Movie Reviews

In this space I’ll keep an updated list of (most of) the movies I see. I’ll post a brief capsule review of each one, but occasionally a longer, more comprehensive review if I have a lot to say.

I feel that grading the films with a numerical score or letter grade would be childish, as well as overly specific. Instead, I’ll just tell you whether I recommend seeing it—Yes or No.

However, if a movie was terrifically good, or incredibly bad, I’ll give it a letter grade of an ‘A’ or ‘F.’

*** The most recent additions are at the TOP of the list.

MOVIES

~The Wrestler - Yes. review to come..

~ Where the Wild Things Are – No. (full review)

~ Observe and Report – No. review to come..

~ The Hangover – No. Here’s why: I think it was over-hyped for me. When the movie first came out, I never got around to seeing it, and soon enough all my friends had already gone. People kept telling me not just that it was good, but that it was the funniest movie they had ever seen. Three different guys said that to me, seriously. So I went in with expectations that were through the roof, and they weren’t met. Not even close. I thought there were funny parts, sure, but for the most part it wasn’t my kind of humor. In general the parts meant to be funniest were cruel and mean-spirited, like the old man in the doctor’s office being mocked for having a wrinkly old ass (sorry but yeah, that’s what old people look like) and being on his way to die (that’s mildly upsetting). How about that Chinese guy who was so good as the doctor in Knocked Up—he wasn’t funny at all, his appearances were either stupid (when he leaps out of the trunk buck naked and jumps on the guy’s face), unfunny (all of those snappy one-liners when he’s in the track-suit; why does he speak like a valley girl?) or confusing (is he meant to be gay?). Plus, the movie wasn’t plausible. In reality, the guy who gets stuck on the roof of the casino would have either a) screamed for help right away the next morning and been heard and let down immediately, or, if not, then b) died. Sorry, but he’s up there in the Nevada heat for 2 full days and nights, and at the end he’s fine, just a bad sunburn, and he hurries home for his wedding? Bullshit. Those photos at the end credits were outrageously funny though, I’ll give them that.

~ Public Enemies - Yes. Actually though, it’s more like a “maybe.” I can’t give it a “no” because it wasn’t bad. Hardly, in fact; it was entertaining. That being said, it was very much exactly what you’d expect it to be, especially if you’ve seen Bonnie and Clyde. The bad guy/good guy (anti-hero John Dillinger) is on a roll, robbing banks, having fun, getting the girl, taking the money, with your standard amount of close-calls and jailbreaks (think also of Catch Me If You Can). In the end, though, justice (or Christian Bale) prevails and he meets his sad, but inevitable end. Movie over, fun time provided, sure, but also predictable ending and maybe 40 minutes too long. But if you like Depp and Bale, and who doesn’t, you’ll enjoy the flick.

~ Departures - Yes. My god, this movie was so incredibly good. My mom had heard about it from a friend and dragged me to see it, so I went in knowing nothing. As soon as it began and I realized it was Japanese, though, I got excited because I just took a terrific course about Japanese film during my senior spring at college. Yet Takita was not a director we had studied. Anyway, the movie kept surprising me—gorgeous cinematography, a genuinely unique, engaging story, and a current of sadness running through it that does not fully reveal itself until the moment when the rock is in that father’s hand. I almost lost it when that happened. I couldn’t believe it, actually, when I went home after the movie and read the NYTimes review, in which A.O. Scott called it “mediocre” and added: “Overlong, predictable in its plotting and utterly banal in its blending of comic whimsy and melodramatic pathos.” That critique just makes me sad; I think, even though it’s not really Scott’s fault, that he fell into a very familiar trend with reviewers, which is to approach any movie like this one (which indeed does make you both laugh and cry, and really tugs at those heartstrings) with cynicism and flippancy merely because he thinks he has to be hard-assed. Anyway, I agree with him usually, but in this case reading the bad review doesn’t make me think that I must be a sucker, or a sap, to have liked it. Instead, it makes me think that he needs to see it again. This was a great entertainment and a memorable experience.

~ Milk – Yes. review to come

~ Role Models – Yes. review to come

~ The Happening – F. (full review)

~ Slumdog Millionaire – Yes. review to come

~ Quantum of Solace – No. review to come

~ Tropic Thunder – Yes. review to come

~ Elegy – Yes. review to come

~ Pineapple Express – Yes. (full review)

~ The Darjeeling Limited – Yes. Review to come

~ Definitely, Maybe – Yes. Believe it or not, I enjoyed this. It’s especially high praise coming from someone who—seriously—does not like lame, formulaic rom-coms. But this one was pretty bearable. Ryan Reynolds is always an appealing draw (see how great he is in Just Friends or Smokin’ Aces; plus there’s The Nine, which, inexplicably, no one ever saw or ever will, but was good). In addition, we don’t get a sappy Meg Ryan or Sandra Bullock as the object of our hero’s affection. Instead we have three capable, fine young actresses (well, okay, Rachel Weisz is far more established than the girl from Scrubs or Ali G’s hot young wife) who all come off like beautiful, compelling, believable people. The only thing that makes this an “eh” movie is the presence of little miss Abigail Cutie-Face, who apparently is the only ten-year-old in Hollywood who can actually act, so they continue to put her in everything and I guess we’ll just have to get used to it. She’s obnoxious, but the movie is entertaining if you just relax and let yourself enjoy it.

~ Vantage Point – Yes. This movie has received some bad reviews, and a dismal 32% score on Rotten Tomatoes. I’m not sure quite why, but from what I can tell, the common consensus is that the clever, interesting idea is ruined by “wooden acting.” Yup, the acting is pretty wooden. But who cares? It doesn’t need to be good, because above all else this is a popcorn action flick. People are labeling this thing the wrong way. It’s not meant to be high art, despite the presence of such heavy hitters as Forest Whitaker and William Hurt. This is a clever, surprising whodunit that keeps you guessing, and entertained. It’s a fast-paced, exhilarating 90 minutes, and the twists are all original and unexpected.

~ Be Kind Rewind – No. (full review)

~ Swingers – Yes. This is one of those movies that it feels like everyone in the world had seen but me, so I rented it. I understood right away why people love this flick, and I don’t just mean the snarky cuteness of Vince Vaughn, who got his start here. I think Jon Favreau is the best part of this one, and in addition I think the show Entourage owes this movie a lot more than anyone realizes. The entire idea of Vince, E, Drama, and Turtle is taken directly from Trent, Rob, Mike, and Sue. Beautiful babies!

~ The Dark Knight – Yes. (full review)

~ Step Brothers – No. (full review)

~ Wall-E – A. This thing is clever, moving, and just gorgeous. I won’t bother adding my praise to the many rave reviews that already exist (including a Frank Rich piece in which he basically suggests presidential candidates take their cues from Pixar). I agree that it deserves to be nominated for an Oscar, and not just the one they give to animated flicks. It’s aesthetically and conceptually beautiful. And somehow, it equally entertains Al Gore followers and lollipop-sucking children.

~ How High – Yes. I know, I know. And maybe it’s just because I love Wu-Tang, but I thought this movie was pretty harmless. Sure, it’s lowbrow, but it’s damn fun. Although I didn’t like when they dig up the body of John Quincy Adams. That was in poor taste.

~ Finding Amanda – F. That’s a big fucking No. I don’t even want to waste my words explaining why this thing sucks, but let’s just say it starts miserable, rises feebly for a few minutes, and ends on the lowest of emotional lows. It leaves you depressed and outraged. And, oh yeah, the acting sucks.

~ Hancock – No. I guess you could say the plot is creative, I’ll give it that. But the execution is poor, and, come to think of it, the originality of the big twist doesn’t necessarily make it compelling. It’s stupid. Plus, the entire movie is packed with blatant, in-your-face product placement for companies like Pepsi and State Farm Insurance. It’s okay, Will, you can’t win ‘em all.

~ The Incredible Hulk – No. Apparently some gullible critics *cough* Harry Knowles *cough* loved this and believed that the film has rejuvenated the Hulk franchise. But as good as Ed Norton usually is, I found this to be pretty formulaic, as far as comic book movies go, and predictable. I certainly won’t go see a sequel, though I’m sure they’ll make one.

~ Casino – Yes. Another classic I had never seen before. What’s there to say? Mafia movies never really get old, if they’re done well (Goodfellas, The Departed, Donnie Brasco, and The Untouchables are all great) and this one is another solid entry. Tons of fun. Great, quick dialogue.

~ Forgetting Sarah Marshall – Yes. Wish I had the energy to do a full review of this one, but only to pinpoint just why Judd Apatow does romantic comedies (’cause that’s what this is, and yet it never feels like a chick flick) so perfectly. I’ll try and sum it up: his movies have heart. He balances the slapstick, raunchy moments or zingy, teen-pleasing, laugh-out-loud one-liners with tender, often sad bits (sad in a good way) that leave you not only thinking you were entertained for two hours, but feeling confident that you actually just saw a really good movie– one that you won’t forget about. I’d say the Apatow comedies (specifically The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up) are more When Harry Met Sally than Ace Ventura. And that’s a great quality.

~ Cassandra’s Dream – No. I love Woody Allen as much as the next guy (in other words, not very much anymore) but this one was rather grim. And I’m not saying an upsetting, sad-ending story can’t be good (American Beauty, what up) but this one’s a real downer. And Colin Farrell (who I’ve always loved and championed even as he’s been ridiculed) was outstanding. But that wasn’t enough to save a movie that absolutely shatters its characters as well as forcing them to utter dialogue that, at certain points (no joke) has audience members in the theater literally cackling derisively at the movie.

~ There Will Be Blood – Yes. Daniel. Day. Lewis. He drinks your milkshake. This one has boring points, but ends on a high note (well, not for Daniel Plainview). And the chilling, plucky chords from Radiohead guitarist Jonny Greenwood give the perfect musical complement to P.T. Anderson’s stunning visuals.

~ I Am Legend – Yes. Lots of people complained to me that this movie was not as good as the book, and “ruined the ending.” So I went out and read the book, and found it painfully boring. The movie, on the other hand, was anything but. Will Smith was magnetic, and the first hour or so, in which he’s all alone, is ironically the most gripping. The movie loses a lot of steam once the girl shows up, but overall it’s a story that is terrifying, touching, thought-provoking and suspenseful. My only big beef was the entire Bob Marley theme—particularly the enraging, corny choice to end the movie with a voice over of the girl quoting a Marley line (“light up the darkness”). Totally cheesy. Neville’s Marley obsession added nothing to the film.

~ The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – A. I saw this one at a film festival in Dublin and the movie’s producer, Jon Kilik, showed up to answer questions. The movie is a masterpiece. You will cry repeatedly, and yet feel uplifted by this story and its unbelievably authentic performances. Meanwhile, the visuals are beautiful: as good as the story is, and as perfectly controlled as the writing is, you’ll mostly feel like you’re watching a gorgeous two-hour painting.

~ Cloverfield – Yes. All I can criticize is that the hand-held camera angles can lead to some nausea, and that the acting is pretty forgettable. But the movie doesn’t need impressive acting. It succeeds in its goals by mere premise and execution: it scares you, and shocks you, and above all else keeps you glued to the screen as you lean forward on the edge of your seat for the entire movie. It’s a thrill ride, and it’s original and daring, which is typical of most J.J. Abrams creations.