well known as an actor, but he's also branched out into directing a couple of times. The first was 2000's powerful artist biopic Pollock. The second is the western Appaloosa, which opens today. Besides directing the film, Harris also stars and contributed to the screenplay, which is an adaptation of Robert Parker's novel. Harris plays Virgil Cole, one part of a two-man peace-keeping operation. The other part is Everett Hitch (Viggo Mortensen), a man who always carries an eight gauge shotgun with him. The two of them travel the Wild West, taking over towns and bringing order to them by enacting their own brand of martial law. This consists of them putting up a series of by-laws; if anyone breaks a by-law, that person is arrested. If he won't come quietly, he's shot. It's as simple as that.

This movie is not high art by any means, but it succeeds at the most basic of movie goals: providing captivating entertainment that keeps the viewer's mind far from real life for two hours. If you are looking for a sweet first date movie, this probably isn't your thing. But if you are looking to be highly entertained and repeatedly shocked by action, this is certainly your pick for the weekend. Just remember to take your heart medicine before you go.

Joel and Ethan Coen are probably two of the greatest filmmakers alive. Their filmography is a list of instant classics. Last year they put out the powerful, critically acclaimed Cormac McCarthy adaptation No Country for Old Men, a dark and bloody film. They've followed it up this year with a film that's nearly as bloody, and even almost as dark in terms of its view of humanity, but nowhere near as serious. To describe Burn After Reading in terms of previous Coen brothers' films: it's a dollop of Fargo, a dash of Blood Simple, and a generous squirt of Intolerable Cruelty.

I am one of those poor, sad, desperate fools: a Star Wars fan. I've seen all the films many, many times (the prequels keep getting worse every time, though I try to pretend they don't). I own them all, some in various different formats and editions. I also own (and very much enjoy) both volumes of the original Clone Wars animated series that aired on Cartoon Network some years ago. I even, God help me, own a copy of The Star Wars Holiday Special, one of the worst programs ever to be broadcast on television. So when I heard there was not only going to be a continuation of the Clone Wars animated series, but also a live-action Star Wars TV series, I was excited. And when I heard that the "pilot" for the new animated series would be released in theaters as a feature-length film, I was even more excited. Certainly this meant we would finally get another really good Star Wars film, a film we wouldn't have to be ashamed of. Right?

I can't remember a recent film that's received as much publicity leading up to its release as The Dark Knight. What with all the insane viral advertising, marketing deals with Domino's and Comcast and whoever else, and then all the press surrounding the sudden and tragic death of Heath Ledger shortly after he completed filming his role as the Joker, it's been hard to avoid hearing about the movie. Reviews of the film have been ridiculously positive, and there has even been talk of a posthumous Oscar nomination for Ledger.

Like many other members of my generation, I grew up with Indiana Jones. Along with the Star Wars trilogy, the films about the dashing, whip-cracking, snake-fearing archaeologist who was named after the dog were three of my favorite movies (yes, I'm one of those poor bastards who drank all the George Lucas Kool Aid he was given and then asked for more), and I still think they're some of the greatest action movies ever made. So you can imagine I was pretty excited about the prospect of a new entry in the series, especially with so many of the old crew back: Harrison Ford as Indy, Karen Allen as Marion Ravenwood (you remember, from Raiders?), Steven Spielberg as director, and of course George Lucas as writer (Lucas wrote the story with Jeff Nathanson, and David Koepp took care of the actual screenplay).

I have distant and blurry—but very fond—childhood memories of the old original Speed Racer cartoon. Based on those memories, the show was about a family of people who all talked very fast (with their lips never quite matching up with the words they were saying) and drove very fast and had crazy adventures. Oh, and there was a monkey. So when I first heard the Wachowskis, of all people, were making a live-action adaptation, I really didn't know what to think. But I was intrigued. I've been following the various ads, clips, and trailers for the movie the past couple of months and I've remained really unsure about the movie. It appeared to be highly stylized, cheesy, and even deliberately fake-looking.

Ryan Phillipe stars in Stop-Loss as Sergeant Brandon King, just home to Brazos, Texas from serving in Iraq. Expecting to be "gettin' out," instead he is informed that the Army has invoked the Stop-Loss provision, meaning that his contract will be involuntarily extended and he must return to Iraq.

Pop quiz: On your first day of high school, if you are a shy, gangly teenager whose only friend is a pudgy wannabe rapper, when you see some bloodthirsty upperclassmen stuffing the only kid dorkier than you into a locker, do you stand up for what's right or do you slink into the corners and thank god it's not you?

I like Jason Statham. I think he's a really talented guy. But let's face it, besides Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, he hasn't been in very many decent movies. Just look at his filmography: Transporter 2, that Uwe Boll Dungeon Siege thing, The One. Ugh. For that reason, I went into my screening of The Bank Job with pretty low expectations.

Penelope is explicitly a modern fairy tale—even to the point of opening with "Once upon a time..." and ending with "...and they lived happily ever after"—about a young woman named Penelope (Christina Ricci), who is cursed. Her family is very old and very rich, and many years ago, a male of their number thought he'd fallen in love with a washerwoman, but ultimately broke his promise to marry her. When the woman subsequently committed suicide, her mother, a witch, put a spell on the family so that the next daughter of their line would be born with the face of a pig. Penelope is that daughter, and the only way she can break the curse is to find true love with one of her own kind. Her mother, Jessica (Catherine O'Hara), is determined to achieve this for her, and so fakes her daughter's death and then locks her away in the family mansion and brings handsome blue-blooded males in one by one, always hoping the next one will be the first to look upon Penelope's face and not run away screaming in terror.

Ever since I saw Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind—the wildly imaginative, deeply moving, incredibly insightful sci-fi/romance/drama/comedy with Jim Carrey that came out in 2004—I've been pretty keen to see what else writer-director Michel Gondry can do. I found his next fiction feature film, The Science of Sleep, ultimately unsatisfying, but just as imaginative and affecting as ESotSM. So I was thrilled to hear about Gondry's latest project: Be Kind Rewind. This film—set over the bridge and up the road a piece in Passaic, New Jersey—is about one of those small, privately-owned video rental stores that are still fighting it out against the big chain stores. The shop is called Be Kind Rewind, and it's run by an aging man named Mr. Fletcher (Danny Glover). His only employee is Mike (Mos Def), a young man who looks up to him as a kind of father figure. And, in fact, Mr. Fletcher has fatherly feelings for Mike, and tends to keep things from him that he knows will make him unhappy – like the fact that the shop is not doing well, the building has been condemned, and if he doesn't make a lot of money and do a lot of repairs in a very short period of time, it's going to be taken away from him to be demolished and turned into a modern apartment building. Mr. Fletcher tells Mike he's going on a trip and leaves him to take care of the store while he spies on the nearby West Coast Video in the hopes of getting the information he needs to turn his business around. Mike has been given only one hard-and-fast rule while Mr. Fletcher is away: keep Jerry out! Jerry (Jack Black) is Mike's buddy, and the local kook – a paranoid weirdo who works down at the junkyard, and lives there in a small trailer, right by the power plant. He's convinced that his mind is somehow being altered or controlled by the power plant, and so one night he convinces Mike to help him sabotage the place. Mike has second thoughts, but Jerry goes through with it – or at least tries to. Actually, all he succeeds in doing is getting himself electro-magnetized, so that the next time he walks into the video store, he erases all the tapes.

So, what is Cloverfield? Probably if you've watched the ads, you've thought of Godzilla, and although it certainly has a lot in common with that series, it also has elements of The Blair Witch Project. It's a monster movie, but told in a hyper-realistic way, from the point of view of the people on the streets who are running between the toes of the monster. Critics (well, the cut-rate ones, anyway) will often compare films to roller coasters in their reviews, but Cloverfield is one of the few movies I've seen that actually delivers a roller coaster-like experience. There were moments during the first half of this film when I was literally gasping for breath and clutching at my seat as I tried not to have a heart attack. It is intense, and the pseudo-first-person perspective only makes it more so.

Imaginary phone call between Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman (pretend you're hearing it it in their voices):

“Shit, I could write that,” said a woman at the Bridge on Monday, when told that Juno was about a teenage pregnancy. Thing is, dear reader, so could you. Not because you found yourself trying to buy a ticket for three to your junior prom, mind; but neither Juno nor this summer’s Knocked Up stray too far from the basic emotional territory set out in Nine Months, Father of the Bride Part II, and the other less-than-memorable pregnancy comedies of yesteryear. Juno starts out with a spiky, wiseass attitude—the eponymous heroine (Ellen Page) begins a call to the local pregnancy clinic with, “Hey, I’m looking for a hasty abortion”—before inevitably deciding to remind the audience of the miracle of life, which I am given to understand is pretty miraculous.